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 (19989)	12/18/1998 12:01:00 PM
From: tero kuittinen	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 152472

What confuses me here is that most of these business journalists and telecom experts doubting Qualcomm are American. It seems that the majority of US commentators have drawn the conclusion that W-CDMA will go forward and that Qualcomm is being "difficult" or "unreasonable". Why are American experts siding against an American company if Qualcomm's position is really impregnable? Apparently Wall Street is also siding with W-CDMA, judging from stock price movements that are triggered by W-CDMA-related news. OK, let's assume that Ericsson is an evil, malignant cancer eating at the heart of the global mobile telecom industry (I like doing that). I just have a hard time believing that a Swedish company can so thoroughly bamboozle Wall Street if they don't have a leg to stand on. Actually, some of the claims Qualcomm has made about IS-95 have been kind of overoptimistic. When they chose IS-95 I doubt that the US operators foresaw that in 1999 rival digital standard phones would have superior technological specs. I doubt that they realized how hard it would be to incorporate data functions like short messaging and e-mail into CDMA phones. I don't think that the CDMA community has been entirely honest in their global projections, either - I have not seen them correct the projections that were based on CDMA's universal acceptance in China - something that is obviously not going to happen. So to some extent, CDMA has been a mild let-down. More to the point, Qualcomm's strategy of alienating just about everybody is making them seem a little short-sighted. A couple of years ago China, Japan, Korea and North America were all either potentially indifferent or hostile towards W-CDMA. All these countries have now a vested interest in W-CDMA, to different degrees. The way W-CDMA alliance has been able to cobble together global momentum is a testament to their shrewd political instincts. I think this matters. Tero

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (19989)	12/18/1998 12:06:00 PM
From: DaveMG	Respond to of 152472

Gregg, Quite a depressing post I must say. I would be very unhappy to see my shares merged with ERICY especially, but even Nokia. Any chance you could give us more details on how this would transpire without revealing any Q strategy? Thanks..Dave

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (19989)	12/18/1998 12:13:00 PM
From: Jon Koplik	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Gregg - I know this is silly, but the Qualcomm shareholdings in this household will absolutely NOT be released to some sleazeball, would-be acquirer (if it ever happens). Our Qualcomm position is embarrassingly small in comparison to that of your firm, but, every little bit may help. Jon.

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (19989)	12/18/1998 1:44:00 PM
From: bdog	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

Gregg: You are perplexed, mystified and frustrated that despite your and a few others valiant efforts, Ericcson's propoganda seems to hold sway. I'm actually comforted because that so mirrors my own feelings and those of my equally frustrated spouse/co-investor. We've been concerned that the company doesn't seem very proactive in countering Ericcson's stunningly shameless campaign of disinformation, i.e., pointing to its increasingly obvious nonsensicality and representing its own - dare I say - righteous position. On the other hand, maybe the Q's PR efforts are simply more sophisticated and targeted in a bigger picture context than we can see. I hope so. Be that as it may, perhaps we're all being somewhat naive. Maybe the deafening silence on the part of most presumably interested parties is not so much ignorance "Duh. Duh. Duh." as disinterest. Who cares what and who is right, what is fair or better for the consumer, the world or the good ole USA? Maybe the key players know exactly the game thats being played by Ericcson but are sitting silently on their hands because they think it will be in their best interests if ERICY prevails over QC? Why care about the content or substance of the argument? Who is going to win and how is that going to affect me? Sorry if this serves only to emphasize my firm grasp of the obvious. Its a dog eat dog world. F**k it! What will be will be. Merry Xmas to all, B-dog