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: Maurice Winn who wrote (90176)	3/9/2010 9:05:55 PM
From: quartersawyer	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197214

There really isn't any reason that Qualcomm in 1995 couldn't have got the handset business going with innovative designs. Except the available genius was not in that direction, and the excellent business plan was to establish the CDMA networks and sell to everyone, so sustained direct competition in devices was contraindicated. finance.yahoo.com Some other plan might have been better, in retrospect. Same goes for the mousetrap business today. finance.yahoo.com,^IXIC Isn't Apple still all about the singular design genius and salesmanship of Steven Jobs?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (90176)	3/10/2010 11:38:58 AM
From: Art Bechhoefer	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197214

Maurice, you raise an intriguing thought: There really isn't any reason that Qualcomm in 1995 couldn't have got the handset business going with innovative designs. Innovative designs of course include both software and hardware. Apple has done a great job inducing software specialists to write programs that run on its phones and computers. Qualcomm has chosen to buy firms that have interesting software applications (banking, location based advertising, etc.), but I wonder, given your thoughts, whether QCOM would have been better off contracting with the firms rather than buying them. When QCOM was still producing phones way back when, they did a lot of advertising of their "thin phone," which at the time looked quite good when compared with most of the bricks being sold. I used one of the thin phones on the Sprint network and found that the chief problem was that it got awfully hot in areas somewhat removed from the base station antenna. It takes more than good looks to sell a product, though that helps. Art

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (90176)	3/10/2010 4:48:51 PM
From: lml	9 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 197214

There really isn't any reason that Qualcomm in 1995 couldn't have got the handset business going with innovative designs. Yes, there is. QCOM is NOT AAPL. AAPL is a consumer PRODUCT company; QCOM, among other things, is a consumer TECHNOLOGY company. I think QCOM should leave consumer products to companies focused upon consumer habits, preferences, behavior, etc. AAPL does a remarkable job in the consumer electronics area, probably better than any other company I can think of. I'd rather see QCOM selling to a company like AAPL than competing against it.