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: edwin k. who wrote (6843)	1/6/1998 10:08:00 AM
From: Harvey Rosenkrantz	Respond to of 152472

Holy cow, Batman, this thread is degenerating into a name calling contest! Throw some cold water on the dogs! Stand back and have a tall cool one, take a deep breath and welcome the new year. There will be many exciting developments coming down the pike and we can use all available eyes, ears and brains to help sort the wheat from the chaff. China has predicted that they will have 35 million wireless phone users by the year 2000. Japan will be well underway by then with millions of CDMA users. WLL in India will be widespread with CDMA getting its share of the business. Korea will be back in business and competing mightily against the rest of the world. South America, Africa and maybe even Europe will see the light and IS-95 systems will be growing all over. Even Australia may be opening the door a crack. Things are moving rapidly and our collective vigilance will enable us all to make more intelligent decisions. However, on the subject of abusive/stupid government actions. Does anybody recall that QCOM applied for and was denied a Pioneer's Preference license to establish a system in Miami. QCOM took that FCC decision to court and won. However, congress subsequently closed the door for all future pioneer preference awards rendering the victory a Pyrrhic one. (If I have the facts wrong, please correct me.) Our government sometimes runs in strange ways imposing catch 22 on good people and worthwhile corporations. Obviously this is not directly translated to the current acrimonious debate, but just to show that there may be valid points on both sides of the table.

To: edwin k. who wrote (6843)	1/6/1998 10:22:00 AM
From: Sawtooth	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

All: QCOM is looking to ge..... "Duck!!!" (Crash...splinter...broken chair in corner). As I was startin..... "Oooh", "Ouch!", "Look out!!!" Uh, hello... "A**hole!" (Smash...broken glass flying everywhere). That's OK; I'll stop back later. ; )

To: edwin k. who wrote (6843)	1/6/1998 2:44:00 PM
From: Bruce R. Schlake	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

Obviously you have me confused with somebody else. Please reread my posts and the responder's to straighten out your confusion. As far as standing up for something you believe in and not backing down to a bully is probably something you have not experienced. This issue is a complex one with points on both sides. Bundling has always been a problem for dominant software companies and we shall see where the line is drawn. Have a good day. Bruce