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 (108296)	1/3/2012 6:03:13 PM
From: waitwatchwander	1 Recommendation Respond to of 197271

Well said ...

To: slacker711 who wrote (108296)	1/3/2012 7:06:59 PM
From: BDAZZ	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197271

>>Sorry about that, but I guess really dont understand how your first argument and this comment work together. << Yes, I guess that line could have been interpreted in a don't second guess way. My point was simply one of perspectives, ie if Dr. J and a chat board guy were giving a keynote address, I would choose to see Dr. J. Nothing against W3, who I consider one of many very good contributors to a great board. But he knows that my stance is that he actually does have a lot of faith in P.J. 2nd best proof? He has his money invested here. But the best proof comes from you last post which he just now agreed with. Your statement, >>but some companies have strong enough business models that only somebody completely incompetent would be able to derail the company<< Exactly. This is actually a terrific vote of confidence by you and W3. The number one desire you have in a CEO of a successful company is, don't screw it up. Simple, yet I can cite a dozen CEOs that have destroyed their companies business models. And Dr J. is not only not screwing it up, he is milking it. So although your statement may not read as the best recommendation, it is actually THE most important faith we all have in this investment, faith that the CEO is competent enough to not screw up the successful business model.

To: slacker711 who wrote (108296)	1/4/2012 9:12:11 AM
From: FJB	Respond to of 197271

HTC to unveil quad-core, LTE-enabled smartphones in MWC, says paper Commercial Times, January 4; Steve Shen, DIGITIMES [Wednesday 4 January 2012] JPMorgan Chase has recently upgraded the stock of HTC to "overweight," expecting the vendor to unveil new high-end smartphones powered by Nvidia's quad-core Tegra 3 CPUs and Qualcomm's LTE-enabled MSM 8960(Krait) SoC solutions, respectively, in the upcoming Mobile World Congress (MWC) 2012, according to a Chinese-language Commercial Times report. HTC will maintain its lead against rivals by two months if it unveils Tegra 3- and MSM 8960-based smartphones in February and ships the models on time in April, the paper quoted Alvin Kwok, an analyst at JPMorgan Chase, as saying. While some industry observers have forecast smartphone shipments from HTC to stay flat or even decline in 2012, Kwok believes that HTC will continue to post a growth of 15% and 29%, respectively, in shipments in 2012 and 2013.

To: slacker711 who wrote (108296)	1/4/2012 11:08:05 AM
From: Jim Mullens	3 Recommendations Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 197271

BDAZZ / Slacker / WWW, re: “second guessing management” BDAZZ- “My post said if you don't have faith in PJ then you should not own the stock.” Slacker I disagree. There are very few companies that fit the description but some companies have strong enough business models that only somebody completely incompetent would be able to derail the company. We can disagree about some of PJ's decisions but I dont think anybody would put him in that class of management. One great thing about owning Qualcomm shares over the years is that I have always thought that they have had limited downside due to the resilience of the business model. That isnt true for the vast vast majority of companies (including Apple). The original Qualcomm team did an amazing job setting up a company that was made for the long-term >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My two cents- Second guessing is one thing, but a consistent barrage of attacks demanding new management is quite another- IMO. As a practical matter, for a long term owner with a substantial investment in a particular company, I would think it somewhat self defeating to one’s own net worth to constantly berate the companies CEO. That’s not to say one should not “second guess” some of management’s decisions, but to constantly shout out for the ouster of the CEO while still having major stake in the company is inconsistent / contrary / incompatible to one’s self interest, IMO. ( unless one’s a take-over “artist”- attempting to drive the price down ) I totally agree that “The original* Qualcomm team did an amazing job setting up a company that was made for the long-term”,* and …….QCOM’s business model is indeed unique as revealed by Gregg Powers (and others) some 15 years ago, and the major reason I originally invested and remained invested thru thick and thin over the years. However, describing Paul as … not “…somebody completely incompetent (that) would be able to derail the company” …is not particularly a great vote of confidence and IMO significantly (totally?) ignores his / the companies many outstanding accomplishments during his close to six years as CEO, many of which were under extremely difficult conditions - both maco and micro). Anyone care to list a few of QCOM’s accomplishments over the past 5- 6 years?