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 (18119)	11/10/1998 4:28:00 PM
From: Sawtooth	Respond to of 152472

16:06 [QCOM,MSFT,FON] SPRINT PCS JOINS WIRELESSKNOWLEDGE TO OFFER WIRELESS DATA SERVICE IN 1999. 16:03 [MSFT,QCOM] JOHN MAJOR NEW PRESIDENT AND CEO OF WIRELESSKNOWLEDGE. 16:03 [MSFT,QCOM] MICROSOFT, QUALCOMM JOINT VENTURE CALLED WIRELESSKNOWLEDGE LLC.

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (18119)	11/10/1998 4:50:00 PM
From: bdog	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Gregg, you're becoming quite testy if not outright defensive. I've apologized once for my part in arousing your ire. Take a valium or something. I remember February but don't think the trauma inflicted by "rabid" sell-side analysts justifys mgmt to timidly and deliberately dampen expectations w/o also educating on the potential upside. I'm not suggesting Irwin become a stock promoter, just represent the company in a balanced way. Maybe he's doing that. I'm reacting only to your assessment of why the stock went nowhere after posting "spectacular" results. According to you the stock has long been undervalued by half. If so company communications should presumably be oriented to providing information which would gradually have the effect of narrowing rather than widening that gap. By the way, I also live in a more or less free country and don't need you to lecture me on my rights as a shareholder.

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (18119)	11/10/1998 8:05:00 PM
From: Ramsey Su	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Gregg and all, I haven't had time to really digest this JV but my first impression is related to 3G. Is this in theory the logical path to 3G? Furthermore, I remember the good Dr. V's paper about the use of 3G is somewhat doubtful. The JV would answer that question also by developing the technology and a market at the same time. While Eric and Nookie are playing the political games, QC is going backdoor and playing the first to market game instead. So am I over estimating Wirelessknowledge's potential or is the street missing the point? One thing for sure - they need to have a shorter name. Ramsey

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (18119)	11/10/1998 11:19:00 PM
From: Bux	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

Gregg, I would like to thank you for the valuable contributions you have made to the people who follow this thread. I read in disbelief some of the rude responses you have received recently for graciously providing your time to explain your take on current events. While some may think you do this to pump up the stock, I think you do it for a more noble purpose, truth. I know what it is like to hear lies and misleading half-truths (see below for more) told about something that is dear to oneself. While I am not the kind of person to worry about my investments, words are not adequate to express my gratitude for your your accurate and insightful views on the Q. Since I am not that familiar with JV's or accounting practices I am at a loss to figure out what we do (or will) know and what is likely to be secret. For example, the percentage stake of MSFT and the Q. Is it proportional to cash contributed or is it likely that MSFT provides the bulk of the cash and the Q the expertise to make a 50/50 partnership? I assume any profit will be divided in proportion to the percentage ownership and show up on the Q's and MSFT's bottom line? If QCOM must contribute cash, could this be why they have lowered analysts earnings expectations? Since QCOM and MSFT are my two largest holdings, does this JV in effect make me even less diversified or is MSFT so big, the effect is too small to worry about? Are there major wireless service providers who are conspicuously absent in their support of this JV? The media coverage of this JV has been typical in that much of it is misleading. Examples: News posted to this thread this afternoon (not sure of source) called QCOM a scrappy company? Went on to report that QCOM moved up 1/4 to 56 7/8 or so on the news. However, the market was closed when the news was released. CNN reported this correctly when they reported QCOM traded at 58 in after-hours trading in response to the news. This evenings channel 5 (Seattle) news reported that MSFT had teamed up with QCOM and other wireless companies to create WirelessKnowledge. It left the viewer with the impression that QCOM was not anymore a part of this than the wireless providers who have endorsed it. How hard can it be to get the simple facts correct? In any case, QCOM has entered an exciting new stage in it's plan to take over planet earth, er, I mean growth. Whether this will be recognized in tomorrows trading activity is anyones guess but with the Intel good news, and the recent buoyant market, I would not want to be caught short QCOM tomorrow. Or Thursday for that matter.