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: pyslent who wrote (53123)	7/3/2006 7:00:59 PM
From: BDAZZ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197214

>>it's not talking about GSM carriers upgrading to WCDMA-<< In addition, any GSM network that wants a WCDMA network must build it new. This is not a GSM upgrade. It is a new network that uses a CDMA air interface and pays QCOM royalties. The rest is just Reuters BS.

To: pyslent who wrote (53123)	7/3/2006 7:10:02 PM
From: Clarksterh	Respond to of 197214

Considering the cost of evolving CDMA to 3G (via EVDO) was supposed to be overwhelmingly cheaper than GSM=> WCDMA, I find it telling (and disturbing) that any operator would switch from CDMA=> GSM=> WCDMA. For what purpose? I suspect that in virtually all cases the flip will be, directly or indirectly, about govt decisions - the latest Indian decision almost certainly being an example of the indirect by decreeing that GSM gets 2x as much spectrum. When have govt decisions been good ones? Comments? (the only weakness I can think of to this proposed explanation is that govts were equally involved in the to-cdma decisions - but I don't think this is the case: Japan, US, multiple CDMA 450 examples. Original Indian decision was, perhaps, driven by govt driven need to be "WLL".?) Clark

To: pyslent who wrote (53123)	7/3/2006 7:20:26 PM
From: voop	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 197214

I think you have misread the article... Would not be the first time! "Over the last three years 25 mobile telecoms operators have decided to replace or upgrade their CDMA networks to GSM or its successor known as the Wideband CDMA (WCDMA) system." I thought the writing was couched in that they said CDMA operator went from CDMA to GSM OR WCDMA. Well I will grant you that to migrate to GSM sucks from a Qualcomm royalty point of view unless that GSM platform migrates to WCDMA quickly (operator would likely have to absorb the first forklift before embarking on second) BUT to say a GSM operator going to WCDMA was a repudiation against CDMA was disingenious depending on the intent. If the intent is to say its bad for Qualcomm then I think it hurts so good. If the intent was to say the CDMA migration to EVDO is disrupted because these carriers are going to get there via WCDMA then okay probably so. The bad news is if they stay at GSM 2G ad infinitum. As long as the operators keep on plugging and chugging to 3G it really makes little difference. Hopefully sales lost to CDMA operators now promoting GSM will be replaced by a LOT more WCDMA HSDPA type subscribers of Qualcomm should get a healthy portion.