SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Gregg Powers who wrote (8167)2/8/1998 1:35:00 AM
From: Gregg Powers  Read Replies (6) | Respond to of 152472
 
BTW, the sluggish "Q" sales are only tangentially related to price. The current "Q" is a single mode, digital only, (1900PCS) product. The cheaper QCP-2700, for which QC is still production capacity constrained, is a dual-mode, dual band phone (i.e. analog and 800MHZ and 1900MHZ digital). The problem is straightforward. Sprint's networks are still being built out, and there are many areas with inadequate coverage (i.e. you get dropped from the network if you are using a digital-only handset). The QCP-2700 ameliorates this problem by roaming into analog mode, or digital at 800MHZ, when the subscriber encounters an area where Sprint isn't fully built out. The current, single-band "Q" doesn't offer this functionality. Customers who pony up for a premium priced product tend to be rather intolerant (and rightly so) as to the technical reasons why their phone calls keep being interrupted--so, in markets with weak network coverage, the "Q" phone has not been selling well. Several solutions are pending. First, a single-mode phone (like the current "Q") is very desirable in PCS markets that are fully built out because the subscriber never has to pay expensive roaming fees to utilize a non-Sprint analog/800MHZ network. So the problem will be mitigated as Sprint's networks mature. Second, QC will begin shipping dual-mode (800MHZ digital & analog) "Q"'s by the end of March or early April--so a technical solution is close at hand. These observations are predicated on my conversations with network operators--who, BTW, indicate that the "Q" is a fundamentally attractive piece from both a form factor and functionality standpoint and that price (although they wish it were lower) is not a gating factor.



To: Gregg Powers who wrote (8167)2/8/1998 4:29:00 AM
From: qdog  Respond to of 152472
 
That was what I got out the conference call; this news was last week. I had thought originally that the conference call wasn't schedule until the 12th. Was it moved up?



To: Gregg Powers who wrote (8167)2/8/1998 8:36:00 AM
From: Christopher White  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 152472
 
Gregg,

Though in the CC management wouldn't name the Korean customer that put off that $60MM order, Value Line's October write up on QCOM supports your statement that Hansol PCS was indeed that customer, "Sprint is slated to receive over $50 million of the Q phones, and Korea based Hansol PCS recently placed a $60 million order..."

I am not too familiar with all the particulars fo QCOM's fundamentals, however, looking at a chart going back 4 years, Friday's action could be called typical for this stock...high beta with violent up and down moves, however, the highs are higher and the lows are higher. Longer term this would seem as good a good place as any to enter - QCOM has perhaps $10/share in cash, a P/S that is 1/2 of LU and a much greater rate of revenue growth than LU.

A quick question, does QCOM have their own FAB to produce ASICs or do they contract manufacturing out? Thanks.

Christopher