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: Jon Koplik who wrote (19213)	12/7/1998 10:52:00 AM
From: DaveMG	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

Proves one doesn't have to be early to do very well, which is the position lots of people are taking with respect to Q, although perhaps not today. When Maria mentioned the Nokia upgrade she said something about "cell phones no longer being in oversupply, Nokia prime beneficiary"... Maybe that's good for Q too, assuming it's even true that there was too much capacity, that there no longer is too much capacity, that Nokia is the prime beneficiary, that....:-)DMG

To: Jon Koplik who wrote (19213)	12/7/1998 3:24:00 PM
From: Nancy Haft	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

O.T. ---- FedEx ------------- Jon, FYI FedEx is the subject of an article in this week's Barron's. We've all seen stocks highlighted in Barron's move sharply on Monday. Yes, the article does point out that FedEx could benefit as the distributor of choice for many e-tailers, but the article also details several other factors in the company's business that make it attractive at this time, chiefly that their network is finally in place and capital expenditures and costs are declining. FedEx has also rationalized its pricing structure, settled with the pilots, and merged with Caliber systems, the second largest ground-package shipper in the U.S. Going forward, the article opines, FedEx should benefit from the growing globalization of trade (i.e., who wants key assembly parts stuck in the hold of a ship), and companies' cost cutting efforts, particularly around managing parts inventories. So maybe the stock action today is not quite as flaky as it seems. P.S. By the way, I'm also a dark meat chicken person.

To: Jon Koplik who wrote (19213)	12/7/1998 4:28:00 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 152472

Cool, so FDX can deliver direct to us in NZ instead of us having to buy from over-priced retailers here who feed an extensive distribution chain back to the producer. I'll be able to order a Q! handset direct from the production line and have FDX deliver it to my door in a day or two. Big Macs will still have to be produced locally due to hunger and food quality constraints unless they have a low orbit ASIC-aided navigation delivery by launching them into space and landing them at a GPS accurately located doorstep using a miniature space shuttle glide technique [don't forget MEMs technology is developing quickly!]. And FDX only went up 11.5% today as a result? Maybe somebody already figured that one out a year or two ago. All part of globalisation, the New Paradigm, money flowing to the most civilized country etc. 'Civilized could stand some discussion, as there are many ways to measure it. I'm suggesting a low tax environment with strongly enforced private property, fraud and personal protection laws. The USA has inherent weakness in this regard and is likely to be replaced as the dominant country by somewhere else. Democracy seems the main weakness which will limit the USA = people vote to take other people's money. It's a form of slavery but the victims are more difficult to distinguish = the characteristics they exhibit is productiveness, intelligence, creativity and desire to overcome the inherent destruction of the natural world [entropy, mortality, genetic defects, landslides, comet impacts and all those bad things]. The USA authorities now spend nearly half the GNP. NZ authorities spend even more than the USA so don't expect us to take over. China might do. Leaving aside all the normal freedom stuff, if the price of China's economic development over the years since the democracy movement and Tienanmen Square, was the cost of those lives [which is not an equation I'd agree with, but it has some logic which would appeal to many] then it was probably worth taking a hard stand and avoiding democracy. Russia took the democratic path and look what's happened to them. There has been a LOT less suffering in China than Russia since 1989. From a utilitarianism point of view, the greatest happiness for the greatest number was achieved in China rather than Russia in the past 10 years. Maybe even the past 100 years! Though neither was a fun place for millions for much of the century. It might be that the best place, most powerful and all that, might turn out to be somewhere small and weird like East Timor, Bermuda, Mauritius, or middle-sized like, heck, maybe even NZ! It would depend on freedom-seeking individuals emigrating, forming a dominant culture with the right sort of constitutional processes to make the place enormously wealthy. They could buy any military security needed and success would breed success. It would need cybersecurity with super powerful encryption. I wonder where it will come from. Maybe people will simply disappear their assets into encrypted cyberspace and there will be a virtual country of freedom from property confiscation. The physical freedom could be managed by living in a safe and free community. Bermuda seems to be a sample of what might come. Globalstar Telecommunications Ltd is there, so my assets are there. Now I need a nice, safe and free place to live in. Mqurice *Off topic on oil* Saudi Arabia must be about ready to dump the OPEC cartel and start pumping. They have GOT to get revenue. Borrowing from Abu Dhabi won't do it. Saudi Arabia has heavily restricted their output to try to maintain prices. At some stage there will be a cave-in. That will mean high cost producers such as North Sea, and USA, NZ and others will have to close. It will mean a collapse in oil prices. I suspect that many will think that oil is like money, the supply needs to be managed. If demand is allowed to build too much, or prices fall or rise too much, then instability and economic collapse or political violence might result. So although a free market would be nice, it would be wiser to smooth things out, even if it takes some political pressure such as a nuclear weapons inspection of Iran and a compulsory reduction of middle-east output. Perhaps Kuwait could be told to cut production more and live on their savings a while. I'm not advocating that of course, just wondering where things might go and what the politically powerful might think and do. Get ready for the USA to 'stabilize' oil prices and production. Don't expect sanctions on Iraq to be lifted any time soon. Expect Iran and other oil producers to get some heat from the USA/UN cartel monopoly/oligopoly.