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: David E. Taylor who wrote (81116)	10/16/2008 11:16:06 AM
From: JohnG	Respond to of 197227

David T--You're right. I read the notes again. There isn't enough info to even make a rough guess.

To: David E. Taylor who wrote (81116)	10/16/2008 11:25:52 AM
From: slacker711	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197227

payment for past royalties due, and an upfront cash payment for the 15 year license agreement. Can you find any reference to the fact that any of this is for past royalties due? Everything Keitel talks about seems to point to this being amortized on a straight line basis. If not, it is hard to make sense of the 7-13 cent guidance. Slacker

To: David E. Taylor who wrote (81116)	10/16/2008 7:21:27 PM
From: Maurice Winn	7 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 197227

That means there is six months in which QCOM has insider trading information which sellers don't have [or other buyers who would compete with Qualcomm for QCOM shares: <No real way to get at that rate until QCOM reports a quarter with them included, which will not be until Q2 FY2009 gets reported next April.> Since Nokia is quite big, that's material information withheld from the market but available to insiders for their personal trading and for QCOM for the buy-back programme. It would be helpful to competing buyers and sellers to know at what price QCOM is a buyer. Qualcom was buying at $42 before the settlement, so they must be wolfing it down at $38 after the settlement. Nokia's payment provides a bit more ammunition after the losses which QCOM must have taken with their financial investments. I guess we'll end up no further ahead. It's a shame QCOM wasn't shorting the financials, housing etc over the last couple of years when the debacle became plain. Meanwhile, it was nice to see Nokia go down with a bit of a thump in their results. My expectation is that Nokia will dwindle as things like the amazing Titan [which I watched in use today], iPhone, BlackBerry, Treo, and the swarms of other devices gain market share at Nokia's expense. I can't imagine that anyone with even slight cognitive function would do without a mobile cyberspace device in 2020. And there's a long trajectory of upgrades combined with price reductions which will keep the latest models always attractive. After 2 years, their old device will look quite jaded to most people and they'll be looking for an upgrade. The residual value of their device will be low. The notion that poor people in Africa, India, China and everywhere between can't afford or don't need mobile cyberspace is false. Chinese has been buying cellphones for a decade despite low incomes and at a time when phones were more expensive per GDP and had a lot less functionality than they do or will have. That proves that poor people rate cyberspace service higher than they do buying SUVs and the other accoutrements of modern life. Cyberphones will be a primary purchase. NOT a luxury. They will be considered a human right, if not compulsory. QCOM controls a dominant market share and can grab more. [To coin a phrase] Nokia can't. Mqurice