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: bdog who wrote (18055)	11/9/1998 9:38:00 PM
From: Asterisk	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

I have a feeling that your post may get a few responses so I think I will start the avalanche with a softball type question. In your post you said The company has a responsibility to communicate accurately, not caretake analyst perceptions. Is that the case really? I have been noticing recently that the shareholders of the Q have been getting much better value out of their stock holdings when the management has been spoon feeding the analysts. I have noticed further that this is a direct function of many analysts laziness. Many have gotten fat and happy off of companies that feed them like they were economic nincompoops and they seem to like it. Analysts like Gregg seem to be a rarity in the business, they actually do some work for the exhorbitant fees that many ask. So the basic question is: Is it managements job to play the "analyst game" and give their shareholders more value? Or is it their job to ignore the current reality of the market and allow their shareholders to "take it in the pants" over the short term so that management can keep their dignity in the long term? Before the flames start, I think that good management should tell the truth all the time and not screw with the "analyst game". But the reality in my opinion is that this post contains some basic truths that cannot be ignored. How else can MSFT, AMZN, etc... have the valuations that they currently have. I hope that this post has caused at least a little thought and that it can spark a worthy discussion.

To: bdog who wrote (18055)	11/9/1998 9:42:00 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 152472

*no news - just rant* Good dog! It's not really a matter of cognitive dissonance because the current price compared with the profit so far is reasonable. P:E of 20 is pretty high compared with where interest rates are. We long term holders think we have found something which will have a large amount of FUTURE value. We just want the future to arrive today! Until the value does become reality through real products being bought by real people, causing a P:E of 10, it is all in the wishful thinking category. We should secretly feel pleased that the price is remaining lower than we think it should be for such a long time, because it means we can see WAYYYYYYY out in front of competing investors who can only see the value when it smacks them in the nose or is announced on CNN. That means we have a big advantage. Imagine what it's like to be the one who spots the incredible value at the peak! The last one on earth to realize that the company is going to rule the world. That is invariably the day before the crash. Because after they buy in at the top, there is nobody left to value it higher than them. We long range discoverers of value get sick of waiting, so are prone to get irritated and frustrated that others persist in thinking it isn't all that good. Many people will wait for the L M Ericsson crowd to win the court case in Texas in a clean sweep, claim massive damages from QUALCOMM and go on to launch VW-40 worldwide. Be assured though, that Microsoft and L M Ericsson, among others, are not climbing all over QUALCOMM because they think cdmaOne and cdma2000 have no future value. They want a piece of the action. Well, they won't get my piece of the action for $80 per share. Those selling at $40, were not, I'm pretty sure Gregg, fully voluntary sellers. They were margined out at the bottom. There is no cognitive dissonance. We are just waiting for reality to catch up with our dreams. $ill Gates has caught up. The USA government is catching up. L M Ericsson is grunting and groaning about it. Nokia is like a swan - smooth on the surface and paddling like hell underneath. The more impatient of us just can't wait for tomorrow for more value recognition. Thinking we won't get run over by a truck! I've been waiting years and can wait some more. Especially since things are moving in the right direction and doing it quickly. Check out a 10 year revenue and profit graph for example. Check out Omnitracs growth graph. Check out cdmaOne handset growth. Licensee numbers. Now, tomorrow, we go to Redmond, where they have a LOT of money stashed away. Of course we want to go there. We want to go where there is big heaps of it. One of the arguments Tero made was that Nokia has the money from their GSM success to fund R&D. Well, if the joint venture needs money, I'd say Microsoft will be able to put a bit in. Enough to match Nokia. Mqurice

To: bdog who wrote (18055)	11/9/1998 10:33:00 PM
From: marginmike	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 152472

I hate to be a glass is half- empty kind of guy. I think ATI, and BAM's reluctence to stock Q is simply because Star-Tac is better. I did some research. Take note of the standby time's and weight. ##################################################################### Qcom specs HE Q™ -800 PHONE : SPECIFICATIONS Talk Time: Up to 1.5 hours - standard battery Up to 2.5 hours - extended battery (dependent on user and network settings) Standby Time: Up to 20 hours - standard battery and in CDMA digital mode Up to 34 hours - extended battery and in CDMA digital mode (dependent on user and network settings) Battery Type: Lithium Ion (LiIon) Vocoders: 8 Kbps and 13 Kbps (PureVoice™) Size: 4.0" x 2.2" x 1.0" (10.2 cm x 5.6 cm x 2.5 cm) - closed Weight: 5.82 ounces (165 grams) RF Power Output: CDMA 200 mW maximum AMPS 600 mW maximum Operational Temperature: -22° to 140°F (-30° to 60°C) Frequency Range: 824.01 - 848.97 MHz transmitter; 869.01 - 893.97 MHz Star-Tac receiver The StarTAC dual-mode (ST7760 800 MHz CDMA/AMPS) wireless phone is among the smallest and lightest digital phones in the world. The phone incorporates a variety of easy-to-use features that consumers can rely upon for optimal performance in both their professional and personal needs, while still maintaining style, weight, and generous talk times. Weighing as little as 3.7 ounces with its optional slim Li-Ion battery, the StarTAC phone provides talk times up to and between 90 and 250 minutes or digital standby times up to and between 40 and 120 hours. Key phone features include: a full matrix, graphic display providing a variety of viewing options; and variable font sizes so phone numbers appear in large, easy-to- read text while incoming text messages appear in a smaller font so more of the message may be viewed. The ST7760 phone also offers VibraCall(TM) alert, Internal Charger, optional headset capability and supports Caller ID* and Voice Mail* services. Cellular One Kansas/Missouri is offering the dual-mode StarTAC phone with the following digital service plans: ################################################################## Considering the Star tac is 40% lighter and has a battery life 4X longer is a death blow for the Qphone. That doesn't take into account that Motorola has a better brand name. Please Greg explain to me how Motorola's phone has leapfroged what is suposed to be the leader in CDMA phones. It seem's to me that the Dual mode Q is less then awe-inspiring. When the backlog is over, and Qcom has to compete in the marketplace they are in trouble. It might be why they are thinking of selling handset division(if that rumor is true) Questions