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 Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: duncan moyer who wrote (1)	9/13/1996 2:40:00 PM
From: Craig Schilling	Respond to of 152472

Duncan, thanks for reply. Could you send me the message again I didn't get the address in your message. Thanks Craig

To: duncan moyer who wrote (1)	9/13/1996 3:12:00 PM
From: Craig Schilling	Respond to of 152472

Never mind duncan I found the spot, thanks.

To: duncan moyer who wrote (1)	8/27/1999 6:03:00 PM
From: Mark Fleming	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 152472

On the "The Gorilla Game" mailing list, loads of uninformed people are trashing QCOM. It's an endless fight. The latest follows. How about some of you help me in responding to him: Ron brings up an interesting point. On a similar note I have been in contact with several of the companies that are part of the standards body (Lucent, Ericcson, Nokia and Qualcomm). This is what I have found out. 1) When W-CDMA is made the 3G standard and rolled out it becomes free. Yes, free. That's what a standard is, a policy set by the government to ensure that all competitors have equal footing. 2) The only proprietary or licensable products become the individual parts of the network (Chips, handsets, base stations). These products can be made and sold by anyone without a licensing fee. An example of this is ATM which is a data networking standard. Both Cisco and Lucent make switches that work on ATM without paying anyone a licensing or royalty fee. If you don't believe me than answer this, who gets the licensing fees from GSM? 3) What will happen is that companies will partner with each other to provide end to end solutions. For example a manufacturer of base stations would partner with a manufacturer of handsets. So if Qualcomm can manufacturer or produce the parts necessary for a part of the value chain they can benefit from that aspect but not the licensing fees. 4) As part of the recent settlement Ericcson does not have to pay royalties to Qualcomm on current infrastructure sales. Infrastructure is much more profitable than handsets. 5) Lucent was one of the first to do work in the CDMA field, has numerous patents and produces chips for the handsets, for that matter so does Nokia and Ericcson who are both building their own CDMA phones. While qualcomm currently (before CDMA is made a standard) can force a small vendor to pay them a fee the large companies have patents to trade. Qualcomm and others must cross license these patents so it becomes a push. 6) A point to remember in technology, the best technology rarely wins if it did we would all have Apple computers, run on IBM chips connecting to networks based on Cabletron switches. Installed base and customer reach are more important. Few clients ever want to change, even to a better technology, after its been installed. If you don't believe that than why is the US still not metric? 7) In terms of the market reaction I can't explain why some stocks are bid up in the short term but if the market is always right why is Network Associates at 16 not its high of 68, NEON at 16 not at 78, AMD at 19 not 35? The examples are endless the market over reacts and is based to some degree to investor sentiment.

To: duncan moyer who wrote (1)	2/7/2004 5:16:37 PM
From: anandnvi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

This is about the dividends paid out by Qualcomm last year. I received my consolidated 1099 forms from my broker for the tax year 2003. THe 1099-DIV indicates that all the dividends I received for the year from Qualcomm (QCOM) are taxable (in box 1b). However, qualcomm.com spells out that only the dividends issued on 12/26/03 are taxable and the remaining 3 2003 dividend payments were non-taxable events. As such, I would expect box 3 of the 1099-DIV (NONTAXABLE DISTRIBUTIONS) to report a non-zero number and box 1b to be adjusted by this amount. How are fellow SI-ers dealing with this? I talked to my broker who said he couldn't help, and that they are not issuing a revised 1099. Thanks for any help!

To: duncan moyer who wrote (1)	1/6/2005 5:13:26 AM
From: JGoren	Respond to of 152472

After Hours Court Announcement 5:35pm 01/05/05 Court denies Qualcomm request to delay Maxim CDMA chips (MXIM, QCOM) By Heather Wilson SAN FRANCISCO (CBS.MW) -- Maxim Integrated Products (MXIM) said after the bell Wednesday that a court has denied Qualcomm's (QCOM) request to delay the development and launch of Maxim's direct conversion RF chips used in wireless products. The court also issued a preliminary injunction preventing third parties or Maxim from accepting or using confidential information about Qualcomm. Maxim said that the court decision clears the way for its development and sale of the CDMA transceivers.