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: Raymond who wrote (20329)	12/23/1998 4:23:00 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 152472

Message 5383378 Oh, I see you already answered the question on what dog do you have in this fight! You own Ericy. Fair enough. Different points of view are great. But many people don't just accept a different point of view without understanding the premises of that point of view and considering weaknesses in the argument. As Tero will tell you, I've always been in favour of 'opposition', and most people here are keen to see the best arguments from the opponents as they are most likely to find the gaps in the Q! case. Don't you have doubts about your Ericy shares when you read all this stuff, which seems very authoritative - Gregg, Engineer, Walt, Perry LaForge, Clark and others who really do know what's going on? Are you happy with what Ericy claims about not needing IP from Q! while compromising vital things like chip rate? Are you not surprised that they have focused on cdma since 1988 and are only now getting trial systems in operation? Q! achieved this way back in 1991. It really puzzles me as to why you would own Ericy - unless the non-mobile business is sufficient to justify the current price. Of course they still have plenty of mobile business too, but you know what I mean. [I don't really hope you lose all your share value in Ericy - I just wish they'd stop the rot and buy a licence like everyone else]. Happy travels, Mqurice

To: Raymond who wrote (20329)	12/23/1998 9:22:00 AM
From: DaveMG	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Raymond, I don't get it it. We have taken your posts seriously and responded respectfully. You may think we are a cabal but I for one, and most others on this thread, are genuinely interested in "the truth". It is in the search for this truth that we engage you in this discussion. Perhaps language places you at a disadvantage. You are one of several who have made grandiose statements and who when asked to back them up are unable to. You now run off with your tail between your legs. The loss is yours....DMG

To: Raymond who wrote (20329)	12/24/1998 2:32:00 AM
From: Ramus	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Raymond, Please don't leave this thread. How will I ever understand the subtle connection between W-CDMA and the NTSC video standard if you go? the horror......... Happy Holidays Everyone Thanks for the posts and comments!! I wish you all Peace Walt

To: Raymond who wrote (20329)	12/24/1998 7:32:00 AM
From: Mika Kukkanen	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 152472

Raymond: Don't leave..post again. My position is well known and we have to take some comments with a very large pinch of salt. There are some very knowledgeable people on this thread and some who just sprout rhetoric with no factual basis. I have stood corrected a few times, but have always enjoyed the challenge and I look forward to the future ones too. Opposite views always strengthens your own arguments and provides insight to the opposition's view/strategy. Don't be afraid to buck the trend, come back and post soon. Apart from Tero, we need others to tame the Qualcomm thread ;-) Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! Mika