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: tero kuittinen who wrote (14663)	9/7/1998 9:29:00 AM
From: kech	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Tero- Has the midnight sun gotten to your head with this review of the Qualcomm "southern strategy"? One could equally charge the Laps with their gun toting dog sleds for manipulating the ETSI to support Ericsson. They need those subsidies to keep coming because tourism just isn't there in the long winter months. Is there even a figleaf of a reason for ETSI to push a different chip rate than CDMAOne other than to keep CDMAOne out of Europe? On the other hand, since the US has already allocated spectrum that W-CDMA is planning to use, it makes sense for US congressman to push for a system that uses currently licensed spectrum as part of the bandwidth that will be available for CDMA2000 or W-CDMA (or a converged version of both). Therefore, a strong rationale for the CDMAOne proposal which utilizes existing spectrum for wideband uses. What is the rationale for the W-CDMA chiprate and why it has to be differnt from CDMAOne? Tom i<* The cynical Southern Strategy of Qualcomm is closely patterned after that of Richard Nixon. It goes like this: pander to the basest instincts of people who listen to Reba McEntire in pick-up trucks and tear up when they watch re-runs of "Alamo" on television. You can't go wrong. So it is the xenophobic Southern right wing creepoids who are now backing up Qualcomm at the US senate. This crowd pushed through the Helms-Burton law that punishes European companies who do business with Cuba. So it is possible that Qualcomm is able to manipulate them into making its case. It is every bit as cynical and nihilistic as it sounds.>

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (14663)	9/7/1998 10:18:00 AM
From: Clarksterh	Respond to of 152472

Tero - As sacrilegious as it might be, I agree with you on some things, but on others you are definitely missing something: The price advantage of CDMA for end users is what? The CDMA handsets cannot undercut GSM handsets that have vastly larger economies of scale. Why do you keep bringing this up when you know it is a false test. Handsets are all subsidized - GSM, CDMAOne, ... - and while it is indeed true that Qualcomm may have more expensive handsets both due to lack of economies of scale and more complicated technology, it is also true that the infrastructure probably saves more than enough money to allow the companies to give the handsets away for free and still be cheaper than TDMA technologies. This is exactly the same situation as the initial situation of GSM vs AMPS. * Let's bury this moldering corpse of "CDMA overlays in Europe Well, I agree with you on something - this is unlikely to happen due to regulation if nothing else. Moreover, current European customers do not accept stand-by times shorter than one week. Only 6 short months ago you were concentrating on talk times. What happened? CDMAOne now matches or beats GSM in this regard so it is no longer important? And I would expect that in the next year they will start to significantly beat GSM in this regard. By then I guess it will be completely inconsequential. <g> As for stand-by times, if you use a battery with no memory - as Qualcomm does - then stand-by times greater than 3 or 4 days is pretty much moot. Just plug it in every night. I can argue that GSM is mainly an Asian standard. The biggest GSM country in the world is China. Again, something that we agree on. Qualcomm is definitely behind in China due to corruption and political infighting. But I wouldn't conclude from this that the GSM technology is somehow superior. How hostile, alienating and short-sighted can a basically promising company be? We are in the process of learning. Motorola's backstabbing was damaging enough; now it looks like Qualcomm's demands about altering W-CDMA are so extravagant not even another American CDMA company will back them. Well, I agree that it is a pity that Qualcomm isn't getting more support, but the same could be said of Ericsson. The reason for both is that almost everybody but Qualcomm and Ericsson produce both technologies and don't want to alienate potential partners/customers. In fact that is the veiled reason given in Motorola's statement of withdrawl. However I wouldn't be at all surprised if Motorola is still talking, but it is behind the scenes. Japan, Korea, Europe and China in the W-CDMA corner. It looks like USA and Republic of Kongo are now the linchpins for the future of CDMA2000 Read the Korean article again - you obviously missed something. Korea is still going to use CDMA2000, but they want to be able manufacture WCDMA. A completely reasonable desire. Of course WCDMA is looking more and more tenuous in it's current version. They have to have a WCDMA free of IPR issues by Dec 1998, and that is just not going to happen without Qualcomm's cooperation. If you think otherwise please give a scenario where it becomes free of IPR issues by then without any cooperation by Qualcomm. The cynical Southern Strategy of Qualcomm is closely patterned after that of Richard Nixon. So now Ericsson is the paragon of virtue? When you yourself have admitted that they have lied - or were monumentally arrogant and stupid - in an effort to defeat Qualcomm. I wish that Qualcomm did not have to resort to politics, but lets face the fact that ETSI is a political organization which is Euro-centric. It is sometimes necessary to fight fire with fire. Perhaps it was a mistake to not even allow Qualcomm to make their proposal at ETSI in the initial process - even though the proposals centered around CDMA technology and Qualcomm was the only company there to have put such a standard together before? Clark

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (14663)	9/7/1998 8:09:00 PM
From: JGoren	Respond to of 152472

>>>* The cynical Southern Strategy of Qualcomm is closely patterned after that of Richard Nixon. It goes like this: pander to the basest instincts of people who listen to Reba McEntire in pick-up trucks and tear up when they watch re-runs of "Alamo" on television. You can't go wrong. So it is the xenophobic Southern right wing creepoids who are now backing up Qualcomm at the US senate. This crowd pushed through the Helms-Burton law that punishes European companies who do business with Cuba. So it is possible that Qualcomm is able to manipulate them into making its case. It is every bit as cynical and nihilistic as it sounds. >>>> My what a prejudiced statement. As a native Texan, I think I should email this to every Senator and Representative. Just because many of the elected representatives believe in open competition--not politically shut out as you would have Qualcomm be--and their belief is not mere rhetoric but to be practiced, you have chosen to insult them in a most prejudicial and stereotyped fasion. That they believe that a unified, integrated backward compatible standard that will permit all the platforms to move into the furutre is logical and in the long-term best interest of the telecom industry. Your prejudicial statements are hilarious. Perhaps your comments will harden the view of our American elected officials and may even doom Ericsson. Thank you, Tero.

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (14663)	9/8/1998 1:03:00 AM
From: Asterisk	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Tero: You are right, nothing in this world is truly black and white, everything is a shade of grey. In your instance I sometimes wonder how opaque you are though (just kidding). If I may I would like to address a few of your "points". 1) Let's bury this moldering corpse of "CDMA overlays in Europe". There wasn't, there isn't, there ain't never gonna be. The push for this began in January. It is September now. Nothing's cooking. How could it? There was a trial system set up in England of the overlay that you are talking about. There were no commercial systems set up that have a CDMA overlay over GSM, how could there be? ESTI as an organization has stopped CDMA (other than WCDMA) dead in its tracks. They won't let GSM be challenged, they have taken the approach that it is better to have economies of scale for the development of cheaper phones so that the carriers can give them away at even cheaper rates. That is fine, it is one approach, the Japaneese (ARIB?) took the same approach but chose CDMA instead of GSM. Everyone has to make their decisions for themselves. But your arguement that there are no commercial CDMA overlays is as I have said flawed from the get go, in europe ETSI has blocked CDMA, and everywhere else people (when they had a free choice) have by far chosen CDMA over GSM once it was available. 2)* I can argue that GSM is mainly an Asian standard. The biggest GSM country in the world is China. The fastest GSM subscription growth in the world takes place in Asia. In three years the total GSM subscriber base of Europe will be overtaken by Asia. This "European standard" does not work as a propaganda tool anymore. Here the situation is black and white. GSM was, is, and will be a European standard, but so what it really makes no difference where the standard was filed it only makes a difference where it is used. For the rest of your statements I have to point out some things that have been bought up before. China is corrupt, as is most of the third world. The Chineese are putting a great show of trying to deal with this right now but by all credible accounts it is still a HUGE problem. In the past ERICY has done business there, thus they know the lay of the land and already have the important people pegged and in their pockets. How do you expect QCOM to compete with that? In the past the Telecom world of China was very confusing and convoluted, since the beurocracy has been "streamlined", whatever that means, it will be interesting to see how QCOM fares in the future. They are still at a disadvantage because all that happened was the previous system was folded into one ladder, but it will be interesting to see what happens. Also, along the same lines. If you take the expansion of the already installed systems of China out how fast is Asian GSM expanding? 3) The rest of your post accuses America of being xenophobic. You want to see Xenophobia go to Japan, France, or Quebec. In my way of thinking Canada (as a general case), and the US (as a general case) are the least xenophopbic places in the world right now. The only reason that you think otherwise is that all you hear is the press trying to sell papers. To do that they hype the feelings of an extreme and extremely small minority into the hype that you are currently seeing. You go to any of the major metropolitan areas (Seattle, New York, San Fran., Chicago) and you see just how xenophobic america is when you walk into chinatown, little odessa, little italy and you see all of the signs in their native tongues and hear all of the languages being spoken and see the melting pot that America really is. After you have done your homework on the xenophobia of America come back and we'll talk. Until then you may want to keep your own xenophobia in check! As a closing point I would like to emphasize something that others have also said, it is definately not in the interest of Motorola, Nokia, or Lucent to cut off one of their arms (TDMA/CDMA) before a clear winner has been declared in the format wars. Everything is business, I am sure that if you cracked a QCOM phone open you would see Motorola parts, yet they are suing each other. That is because in business while you are trying to crush a company with one hand you can do business and sell to it with the other, they are not mutually exclusive.

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (14663)	9/9/1998 6:14:00 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 152472

Tero, "About that price disadvantage of GSM - GSM-1800 calls in Finland cost 8 cents a minute. Prices are crashing in the rest of the Europe as well. The price advantage of CDMA for end users is what? The CDMA handsets cannot undercut GSM handsets that have vastly larger economies of scale." Since it takes fewer cell sites for cdmaOne compared with GSM, there is an inbuilt price per minute advantage, assuming the electronic gizzards cost the same [note I mean the inherent cost, not the price which the market will pay]. A chip for GSM must cost about the same as a cdmaOne chip, unit costs for both are not too bad now. Wires and capacitors and stuff are all similar. In USA, Sprint is undercutting GSM. Finnish systems are more mature and heavily subscribed, so can profit with 8 cent minutes. Imagine what heavily loaded cdmaOne networks will be able to charge. But this is rehashing dead territory. Neither L M Ericsson nor Nokia dispute that cdma is the way to go. It is just contentious as to how much they will pay for the privilege. You are the only one arguing that GSM is holding a winning hand. While Nokia handsets are great [for GSM], subscribers buy the whole kit and kaboodle - handset AND infrastructure. NOT just the handset. A cheap handset and expensive infrastructure add up to high cost minutes. This is old territory now. But seems to need repeating. "Let's bury this moldering corpse of "CDMA overlays in Europe". Tero, you KNOW that Nokia and L M Ericsson are trying to get a 3G licence from Qualcomm. They are doing that so they can overlay the GSM networks in Europe and instal greenfield systems too. I'm sure you have noticed talk of making the new 3G systems backward compatible to GSM. Qualcomm wants to emphasize cdmaOne backward compatibility. So, don't bury the GSM corpse yet Tero. Not until the cdma2000 is ready to bury it in an overlay. "I can argue that GSM is mainly an Asian standard." The word standard doesn't really mean much. As you suggest, what counts is how many people use which system. I argue that Globalstar will be much more of a 'standard' than any industry standard. Sure, it will take a few years, for costs to decline and technology to improve, but GSTRF should be not far from the most ubiquitous of standards. Technology is moving too fast for a 'standard' to last long. Heck, GSM and cdmaOne have both barely got going and GSM is to be superseded and cdmaOne too. Though cdmaOne will have a better upgrade path. GSM is a 'European' standard in that it was the only one allowed. Same as cdma was forced on Korea. "What allies does Qualcomm have left? " They are called subscribers. The best allies to have. Also, each of the cdmaOne and cdma2000 licence holders will be working to maximize their profits from CDMA. They too are allies. Whining maybe, but allies nevertheless. Nokia is also an ally. Making cdmaOne handsets and paying Qualcomm lots of lovely royalties. Go NOKIA! Don't forget the USA political, judiciary and military systems. They are allies of Qualcomm. I'm sure you understand I am not an American patriot. Even NZ supports Qualcomm. It's official! "The cynical Southern Strategy of Qualcomm" Tero, you are stretching a point here. Support for Qualcomm will derive from the intelligentsia of the USA administration. Not by a lynch mob in pick-up trucks, though when primed they will no doubt agree that the stinking commie bastards in Europe need to get theirs. Qualcomm has indeed maintained good relations with Al Gore and others. Brent Scowcroft on the board. Bernie Schwartz a big time democratic donor [not the redneck clan]. Good for them. Qualcomm has got the best politicians money can buy. I think you should pop down to Nokia and persuade them to go holus bolus in with Qualcomm. Maybe L M Ericsson is simply redundant for rapid cdma mobile development. Imagine the cmda2000 sales Nokia could make in Sweden and L M Ericsson would have to stick with their "We will deny them their request" to those customers who seek cdma. Now do you see? Mqurice