Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: carranza2 who wrote (50679)	3/1/2006 9:19:44 AM
From: JeffreyHF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197199

The impending expiration of, and need to renew licenses, was the context for some of PJ`s remarks yesterday. He suggested that one major license was being currently renegotiated, and that due to the older "capture period" for that license, and Qualcomm`s greater contribution to HSDPA, HSUPA, and other high data improvements that evolved from HDR, Qualcomm`s leverage is greater today than it was when the original license was negotiated. One can infer that Qualcomm has increased its royalty demands for license extensions, although it isn`t necessarily so, or,it may be a negotiating ploy to encourage the signing of extensions.

To: carranza2 who wrote (50679)	3/1/2006 9:48:23 AM
From: Jim Mullens	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197199

C2, Re: C2, Re: NOK6 (POS) / Q raising royalty rates, and “. I was relying on thinkclear's notes for the idea that the licensing deal is not a full 100% all-you-can-eat smorgasbord.” Ok, got-ya. His notes are as I heard. But, as I stated in my prior post, I believe the Q continues to license on an “all-you-can-eat smorgasbord” basis. As I understand it, the “all-you-can-eat smorgasbord” table is reset at the time of license expiration and the renegotiation process begins anew. 1. Again, the licensee negotiates from the position that royalty should be less due to old patents being less valuable, the Q’s position is that the newer patents and those added during the extension period are as / even more valuable, and “generally” a status quo royalty rate results. 2. And, Original licensees with favorable terms may be asked to pay the “going rate” (standard rate) which has now become the “fair and reasonable” rate. After all, all they (original licensees) want is a level playing field, right??????