SI
SI
discoversearch

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 (20855)1/6/1999 1:28:00 PM
From: DaveMG  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 152472
 
Thanks for posting WSJ article Jon. To my knowledge the most positive Q piece they've ever published.
They say a bunch of things I wonder about though...

On Jan. 1, a new European Union directive will take effect that could well spur the first digital trade war.

Is this correct? Does the directive actually take effect Jan 1?

Furthermore, they will impose a second-best technology on stagnant European economies and on the developing world at a time when the telecommunications gap is an increasingly important reason why there is an economic divide between nations.

I guess they've been talking to Walt..:-)

For starters, depending on the government rather than on the private marketplace to choose technical standards is bad economics. Adhering to an open marketplace is especially important in high-tech industries where intense competition usually yields the best technological solutions. The Japanese bureaucracy learned this when it mandated analogue high-definition television a
few years ago only to discover that digital television is of a far superior quality.


The Gov and mkt fundamentalists are rallying around this free marketplace clarion call, “let the mktplace decide”. While this sounds good in theory I think most of us would probably agree that the plethora of digital wireless standards here in US has been a pain in the ass, even though without it t Q might never have gotten CDMA off the ground. Is this really what we want perpetuated?

And what would be the ramifications in Europe of multiple standards anyway? Maybe this would allow Q the CDMA2000/GSM overlay? We'd continue to have these unnecessarily bulky multimode handsets wouldn't we? Why no mention of convergence?

The third problem is that the European standard is simply not the most efficient one. Even the current generation of CDMA networks have proven to be more efficient in high density areas like Hong Kong, Korea and Japan. GSM networks, by contrast, have become saturated quickly and had to be replaced in Australia. As 3rd generation systems come on-line, the efficiency gap will widen. A 3G system based on CDMA technology would operate at speeds of 1.5 million bits per second or more, and thus facilitate the new generation of
hand held computers and Internet phones (gadgets which are mostly produced by Qualcomm, the inventor of CDMA). 3G systems based on GMS
technology would operate at much lower speeds. In tests already conducted on various 3G systems, the Chinese found that the proposed American CDMA standard would be more efficient.


This sounds like CDG rap. What about IPR fight. No mention of that is there? It's really a shame that so much of the reporting we get is so half baked. The other night CNBC stuck Q in there with Nextel and Omnipoint as potential takeover targets, seemingly unaware that QCOM is essentially an equipment vendor. And then there's the Bell Atlantic/Vod/Airtouch thing. Hardly a mention of CDMA/GSM / 3G issues, and how these iissues might be affecting the various players. FWIW I'd think that a Bell Atlantic/Airtouch merger would be better for QCOM. We'd get a national IS95 network and a committed CDMA2000/convergence carrier. Who knows what Vodafone' intends? Perhaps Gregg has some conflict of interest free thoughts? And no mention of G* either. Both Vod and Airtouch are G* LP's.

Josef….Keep firing those questions!!!

This is one SCARY market....Dave