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: Maurice Winn who wrote (19157)	12/5/1998 6:12:00 PM
From: Jon Koplik	Respond to of 152472

O.T. - deflation, low interest rates, "flow of funds" analysis. (Just skip this, if you are a normal person). Maurice - the other day, I was having a "high level intellectual debate" (?) with someone on the following theme : If the economy is about to "crash and burn" the way I believe, won't the low interest rates that ensue have an equilibrating effect on the system ? What I forgot to mention to this person (who may be reading this right now) (but, I thought you might want to hear this also) is -- if one looks at "flow of funds" type figures compiled by the U.S. government (probably the I.R.S.), apparently the amount of "interest received" in the whole U.S. economic system is larger than the amount of "interest paid." (I think this was regarding looking at individual tax returns only. If corporations (and partnerships) are added, who knows ...) Thus, low interest rates may actually accelerate the propensity of people to "hold back" on consumption, since their interest income would be smaller. (As I have warned previously : only a few people in the entire U.S. have a true grasp of flow of funds analysis). (I am not one of them). (I hope this does not precipitate this thread being clogged up with "wacko" economic stuff until Monday morning arrives). Jon.

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (19157)	12/6/1998 8:36:00 PM
From: DaveMG	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Mq, "Dave, things were pretty good to 30 September for Q! you know".. I agree which is why I'm holding on and optimistic. Consensus for next year is $2.75 and rising, up a meagre 131% over 1.19 for FY98 (this is according to Daily Graphs who by the way Chaz are using .66 from last quarter). Thing is though that royalties of 200mil, same as this year, would account for $2.70, so in fact nada will drop to the bottom line from the rest of the 3.5 billion operation, all profits to the extent that they exist eaten up by R&D, which is not necessarily a bad thing if the money's well spent. IPR and 3G chess game remain paramount. I won't be too surprised to see no upward movement until the smoke clears, even if Q does pretty well. It's probably going to take a great quarter with a substantial earnings surprise to get any attention. The mkt is too busy playing follow the leader, although it's worth noting that Q's got a relative strength rating of 78, better than 4/5 of the mkt. Doesn't QCOM claim that every phone it sells is a smart phone because the software is upgradable? I would think that these form factors are not going to continue to evolve very dramatically other than perhaps their thickness, it's the materials, gizzards , brains and batteries that'll change. I think MarginM is right about the StarTac. Mot's got a classic. Maybe the Q phone will evolve quietly into one too. Just drop it off every year for a little extra juice.. Dave