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 (93422)	7/21/2010 10:27:43 PM
From: badger3	1 Recommendation Respond to of 196647

<Something has changed, the question is whether it is permanent> New Gulfstreams for the patent attorneys??

To: slacker711 who wrote (93422)	7/21/2010 11:44:47 PM
From: kelseysuncle	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 196647

Keitel dodged all of the direct questions and even stated that he would go into more detail in November. Something has changed, the question is whether it is permanent. From my listen he didn't exactly dodge the questions but DID stick strictly to his prepared answer. There were at least three questions asking for clarification of the lower margin. Each time his answer was essentially the same: fixed cost, lower Jan Q revenue hence lower margin. The analysts didn't seem to buy the explanation and I wouldn't be surprised by headlines tomorrow claiming record low margins for QTL. OTOH from my own experience costs for patent filing HAVE roughly doubled over the past two years and if patent filings have increased (as I think I heard in the CC) costs could have significantly risen and with revs seasonally down maybe that's all there is. It was the only weak part of the CC, the rest was quietly confident. The AH reaction was pretty good. I hope it carries through tomorrow. Best, ku

To: slacker711 who wrote (93422)	7/22/2010 7:52:03 AM
From: ihavenoidea	15 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 196647

A decent quarter thanks to the success of Qcom Technology. Unfortunately, only when qcom obtains and implements quality management of the enterprise will we shareholders be rewarded. Qcom mangement is stuffing a buck or two a share in my front pocket today. But I have not lost sight that qcom management stole my wallet the first half of the year, using it for such things as defraying the cost of Dr. PJ's trip to Davos (when he should have been leading the disasterous Quartely Conference Call), as well as using it for excessive compensation for he and his management team in March as they continued their mediocre management of the business as this quarter results reflect. The costs all add up, but I'm sure there is fat to cut to bring up margins. Most all of us agree that we don't want qualcomm concentrating on managing shareholder cash; but unfortunately the bigger qcom becomes, the more they are in the business of not only managing cash, but the operating expenses. Both require a like competency. Unfortunately, the Qcom management team has not gained the maturity to manage a mature company.Lets take a look: Qualcomm’s FLO TV business makes up a majority of its Qualcomm (NSDQ: QCOM) Strategic Initiatives group, which in the third quarter, reported $118 million in operating expenses (primarily related to FLO TV), it said. That's $400M this year down the rat hole for FLOP TV. I don't know how much last year, or the year before, or how much next year before they dump it. Plus the $1.2B we have tied up in owning the frequency. Also,as you state QTL expenses are now around $175 million a quarter during a period of relative patent peace. Up from $50m 2 years ago.To put that in proper perspective, FLO-TV expenses are twice what QTL expenses were two years ago, with nil benefit. Do we see a trend? Bear with me while I quote from the most relevant part of my post of 11/27/2008 on this tread; as if it was today: "It is apparent that QCOM is not addressing the former cost increases in R&D, which were at an increased level; they are not addressing the current increase in R&D; and they are exacerbating the situation by not addressing the increase in future R&D. It is instructive that this is only an example of a failure to control costs in one area (R&D), but it also indicates that the cancer of overhead increases are spreading througout qcom; and not being adequately treated. Bottom line (no pun intended), these out of control overhead costs have a material effect on past earnings, and a material detrimental compounding effect on future earnings." The compounding effect referred to in the prior post is now evident as shareholder money wastefully spills out like the oil in the gulf; and qualcomm management can't seem to put a cap on it after several years.i.