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: Gregg Powers who wrote (8455)	2/12/1998 10:41:00 AM
From: bananawind	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Gregg, Glad to see you are still posting. I hope this doesn't mean you are still airborne or stuck in an airport. Your perspective is most welcome. -JLF

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (8455)	2/12/1998 10:46:00 AM
From: Ramsey Su	Respond to of 152472

Gregg, we are in agreement on all counts, your response to Mike's posts is just far more detailed than mine. On item #5, management did specifically talk about maintaining the $800M cash level, referenced doubling the number of authorized shares and discussion on credit lines with major lenders including BofA. I sensed that they are uncomfortable in going after too many projects that require vendor financing, which I guess is the norm for a lot of these infrastructure contracts, without first having some financing lined up. Jim, regarding the Q, allow me to clarify my point. I think there were too much emphasis on the first generation Q phone. Take an area like SD, Sprint's coverage is still poor and inferior to Nextel, PacBell and AirTouch dual mode. If I am to spend the bucks, I want the best, not just the smallest. To me the first generation Q phone is almost like the StarTac analog. I think come April, when the dual mode Q phone hits the market, sales should pick up. Ramsey

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (8455)	2/12/1998 11:20:00 AM
From: H. Bradley Toland, Jr.	Respond to of 152472

Gregg, I enjoyed your spirited conversations with Candlestick; it livens things up a bit. But seriously, have you any other companies as special as Qualcomm that you're investing in? Would like to know. Here's a couple we own that we feel have the long term potential of a Qualcomm: Genzyme and Genzyme Transgenics. PS: in QCOM since 17.

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (8455)	2/12/1998 1:59:00 PM
From: Clarksterh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Gregg - Gee..in the world accord to Mr. Fool, if Samsung handsets sell poorly that's bad; however, if Samsung handsets sell well, that's bad too. Just anyone think his reasoning is superficial besides me? Well, we (the longs on this thread) seem to think that if Samsung sells more phones it is good, and if Qualcomm sells more phones it is good. Isn't that equally silly? In actuality I think we (Mr. Fool, you and I) are all saying the same thing - Everything else being equal, I'd rather have a Qualcomm handset sold than a QPE handset, and a QPE handset rather than a Samsung, and a Samsung rather than a Motorola, and a Motorola rather than (God forbid) an Ericsson. Clark

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (8455)	2/12/1998 2:52:00 PM
From: Todd E Godwin	Respond to of 152472

Hey Gregg: Who have been Qualcomm's underwriters in the past for IPO and any other financing issues? Thanks in advance, Todd

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (8455)	2/14/1998 12:01:00 PM
From: Ramsey Su	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 152472

Greg spend the last quiet hour on Sat morning digesting the numerous posts from you. Your argument is compelling, especially from the break up value perspective. QCOM current cap is around $3.5 billion, using the recent trading range. You seem to imply that $5 to $7 billion is more in line. The share price, with about 70 million shares issued, should therefore be more reasonably priced at the 70 to 100 range. One can easily argue that the takeover value should be even higher than 100 because there should be a premium for goodwill and other intangible blue sky value to entice the company to sell. It may even be logical for someone like LU and T to gobble up QCOM, take the IPR and use their financial muscle to really dominate the current explosive growth. Could they possibly say thanks to ERICY for pushing through a w-CDMA 3G? Something like, "thanks, Eric, we have the CDMA IPR to develop 3G. If you guys want to play also, please pay. By the way, we also have the technology to lay CDMA over GSM in the mean time, possibly provide a seamless transition in the future." What do you think of that scenario? Ramsey