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: Rajala who wrote (15608)	9/28/1998 7:03:00 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Rajala, negotiating strength comes from the legal position on the property in question, not from size. Where size enters the equation is the political and military systems to back the property claims. SETI is minuscule in that regard. So is the European kleptocracy backing it. Qualcomm and the USA have got all the size they need to defend Qualcomm's property. So SETI is not only the telecom manufacturers, it's also the government bodies and telecom operators and GSM all rolled into one is it? Not many customers in SETI by the look of it. Just one big lovely, cuddly, socialist, kleptocratic pack of gangsters the way you describe it. Their optimum function would be to all get real jobs instead of scuttling around the corridors of power hoping for a state handout from the backs of people earning a living. SETI's 'democracy' where they allocate votes by sales in the last year is a joke. Their concept of 'let the free market decide' is a joke showing a lack of understanding of what a market is. For your edification, a market involves people making voluntary choices and forming voluntary associations and trades without hindrance from disinterested third parties. Note that disinterested is a different word from uninterested. Dave is tendentious, not more than correct. He and I suppose you, have got some barrow to push. People with barrows to push ignore reasons and flit from place to place, puffing smokescreens around the place. You ascribe fault to Qualcomm, saying "If or when QCOM sits at the negotiation table there will be busloads of people on the other side,...". As though Qualcomm isn't interested in negotiating highly profitable royalties to maximize their income from others who want to use their cdma property. They have been negotiating and selling licences since the 1980s. They have been in negotiations with L M Ericsson for years. They have been explaining their 3G requirements for at least a year. SETI wouldn't listen initially because of their absurd 'democratic' vested interest process. You are wrong in your suggestion that Qualcomm is unwilling to negotiate. So, the question is, why did you suggest that is the case? Can you see that size of SETI is irrelevant? If you really can't see that, can you persuade me that it is something I should worry about. I see no reason that the number of SETI members is of much interest. Of course "...there will be busloads of people on the others side..."; they are all looking for a free handout and free handouts attract freeloaders. Yes, you have roaming throughout much of Europe, and quite a few places in the world, but not at all is it most of the world. The SETI one standard policy isn't such a huge success. What % cellular subscribers in Europe overall? What % in USA? Hong Kong? Japan? Korea? You will see that Europe is not anything special. Finland is crowded with cellphones true enough. Russian centrally planned economics had some successes too. First man in space. Lots of Olympic medals. But in the end, the costs of communism and central control are too expensive, ineffectual, wasteful and uncompetitive. Human freedom and dreams are much bigger than SETI's, Nokia's and L M Ericsson's squalid little grab for somebody else's property. Anyway, why are you worried about it and so keen on SETI? There you are, a few questions for you to answer. Mqurice