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: Harvey Rosenkrantz who wrote (13517)	8/10/1998 11:39:00 AM
From: Gregg Powers	Respond to of 152472

Harvey: Couple of observations. One, I don't think that Mr. Hedfors needs to "convert" to cdmaOne because I don't view this as a religious debate. ERICY is the driving force behind GSM and QC was the driving force behind CDMA; at CDMA's genesis, these technologies were at cross-purposes to each other and this resulted in diametrically opposed economic agendas: QC wanted a piece of the piece and ERICY did not want to share. That was then and this is now. Today, based on announced migration to W-CDMA, direct sequence spread spectrum is the future...that's a war that has been won (i.e. long-term TDMA is dead and CDMA is the future). However, the TIMING of this transition remains very much in doubt. If ERICY cannot do W-CDMA on terms that it finds acceptable, it will push TDMA-based GSM as hard as it can for as long as it can. This is a rational strategy, but in following it, ERICY runs the risk of repeating IBM's mistake (i.e. overstaying its dominant position in mainframes). Note that IBM didn't fall off the map, it just lost its status as a preeminent growth company...such is the risk that ERICY faces. Given this dynamic, and given that Bo Hedfors no longer should have any allegiance to the ERICY agenda, why should he push MOT to pursue a dead-end strategy? With Jack Scanlon gone, MOT needed to bring in a top-notch person to run its CIG, so from a resume context, Hedfors looks like a coup. The cultural dynamic is far less clear. MOT has historically suffered from an enormous "not invented here" syndrome, compounded by a political hierarchy that, in some instances, prompted internal divisions to compete AGAINST each other while simultaneously trying to beat-out external competition. These problems require a manager capable of reconstituting a culture...and I have no perspective as to Hedfor's competency in this regard. Best regards, Gregg

To: Harvey Rosenkrantz who wrote (13517)	8/10/1998 11:42:00 AM
From: Shi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

For those of you economists and money-suppliers: As bad and unfortunate as the flood in China is (240 mil. affected and >2000 dead), will it save China's economy as a whole? Similar argument has been raised after Kobe earthquake, I wonder how true it is. I guess the reconstruction effort would be a significant stimulant on the demand side, the government simply needs to print more money. How far can the side-effect of the flood go in helping China's economy, given that a devaluation in Yuan will almost certainly become a reality? Shi