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 (8541)	2/15/1998 4:31:00 PM
From: Greg B.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

With CDMA essentially a standard in North America (assuming positive outcome from Mexico auctions), I'm trying to understand what the GSM Operators around the world should be thinking from a strategic perspective. Have not seen any guidance in the trade press to this point. It appears that the ETSI W-CMDA standard is a super set, and that not every aspect needs to be implemented to support it. For example, can a greenfield CDMA (modified IS-95) deployment coexist in a TDMA/GSM infrastructure environment? I thought that was one big deal about the GSM overlay demonstration. If this is the case, then GSM operators should stall or reconsider their build-out strategies. A clearly defined migration strategy is needed, especially in light of the discussions of a global standard. Surely, a business customer is concerned whether the phone will work in North America (or does GlobalStar serve this type of customer?) Meanwhile, in the vacuum that ERICY is exploiting, QCOM must also counter marketplace discussions of ERICY's own version of W-CDMA. If it is to be compatible with North America's IS-95, the GSM operators should be now concerned about whether ERICY plans to infringe on QC patents, leaving the GSM operators dealing with possible liabilities. IMHO, there has got to be some guidance for the new operators coming on-line in the future. Sure would benefit them (and probably QCOM) if it came sooner rather than later. That might also effectively counter ERICY marketing tactics, and prevent them from selling as much TDMA-based GSM as it can today. Anyone have any thoughts?

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (8541)	2/15/1998 8:00:00 PM
From: Eric Daniels	Respond to of 152472

Gregg, Thanks for the well reasoned, knowledgeable, coherent posts. If I were not the individualist that I am, I would be trying to buy into your managed funds. Eric Daniels

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (8541)	2/15/1998 8:53:00 PM
From: JMD	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

Gregg, all. Please comment on my concerns for the mighty Q. There are two and they are related. First, is Q big enough to survive as an independent company? At $2 billion in sales with 10,000 employees, they would certainly be considered a large company in many industries. But in the telecom biz, I think it would be fair to label them 'medium small'. This matters because the local SF Newspaper makes a mistake every now and then and prints something worth reading. Today, it was on Apple and a series of comments by ex-Apple execs opining on what went wrong. I couldn't help but see an analogy to the Q (not in the sense of what IS wrong but what MIGHT BECOME wrong). Their point(s) centered around the theme of having absolutely, hands down the best technology and blowing it. One guy said "We squandered a 10 year lead". "The best technology does not always win. The partnerships and the business model matter as much or more than having the best product. The Mac remains a force in the publishing industry because Apple forged strong partnerships with graphics software makers like Adobe, Aldus and Quark. But we didn't broaden the Mac's appeal by licensing the OS to clone-makers or allowing it to run on Intel microprocessors." Like Gregg, I have no desire to see the Q acquired by anybody and think we'll make a lot more dough if they aren't. That said, wouldn't it be better to license big "partners" like LU, NT, maybe even NOK and surround Ericy, panic them cause they're now isolated? I guess the idea is we don't need to be bought by Lucent, eg, if we have them out there hammering away at the CDMA bandwagon. Now I know LU already is to a certain extent doing just that, but given the Q's size, I'd like to see us get more buddies--not buddies that don't pay for our IPRs but maybe they get a most favored nation clause: LU and NT pay X, MOT pays 1.15X, and Ericy pays through the nose X. Any point to this ramble? Mike Doyle