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: qdog who wrote (6488)	12/15/1997 1:03:00 PM
From: dougjn	Respond to of 152472

Qdog, yes, I'm actually 1000% convinced of the superiority of G* over I* for a host of reasons, including: 1) 1/2 the upfront cost for a bunch of reasons, including CDMA, smart ground dumb birds; 2)3 to six times capacity due mostly to CDMA (major help to the upside, dealing w/increased competition); 3) much better political positioning, due to decision not to bypass locals esp. for long distance (see 1) (this translates into rollouts actually occuring in places like China, where I* is doubtfull); 4) much cheaper handsets, from the Q; 5) probably much better reception indoors, etc., due to CDMA multipathing (currently not much attention to this but for the high end traveler the Mot covets so much this is a very biggie.) My issues aren't whether G* will blow I* away. (I suspect I* may crash and burn.) My issue is whether there are the millions of subscribers projected who a) don't have cell coverage where they go and b) can afford 1-1.50 minute for G. I'm not saying they aren't there. I'm saying I worry about it. Its about the only G isssue I worry about. (Launch explosions are temporary phenomena, what w/insurance, etc.) Regards, Doug