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: tero kuittinen who wrote (8280)	2/9/1998 5:05:00 PM
From: Asterisk	Respond to of 152472

Tero: One company depending on anothers chips is nothing new. I am sure that if you popped the back on a QCOM phone you would see some type of Motorola chip. Motorola and QCOM are still doing business even though they are suing one another. Business is business, you cannot apply emotions to what a company does. Companies make decisions all the time that if looked at from a humanity standpoint are deplorable, yet they are the best business decisions that they could have made. I encourage you to look back to Gregs post for an explanation of using outdated technology for Nokias first swing at the CDMA race.

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (8280)	2/9/1998 5:23:00 PM
From: bananawind	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Tero...you give far too much credit to those in the financial press. While often smart and hardworking, you will find that your typical WSJ reporter does not have much appreciation for how businesses actually operate, not to mention a technical subject as complex as CDMA IPR's. If they can't see it in a four word headline or a few two sentence paragraphs, IMO it just ain't gonna happen. FLASH ....CDMA PIONEER QUALCOMM OWNS IMPORTANT PATENTS COVERING TECHNOLOGY NEEDED DESPERATELY BY EUROPEAN PHONE MAKERS.... Nah... just ain't gonna happen.

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (8280)	2/9/1998 5:34:00 PM
From: Quincy	Respond to of 152472

Do you know that Qualcomm phones use internal parts stamped "MOTOROLA"? Kindof blows the direct competitor theory, doesn't it? (Trust me. Taking these phones apart causes them to stop working. Not recommended.) As far as the cheap technological edge, doesn't it make more sense to choose the technology that is able to give me lower monthly charges with fewer capacity problems and a higher data rate than GSM? But, don't start telling me why GSM is better, I chose my phone company because their rates were lower. Airtouch attributes this to CDMA. Even a precursory study of IS95 innovations and Qcom's patents demonstrates Europe is left with either licensing Qualcomm's technology or developing their own (something they have been working on for the last decade with little success except for Nokia's IS95 innovations.) You don't need a reporter to figure that part out. ASIC's are an important but small part of the entire learning curve every manufacturer is faced with. Nokia and Motorola chose to forgo the advantage of starting all learning curves at the same time and are struggling to get to market. Believe what you want, Tero. Others have already commented on the obvious slant of WSJ. It's sad. But, it might explain some things about your posts.

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (8280)	2/9/1998 5:37:00 PM
From: John Cuthbertson	Respond to of 152472

"I believe that Qualcomm holds the key to W-CDMA when I see it reported in WSJ, Businessweek, Forbes, Fortune or some other major business publication. Not Total Telecom. You would think that it would be such a news bomb that these major publications would pick it up, wouldn't you?" Tero, No, in fact far from being a news bomb, I would think that this fact is really too bleedin' obvious to count as "news." (Though, in agreement with Jim Frost's post, it may not be obvious to the financial press.) ==John

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (8280)	2/10/1998 12:53:00 AM
From: qdog	Respond to of 152472

You no what Tero, I refrain from answering your first post, because it made me laugh. Now I choose to answer this one. Let me get this straight, QCOM brought MOT to it's knees?? Haleujah, there is a GOD!!! Like MOT hasn't been charging folks for IPR and the chips that are involved ove rthe years. Hey sport, IBM derives over $1 billion in royalty and licensing revenues; so QCOM get's a couple of million!! And how much does Nokia get???? We find out in the next couple of days and will sure throw it in your face if it's more than QCOM's!!! As to your NEW AND IMPROVED version of CDMA, we will see what the final bastardized version it REALLY is!! Just like the original French dreamt version of GSM that is champion by the Nordic crowd??? Where is the ISDN capability of a GSM phone from Ericsson/Nokia?? It doesn't exist.............