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 (62477)	4/12/2007 8:23:39 AM
From: slacker711	Respond to of 196989

I should also add that if Nokia's statement about a less than 3% royalty rate is true, it substantially ramps up their risk. They have until the end of '08, but beyond that it might make real fiscal sense for Qualcomm to split the company. An extra 2% in royalties would go a long way in covering the duplicate R&D between the two companies. Slacker

To: slacker711 who wrote (62477)	4/12/2007 8:32:25 AM
From: carranza2	Respond to of 196989

Not often you get two concrete statements from companies that are so much in conflict each other. Usually, I can find a bit of wiggle room in statements, but I dont see any here. Lots and lots of wiggle room. The salami is sliced so thinly by NOK on this PR you can practically see through it. What does "aggregate" mean? Probably includes the total number of licenses for which it pays 1% or less. Of course, this reduces the overall "aggregate" rate. Nokia is probably under a continuing obligation not to reveal the rate Q charges. When you see a statement to the effect that "Q charges us x%", then there will be no wiggle room left.

To: slacker711 who wrote (62477)	4/12/2007 8:45:54 AM
From: limtex	Respond to of 196989

slacks - how much in $. Lets see the beef. %ages are important but can be confusing, $ aren't confusing. Best, L