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: Wildbiftek who wrote (146655)	5/30/2018 8:40:30 AM
From: slacker711	2 Recommendations Recommended By FJB pyslent Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 196545

Qualcomm's ICs embody their patents as much as Intel's CPUs embody Windows. In other words they don't. and a handset embodies a lot of IP and value that isnt remotely associated with Q. There are good arguments on both sides but the history comes decisively down on the side of handset level royalties. Personally, I would be far more worried about the level of royalties. Do Q's contributions roughly half of total wireless royalties at a level of $7 billion a year? Certainly true, with CDMA and WCDMA, but the early core patents have all expired and the work on LTE and 5G is far more spread out in the industry. I think Q digital patent wall provides a pretty good idea of what this means. qualcomm.com The orange patents are Q's cellular patents. You can see the early patents have hundreds and sometimes thousands of cites. Q has far more patents later, but none have anywhere near that kind of importance. Note that Q has used an algorithm for later patents to estimate the total number of cites that the later patents will eventually achieve. Slacker