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 Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cold_snowman who wrote (197625)	2/7/2026 11:33:09 AM
From: RoseCampion	15 Recommendations Recommended By aryl beagle57 CrackheadBob Dr. John Eric Martin and 10 more members Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 197638

For me, what you wrote really crystallized QCOM's 20+ years of self-inflicted wounds and strategic missteps for me. It hit home, so please accept my thanks for shining a light on the core of the problem. Too many posters on this group love love LOVE outsourcing their brains entirely to LLMs (guilty confession: when I see "/aimode/" or "Copilot" in the top of a post, I almost always skip the whole thing immediately). But here I will go against my own better judgement and have Sam Altman's Frankenstein weigh in in a historical context in a manner I'm not nearly well-read enough to do myself. If nothing else (tl;dr, as the kids say) scroll down to last few lines - the "A Unifying Framing" bit - and what should be some sobering reflections for the current C-suite and Board. /rc/ ----- Strategic blindness in Myth, Literature, and History Literary / Mythic Achilles (Iliad) Achilles is right that Agamemnon wronged him. His withdrawal is morally justified. But he confuses personal honor with strategic necessity. By insisting on being right now, he allows the entire Greek war effort to deteriorate. Core failure: absolutizing justice at the expense of collective outcome. Odin (Norse myth) Odin is obsessed with knowledge and being correct about Ragnarök. He gathers wisdom obsessively and is usually right. But his fixation on foresight becomes fatalism: instead of changing outcomes, he reinforces them. Core failure: mistaking knowing the future for mastering it. Ahab (Moby-Dick) Ahab is not wrong about the whale’s agency or significance to him. But every successful assertion of dominance over his crew, every rhetorical victory, brings him closer to annihilation. Core failure: turning symbolic truth into totalizing purpose. Political / Tragic Figures Creon (Antigone) Creon is legally and politically correct: law must apply uniformly, especially after civil war. But he cannot see that enforcing law at all costs destroys legitimacy, family, and stability. Core failure: confusing order with justice, and authority with wisdom. Coriolanus (Shakespeare) He is right about the fickleness of the mob and the corrosive nature of populism. But he refuses small concessions (rhetorical humility) that would preserve immense power. Core failure: refusing to pay trivial prices for enormous gains. Folklore / Archetypal figures Faust (Goethe) Faust is correct that conventional morality is limiting and that lived experience matters. But he keeps escalating the wager instead of stopping once insight is gained. Core failure: mistaking continual optimization for progress. The Fisher King (Arthurian legend) His wound is “rightfully” borne; his suffering is justified. But refusing to ask or answer the right question freezes the entire kingdom. Core failure: personal fixation blocking systemic healing. A unifying framing - these protagonists all share one fatal flaw: They optimize locally while destroying global value. Or more sharply: They mistake being right for being wise. They *fight symbolic battles as if they were strategic ones, and treat concessions as defeats* instead seeing them as investments.**

To: cold_snowman who wrote (197625)	2/8/2026 3:49:50 PM
From: matherandlowell	7 Recommendations Recommended By AlfaNut dylan murphy GR8FORM Jon Koplik manning18 and 2 more members Respond to of 197638

Thank you for this thoughtful reply. I'm still wondering if nVidia conspired with ARM to impede Qualcomm's entry into the data center, but this involves understanding variables which are beyond the scope of either the board or my understanding of the technology. Overall, I come back to my usual point: while Qualcomm is a very solid company which is growing, it is not being valued as a technology company but rather as a slow growing utility company. As this perception changes, as it will with the continued growth of auto and IoT, and the addition of an entry into the data center, I predict the market will slowly begin to reassess Qualcomm. Of course, those of us long standing shareholders get discouraged when our stock is not appreciated for the technological force that it is, but that's why investing is not a slam dunk type activity. It's not exactly a horse race, but there are horse race elements involved. From Jim Kelleher's Argus stock letter on Q: "QCOM shares are trading at 12.6-times our FY26 non-GAAP EPS forecast and at 12.1-times our FY27 projection. The two-year forward P/E of 11.5 is below the average P/E of 14.5 for FY21- FY25. The two-year forward relative P/E of 0.51 is below the relative multiple of 0.72 on a trailing-five-year basis and represents approximately half of the market multiple, despite the company's strong long-term growth trajectory. Our historical comparable model signals value in the $190s, below peak though above current prices. QCOM is trading at discounts to peers on most price-based multiples. Our peer-indicated value of around $300 is in a stable trend and remains well above current prices. Our discounted free cash flow model signals value above $350 based on prospects for higher long-term EPS and cash flow growth. Our blended valuation for QCOM is in the $300s, no longer rising but above current prices." It's not a question of how the stock is valued today; it's a question of how it will be valued in a year or two. We know it's unfairly valued by today's market (for whatever reasons you want to cite), but as Apple needs a new license and a new modem, and as other sources of revenue and profit come into play, Qualcomm must be regarded as a safe and solid stock to hold. j.