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: A.J. Mullen who wrote (58811)	1/19/2007 5:25:25 PM
From: rkral	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197254

>>>[edit: Art] did say the suit was financially important. Financially important events affect the value of a firm. If the market is efficient, the stock price will change with accordingly.<<< That doesn't mean much without a time frame, and I certainly don't think Art meant QCOM's price will change in the short term. As you've pointed out, there is unlikely to be a material impact on Qualcomm's bottom line -- whether the Q wins or loses the video compression case. The Q hasn't collected any H.264 royalties to date and if they lose, the chances of such royalties in the future pretty much evaporates. However, if Qualcomm wins, they have a chance at collecting enough H.264 royalties to have a material impact on the bottom line, but that wouldn't happen for quite a few years IMO. That said, I really don't believe Qualcomm filed the patent infringement suit against Broadcom to collect H.264 royalties. Rather, it's partly posturing to negotiate the CDMA patent and partly a counter-offensive to Broadcom's suits. But this topic is a "horse beaten to death", so I'm withdrawing from the debate ... and somewhat regretting chiming in at all. >>>Art responded to a hypothetical question. Not a conjecture<<< To me that's a distinction without a difference.