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: slacker711 who wrote (61940)	4/4/2007 9:52:42 AM
From: GO*QCOM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197299

The other side of the coin is the new competition that an independent network like MediaFlo could present the existing BIG Broadcast television networks such as ABC \| CBS \| Fox \| NBC.Once there was the big three then a 4th appeared on the scene that being FOX networks.The present now big four worry about the new network that could evolve into its own powerhouse with new content as did FOX in the 80's.Fox was able to pull off the formation by buying up all the small independent stations and morphing into a big broadcast network.Mediaflo presents the newest threat to the status quo.That said I would think the existing Big Four would want to fill the new network with there own content rather then compete with a possible fifth network with its own all new content supplied by Hollywood studios dying to forge the all new digital broadcasting network MediaFlo that could broadcast to ANY digital screen like desktops,laptops,IPOD's ect ect then add the Apple or MS transfer to the livingroom.The reach of MediaFlo could be huge,then add the cable content and there is alot of reason for MediaFlo to prosper.The other real possibility is a take over by one of the big networks once the MediaFlo becomes public which should be an exciting bidding war and a sweet ending.Ahhh life is good with QUALCOMM.

To: slacker711 who wrote (61940)	4/4/2007 10:06:14 AM
From: ohohyodafarted	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197299

This is an interesting development. However as was stated in the article, I believe the 2 systems will live in harmony with each other. Media Flo will be offering content that the over the air broadcasters can not offer. Free TV is still Free TV and you get what you pay for. I watch 99% commercial free satellite via a large 10 foot c-band dish with a first generation signal.. I don't like commercials, they insult my intelligence, and so I try to avoid commercial channels if at all possible. Of course there is the other side of the coin and that is, a large percentage of the population will watch anything as long as they don't have to pay for it. But I look at it like this, Free TV, has lost market share because the quality of the content is sub-standard, and it is crammed with commercials. Pay TV has eaten a large part of the traditional broadcasters market, because there is more to choose from and quality is better.

To: slacker711 who wrote (61940)	4/4/2007 12:00:31 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197299

Here it comes - Walled Garden, controlling the customer, charging like Globalstar, sign-up by subscribers slowly like Globalstar, and just like Globalstar's "Iridium is not competition. It's a different market." : <MediaFlo executives say they're not threatened. They say the broadcasters' service is complementary to its offering. "I would argue [the broadcasters' approach] is not a direct competitor to MediaFlo," says Omar Javaid, vice-president of MediaFlo International. "These services can happily co-exist. They are complementary." Javaid points out that today, 85% of Americans not only watch local TV stations at home but also pay for extra cable and satellite channels.> It was quite obvious that Verizon and other telecom companies would do as they always do = over charge and under deliver. MediaFLO has barely been born. Yet another opportunity being strangled at birth. Mqurice