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 (13774)	8/14/1998 8:28:00 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 152472

koreaherald.co.kr How about some arithmetician doing some calculations on those juicy figures! I guess we finally get a good handle on royalties we can expect. They are going to be very yummy by the look of it. I'm keen to count my chickens before they've hatched. We know how many cdmaOne handsets sold in Korea and who sold them and when. That's been published, now we have the missing link. Gregg, words can be ambiguous, so I suppose we have to cross our fingers and hope that there was a numerical definition of 'cellular'. 1991 was long ago, before PCS, so I wouldn't be surprised if 'cellular' was taken then to mean any wireless gizmo you hold up to your ear to yak and roam around town. Qualcomm always seems to have been on the ball legally, so I doubt it. In any event, in the grand scheme of things, the royalties involved in Korean shouldn't be too serious. So not much contingent liability needs to be attached to Qualcomm. While the parties to the contract don't need to explain it to the other, the intent to agree is the basis and unambiguous meaning is needed. A third party, a judge, needs to agree the meaning is clear. Having seen Perry Mason in the 1960s, I know this. Mqurice 17 days.

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (13774)	8/17/1998 3:14:00 AM
From: John Cuthbertson	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 152472

Gregg and Maurice, Aside from the frequency bands used, which differ from country to country, the big distinction between cellular and PCS is the transmitting power of the handsets. If I remember the numbers correctly, a cellular phone has about 3 Watts of radio transmitting power, whereas a PCS phone has half a Watt (someone please correct me if I'm off on the spec's). This is why PCS systems need more base station sites to provide coverage over a given geographic area. ==John