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: SKIP PAUL who wrote (21039)	1/9/1999 3:30:00 PM
From: brian h	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Skip, Totally agree. I can not go out to tell my friends I owned QCOM - such a great company but no stock appreciation for the last two years. That just does not cut it. We really need some helps that can promote both CDMA and QCOM's shareholder value. Brian H.

To: SKIP PAUL who wrote (21039)	1/9/1999 5:53:00 PM
From: Clarksterh	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

Qualcomm stock appreciation - I agree that Qualcomm has an obligation to grow 'share value' (yech - I hate buzzwords). If you take as a given that if you grow the company, eventually the stock will grow, then this should be the main job of management - growing the company. This is something that Qualcomm management is doing extremely well. The only reason to worry about the short term movement (2 or 3 years in this context) is when you need your stock to grow in order to grow the company - i.e. the stock really is being used as currency like at Cisco. Qualcomm doesn't seem to need this much since I can't really conceive of them growing much faster anyway. Thus, (in the spirit of Walt) c'est la vive. Eventually it will grow. It may well be that Qualcomm management knows that they are not 'personalities' and are not likely to become so. Certainly their strength appears to be in engineering, marketing, ... , but not in public presentation (the IJ interview on CNBC was not particularly good - NOI) Why not play to your strengths if you know that eventually it will pay off? Put it another way - would you rather have IJ in charge or someone who as an unknown might know nothing about the other areas (think Apple and PepsiCo CEO), but would look well on WSW? I pick IJ anytime. Now if it is possible to hire a PR firm to improve your company image, that might be a good idea since it allows IJ and his team to concentrate on what they do best, but I think that Qualcomm is already starting to work in that direction (witness the rebuttal to Ericsson's compromise). But I strongly disagree with having IJ or one of his staff try to boost the public perception of the company personally. As usual, JMO. Clark