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: Raymond who wrote (17509)	11/1/1998 7:52:00 PM
From: Drew Williams	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

<<ETSI:s goal is not to promote the european industry.>> Hee heee heee!

To: Raymond who wrote (17509)	11/2/1998 2:11:00 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 152472

Raymond, are you suggesting I can go to Europe, buy spectrum at a free market price and start selling cdmaOne and cdma2000 systems anywhere I like? You asked "Who are stopping QCOM from selling there [sic] products in Europe." GSM [Groupe Speciale Mobile] was established, with spectrum regulated and suppliers licensed, in the monopolistic way Europe does things. Europe has trade barriers and subsidies and standards and all sorts of restrictive trade practises. New Zealand used to be like that - we adopted the same systems. Fortunately many have been ditched though we still have an absurd free-loader welfare system which keeps NZ in the also-ran stakes. SETI benefits primarily the SETI members. The consumers are not top of the pops. That is why consumers are not allowed the forbidden fruit from San Diego. They might flock to it in their 10s of millions. Now that Europeans have the GSM standard which enables them to roam all over Europe, they could perhaps allow cdmaOne to set up in competition to improve citizen's choice. People who want the ubiquitous standard could go with GSM. Those who want the cheap, local cdmaOne service could go with that. What do you mean that NTT DoCoMo invented VW40? We hear constantly how L M Ericsson invented it, about 1986 or so. Or was it before that? Despite L M Ericsson and others claiming up to 1996 that it couldn't work, was late to market and would collapse under load, breached the laws of physics, would be expensive, wouldn't meet capacity expectation, and was a fraud. Interesting to see that L M Ericsson employees have been arrested in Mexico to be charged with conspiring to handle tenders improperly. Do you think they were bribing officials to get orders which otherwise would not be given? This certainly fits with the corrupt, dishonest, charlatan, thieving, conspiratorial image I've gained of them. Do you own shares in that crew? What's your interest otherwise? Yes, I call L M Ericsson paying 12% to QUALCOMM's royalty division competition. Usually companies pay for their own research and development. The Q! has generously offered to save Ericy the time and expense of trying to build their own system and 12% seems a very generous offer for such a complex system which others thought couldn't even be built. I suppose you are unfamiliar with competition, but it is the idea that companies produce ideas, products and see who can get the most profits by attracting the most profitable customers. Competition doesn't mean you find all your best strengths, then give them to competitors. You show an utter misunderstanding of what free markets are. For example, QUALCOMM is a bit short of money. How about Ericsson GIVE QUALCOMM $30bn so that each has the same financial resources. Oh, and also GIVE QUALCOMM 40,000 employees for no cost so that they have the same staff level. Hmmm, how about giving QUALCOMM a whole lot of factories, offices, and all the other paraphernalia needed to produce telecommunications equipment and sell it? In exchange, QUALCOMM can GIVE Ericy the free use of cdmaOne and cdma2000 intellectual property. Provided of course that Europe deregulated their markets and all other variables were levelled up before the competition began. Actually, I don't like that deal. I think the IP of cdmaOne is too valuable. Ericy would also need to pay a small royalty, say 2% of revenue. Now THAT would be competition. Your hypothetical "...if Ericy wins in court would I condemn QCOM for infringing Ericsson's patents" is silly. Of course I wouldn't because there is not the slightest evidence that QCOM has intended to do anything wrong. Any sensible person can see that nearly everyone believes QUALCOMM owns the property. I wouldn't condemn somebody because a court arbitrarily confiscates their property. Everything points to ERICY being a pack of crooks. If QUALCOMM is awarded $20bn damages against ERICY for unfair practises, will you condemn ERICY for being a pack of crooked charlatans. Of course I bragged about the cdmaOne overlay of GSM at Newbury. And said that was the end of GSM. And so it is. You do understand that Ericy, Nokia and everyone, literally everyone [apart from Tero] wants CDMA for 3G, which will overlay GSM? Tero still thinks that GSM is going to win because Nokia has organically grown handsets. It was QUALCOMM's success with cdmaOne and the overlay of Newbury and other pressure points which have forced L M Ericsson's capitulation to CDMA. The only questions remaining are what part they might play in future in CDMA, if any? How much will they pay? When will cdmaOne and cdma2000 subscriber gains per month exceed those for GSM? Look out! Already Globalstar cdmaOne satellites are swooping over Europe, sending secret cdmaOne signals back to San Diego. Mqurice PS: Drew, 'extorquerationate' means very, very high priced. In fact so high priced that it is like having arms twisted from your body. Causing severe financial loss. But unable to be refused. I got that from nihilistic 'nihil'. Apparently that is from Latin. 'Latin' means torture, twisting and wrenching of young minds who would rather go out and play.

To: Raymond who wrote (17509)	12/23/1998 2:36:00 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

Raymond, what dog do you have in this fight? Are you an innocent searcher after the mysterious truth of the universe? You said: "I remembered how much you bragged about the IS-95 overlay at Vodaphone.That was the end of GSM." And so it is Raymond. That is why Ericy is trying so hard to find a VW40 way of overlaying GSM. Your answers to the questions about how cdma2000 degrades VW40 was pretty thin on the ground. Yes, we've heard of the chip rate which Ericy has now 'compromised' after a decade of unique, patented work on this technology which they have been demonstrating in trials this year. But the chip rate has been shown to be tripe. I gather the answer was "I dunno but it's complicated". One reason NTT wants VW40 is to get free access to intellectual property if they can. If they just ask Q! for supply of it, Q! might ask for 10% and it's worth asking for a discount and indulging tactics in the attempt. Mqurice