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 (16643)	10/16/1998 9:44:00 AM
From: Jon Koplik	Respond to of 152472

Gregg - wonderful. Thank you very much. Jon.

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (16643)	10/16/1998 11:01:00 AM
From: Harvey Rosenkrantz	Respond to of 152472

Nice summary of the past "disinformation" campaign. Hopefully the "wannabe erudites" on this thread will get the message and stop filling the thread with nonsense.

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (16643)	10/16/1998 11:49:00 AM
From: RalphCramden	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

Let's just suppose ERICY and Europe go nuts and do attempt to put W-CDMA into Europe without QCOM's IPR. QCOM could still use its IPR to compete, if it wished, in the W-CDMA market! While every other company would be bending over sideways to reinvent a wheel so that it isn't obviously round and uses something other than spokes to hold it to the axle, QCOM could take its whole product line, make the useless but trivial changes required by W-CDMA, and blow the shorts off its crippled competitors. And of course it could do all that while aggressively protecting its IPR from infringement by its competitors in Europe. I think QCOM's in the catbird seat on this one.

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (16643)	10/16/1998 4:20:00 PM
From: dfloydr	Respond to of 152472

Thank you Greg for sharing the results of your long and detailed efforts. It sure helps to make sense out of this field. Floyd

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (16643)	10/16/1998 4:34:00 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

Gregg, The question is, did you buy QUALCOMM cheaper than my $18 June 1994? I bet you can hardly believe QUALCOMM shares traded for $37 a week or so ago. To call CDMA in early 1994 little more than an interesting science project is a stretch. I thought then it was the best thing since sliced bread and was all ready to start counting handset sales. Surely it was better than a science project, even way back in 1991! Heck, even in 1989 it was conceptually robust as a business. In 1986 it was a VERY interesting science project with major implications for worldwide communication. People have at times, in these threads, criticized Irwin Jacobs for lacking charisma, resulting in lack of share value recognition. I share your enthusiasm for Irwin and the moral tone of QUALCOMM which derives from those values. I'm probably not as enthusiastic as you since I don't know him personally, but the bits I've seen fit entirely with your opinion. It is amazing that L M Ericsson scum [I hope that term is accurate - nobody seems to challenge me on it] are managing to maintain a debate similar to that of 1995 and 1996. Just how gullible can people be. Is it because people have an inbuilt fear of size and L M Ericsson is big? Same as they feared Motorola, which is increasingly looking like roast duck. Heck, even Chris Reeder was nervously waiting for Motorola to come raging out of the cage. Anyway, great post. Please continue - I'm sure your Capital Managment will benefit, although the share price can't be much encouragement. When it becomes a Glee Club, then is the time to abandon the thread [not suggesting you are]. Mqurice

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (16643)	10/16/1998 7:34:00 PM
From: JGoren	Respond to of 152472

Gregg, superb post. As a lawery who has practiced securities law in the past, one thing jumped out at me. You state: "I would suggest that you separate ERICY's verbal commentary from its more legally binding publicly-filed documents....I have yet to find, in such a documentary review, any affirmative statements by Ericsson as to its ability to do W-CDMA specifically without QC IPR." I wouldn't mind being the plaintiffs' class-action lawyer alleging that Ericy intentionally made misleading press releases that inflated its stock price when it knew otherwise.

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (16643)	10/19/1998 10:15:00 AM
From: william i smith jr	Respond to of 152472

Gregg As an early investor in globalstar, I remember a long article in the WSJ questioning whether CDMA would work at all. Needless to say, I was more than a little concerned, especially considering that this was a front page story. It turns out that the article was written at a time when at least one CDMA system (Korea) was in late stages of deployment or already functioning. Talk about deceit and poor reporting. Today, it sounds like more of the same. Fool me twice... Bill