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: JeffreyHF who wrote (72840)	1/2/2008 4:37:55 AM
From: Raglanroadie	Respond to of 196842

On the two year time frame I stand corrected and shown lazy in my reading diligence. All I can say is hopefully it comes only once a year. When it comes down to it what I tried to express was my sense that while the the subject is new the response seems reminiecent of the whole ITC ordeal. While the ITC issue is only delayed it seems to have lost its menacing flavor of the moment allure. My inclination is to view this as just another starting point with a currently pegged date of 01/31/09. If Q appeals which I suspect they will that date may very well more further out from the starting point. I figure that if Q's appeal has merit there is a good chance for that date to be changed. If Q appeals the decision based soley in maneuver then that date should hold. Since it is only the first weekend only time will tell. I would like to note though that 01/31/09 is one month after NOK's option expires. If we are to believe that NOK and BRCM are in cahoots then NOK's option will have an affect on BRCM. Will NOK sign before the option expires, some period after that, or never? If NOK exercises the option then I suspect 01/31/09 will be mute. If NOK roles the dice and lets it lapse but still aquires a license afterwards then I seems to me that those are the months after 01/31/09 that will be impacted. WRT chipsets a few thoughts come to mind. TIC here but since Apple has shown that slower-older is all that is needed to succeed maybe Q could dust off some really old designs and still offer all that the market really needs. There is also the little matter of our chipset supplies. If I had to choose between a company that was facing lost chip sales when they have excess capacity to one where supply is constrained I'll go with the supply constraints. Since production can be shifted I suspect this has more chance of influencing Q's direction than jeopardizing it's existance. I agree that earings could very well be affected but am not sure at this point to what degree if at all. I'm not sure what they will say at CES but if they don't say much at all then my guess is that the folks over at marketing spent most of their time preparing to promote products that were under a cloud. I guess if it does turn out that BRCM's patents control Q's business to such a degree that Q is pushed aside to obscurity then those must be pretty darn good patents. My sense is they are not so this to will probably pass the torch to some as yet unkown flavor of the moment. WRT Q being speechless all I can say is we have different opions. While communication from the corporation is always good in the broader context I prefer more appropriate venues over PR horn blowing. My cat instintively purr's when I pet her and while this is nice it is nonetheless only beneficial to the cat for that moment. Since PR's have limited shelf life I enjoy them but try not to depend on them. Please don't get me wrong I think that the issues you highlight are important and you articulate them well. I just refuse to get to worked up at this time let alone over BRCM horn blowing. It is late so I won't edit this I hope you understand. Charles