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: jprincess who wrote (59618)	2/1/2007 4:21:52 PM
From: JGoren	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197155

just sell your stock if you are unhappy

To: jprincess who wrote (59618)	2/1/2007 4:57:38 PM
From: edwin k.	Respond to of 197155

Get lost e.k.

To: jprincess who wrote (59618)	2/2/2007 7:52:43 AM
From: mindykoeppel	Respond to of 197155

I agree and disagree with JPRINCESS and Princess I welcome your usual poignant criticism - in contrast to Princess I think Q is a great company to work for, a great business, great management but a TERRIBLE stock to own since 2001. Those who got in early are the regular cheerleaders who have very low cost and NEED to wait for the always next year syndrome. I am not cashing out now either but I am NOT a happy camper. I think that Q does nothing to win any friends on Wallstreet. Most people do not know what they even do. Their public relations department is non existent. People sat in Qualcomm stadium for the SUPERBOWL - which was a great opportunity for Q to do an ad on the Super Bowl educating people why they should demand Qualcomm inside their cell phone similar to Intel's PR or at least let them know what Qualcomm as in Qualcomm Stadium stood for! And we did NOT get a raise this year in dividends but the execs DID! I am posting an article from Crazy Cramer which I do not believe I have seen on the Qualcomm message board even though it is from Dec. 22nd. And don't forget the wonderful Christmas present that Qualcomm gave us on December 22nd with that warning. And this is Cramer who early last year said "I will NOT say how high I think QCOM will go because it is unbelievable and embarrassing." Qualcomm's stock price - in spite of increased metrics in all aspects of the business - ended 2004, 2005, and 2006 LOWER than each preceding year. And I dislike CRAMER because I think he is a pump and dump nut. Enough of Qualcomm's Spin By Jim Cramer RealMoney.com Columnist 12/22/2006 7:44 AM EST Click here for more stories by Jim Cramer Leave it to Qualcomm (QCOM - commentary - Cramer's Take - Rating) to attempt to spin an earnings-disappointment release into an upside-revenue-surprise statement. That's what it did last night. Go read it. I owned Qualcomm for what seemed to be forever for ActionAlertsPlus.com, and I finally got fed up with it. I felt its insistence on endless legal problems with both competitors and clients in an attempt to keep earnings higher than they might normally be would have to have a cost eventually, either in lost clients or in enormous legal fees. We got the latter last night. The numbers are so expensive that it actually impacted earnings. I think the news for legal gets worse here. When you sue your most important clients and refuse to settle, you have to figure that in the future, they won't design in Qualcomm. That's beginning to happen. Of course, though, in the same sentence as the guide-down is a revenue boost, because Qualcomm never wants to let you down. My problem with this, though, is that I don't want a company to sell a lot of product and make less money. I want a company to sell a lot of product and make more money. Qualcomm is making it sound like if it weren't for this legal nuisance, it would have had a big quarter. But Qualcomm's M.O. is to sue and be sued. It's an operating cost for this company, so I don't buy the breakout. In other words, Qualcomm is having a weak quarter -- just admit it. They won't. Which is, in the end, why I had enough of them. At the time of publication, Cramer had no positions in the stocks mentioned thestreet.com

To: jprincess who wrote (59618)	2/2/2007 1:43:23 PM
From: Art Bechhoefer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197155

jprincess--In evaluating QUALCOMM and its management, you make an error that others (especially myopic investment advisors) often make, which is to judge a company and its management by stock price. Instead, you might want to make some comparisons with other "quality" stocks. For one thing, QCOM may be the only major tech company with no debt. For another, it has a huge cash position exceeding $10 billion, which we all, undoubtedly, hope won't have to be used on legal fees, and which eventually might lead to stock buybacks or increased dividends. Third, while you were lamenting the sorry price of the stock, you ignored the fact that book value per share (an important measure of shareholder wealth) INCREASED by 8.4 percent to $9.70 per share. Looking at those numbers, you have a stock selling at only 4 times book value--very low for a company with a good earnings track record and no debt. Look at the numbers again. If the fundamentals are as solid as I believe, then the fault is NOT in the management but with people who ignore (intentionally or not) the intrinsic value of the stock, and the recent gains in value as measured by book value. Then look at the patent portfolio (including the two most recent challenged patents, which the jury determined to be valid). This is the heart of the value of the company, and for the most part, these patents aren't even included in book value. If you're just playing by stock price, you're missing a lot of what the company is. If you still feel that way, and if there are others like you, then one alternative would be to sell out-of-the-money covered calls, thereby generating some income while you wait for all these patent related matters to be resolved. Just don't blame management for the attempts of outsiders to dump on the company. Art