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: ggamer who wrote (60692)	3/2/2007 3:02:38 PM
From: BDAZZ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 196972

>>Also people were saying the EDGE/GPRS/etc were not going to happen.... All I am saying is that they were all ok and now QCOM needs to share the royalties with a few others. Nokia is still a king in the wireless market and they will continue to be a king in 3G and overall they have done OK.<< EDGE could not have happened without the use of QCOM IPR, and actually QCOM gains strength in the world wirless market with 3G, and Nokia is far weaker in 3G than GSM.

To: ggamer who wrote (60692)	3/2/2007 3:08:58 PM
From: matherandlowell	Respond to of 196972

"All I am saying is that they were all ok and now QCOM needs to share the royalties with a few others" Has QCOM agreed to share its standard royalty rate with others? My understanding of the deal is that the Q still charges and receives its standard rate. What the others charge is up to them but too much of an increase will make WCDMA noncompetitive with CDMA. I admit that there is some difference of opinion on this point. Some might claim that there is an implied cap on total royalties. I have yet to see where QCOM agreed to cap its standard royalty rate. j.

To: ggamer who wrote (60692)	3/2/2007 3:47:20 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 196972

GG, when one provides a service and others also provide services, one doesn't share one's pay rate with the others. The others charge for their services according to what they think they are worth. If the buyer needs all the services to use the total product or service, then they either pay the whole lot, or they decline to buy. QCOM doesn't have to share their royalties with others. The others charge what they like for their intellectual property and it adds up ... to 12% in the case of W-CDMA apparently, but maybe it's higher than that for people with no intellectual property to trade. CDMA2000 adds up to 4% on average, but new licensees pay more like 5.5% I think, plus an upfront fee, and do a cross-license. I don't see the lawyers sharing their fees with other lawyers. They all charge their fees and it adds up to $1 billion or something for QUALCOMM. QUALCOMM can decline to buy if they wish. When you buy a car, the engine maker doesn't share their revenue with the headlight supplier. Each sells their parts and intellectual property for what they think it's worth. The price of the car is whatever it all adds up to and what the market will bear on top of that. Mqurice

To: ggamer who wrote (60692)	3/2/2007 6:08:18 PM
From: engineer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 196972

Your still wrong...

To: ggamer who wrote (60692)	3/2/2007 7:35:05 PM
From: BDAZZ	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 196972

>>Nokia is still a king in the wireless market and they will continue to be a king in 3G << Nokia is king in wireless handsets for now, but this does not mean it will continue. Remember when MOT was king? Remember when GSM was the future? Nokia could ensure their top position by signing with QCOM and building handsets around QCOM chips in addition to TXN, but this is not the course they have taken. Nokia decided to put its top position in peril by openly vowing to use QCOM IPR and not pay for it if QCOM did not start to charge what Nokia thinks it should charge. This was not a wise move, but Nokia has distinguished itself in the last few years by acting in curious business ways. Re their strange attitude toward not using QCOM chips for CDMA. This attitude has cost them dearly in revenue and greatly promoted the status of their competitors. Samsung et al cheer Nokia's self crippling hatred of QCOM. It's caused Nokia to, for no reason, shut itself out of a big wireless market. Once you let emotion run your business you're messin up. Many may hate QCOM, but use their tech because it is the best. They will stop using it when it is not the best and never look back. Never let personal get in the way of business. Go ahead and hate QCOM, but use anything they have to make you money.