SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Q8tfreebe who wrote (62328)4/10/2007 8:36:56 PM
From: engineer  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 196972
 
exactly, go find that slide we got a month ago on Nokia market share relative to LG and Samsung in WCDMA. If it were cost, they (Koreans) would not be growing at 2x the rate of NOK.

The real reason is that NOK outsources all their high tech phones for development to offshore houses, which means they pay alot more in development to get to the same place as the Koreans. they only know how to design very low cost units. They are missing the mark on 3G. Nobody wants a 3G $20 phone. NOBODY. That brings with it a set of features which has no 3G abilites. Small screen, simple keyboard, no camera, etc. Like India prepaid phones. Not a phone for EU. EVER.



To: Q8tfreebe who wrote (62328)4/10/2007 10:15:00 PM
From: 1HumbleGuy  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 196972
 
You are most probably correct that LG pays higher net royalty rate than Nokia does. But you are incorrect overemphasizing the LG's 3G phone contest win. Likely LG's strategy was to gain market share here and also make good bang for buck to win public contest. So they gave up their margins, maybe even went for negative ones, thinking of "short term pain, long term gain" strategy Look at the LG's margins. They are very poor, quarter or two back their handset business was still bleeding.
LG just doesn't have own IPR power to stand against Qcom, so of course they swallow spit and "take it", because "leaving it" would put them out of business stright away.