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: pass pass who wrote (8152)	2/7/1998 9:10:00 PM
From: engineer	Respond to of 152472

I think all Korean companies are under IMF review for dumping in general.

To: pass pass who wrote (8152)	2/8/1998 1:25:00 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Respond to of 152472

pp, good point. are any big time gsm mftrs located in asia?

To: pass pass who wrote (8152)	2/8/1998 1:05:00 PM
From: METMAN	Respond to of 152472

pass pass, dumping cheaper phones on the US market may help CDMA usage grow, meaning more royalties for the Q, but it will cut in greatly to Q's share of the handset market. Most here already know that sooner or later, Q will be facing increased competition from other handset makers (once they get their phones on the market), so it is important to continue getting as much market share right now, as is possible. I see this for at least 2 reasons: 1) Obviously, lost revenue to the Q if handset sales go to Samsung or pure Sony. Sure there's a royalty for the ASIC and technology, but you can't tell me that Q gets more money from Samsung per phone than they do from selling one of their own; and 2) more importantly, brand recognition. If the Q doesn't establish brand recognition before other handset manufacturers flood the market with more handsets, than Q's handset business will be reduced to more royalties than revenues. I believe that this has already been brought up from time to time on this thread. Look what has happened to the DRAM industry since the summer of 1995....Micron clobbered by SEA dumping memory in US market...Micron manufactures/sells more memory than ever, but the company is suffering greatly. This past summer the boom/bust cycle for disc drive makers...QNTM and WDC hit badly by lower priced drives from Maxtor and others. Granted, Q has more going for it, but anytime a product begins to reach commodity status, watch out. All here agree that Q needs others to gain acceptance, but there is a great balancing act here between market share and market acceptance. I believe that Q will do well for a long time, but the short term is critical to avoid any more mis-steps in marketing, brand recognition, anticipated sales of lower vs. higher cost models and intense competition from others who are already in the market. In retrospect, the SuperBowl marketing did not go as planned...we have already complained about the lack of "Qualcomm Stadium" being mentioned.....I saw the whole game....2 Q spots ran...I remember only 1 and I was looking for them specifically. My guess is that they have gotten more for their money with the full page ads in the Wall Street Journal this past fall. Just so you know, I don't disagree with you about the acceptance of CDMA, but I think the emphasis has to be placed on brand recognition and "word of mouth" advertising.....the only way to win is to get as much of your product out there as possible, since your name is plastered all over the product...and everyone sees it, everywhere....until Qualcomm becomes a household name, they have a lot more at stake than say, a Sony, Motorola, Nokia, or Ericsson, even though these guys have entered (or will enter) the game at a later date. Comments always welcomed..... regards and respectfully, metman