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 : Ericsson overlook? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Leif V Singman who wrote (2886)	3/5/1999 1:56:00 PM
From: Caxton Rhodes	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5390

Hola Leif- On a weekend go back and read the old posts on the ericy and q threads. Most of the stuff is there and it's pretty easy to skim through to the juicy ones. Posting volume on the q thread has gotten way out of control now but in the early days a lot of the posts discuss how ericy and other tdma proponents claimed cdma would never work. Lots of articles in the WSJ stating the same (i.e. Jacobs Patter). Forbes article TDMA or Bust (I think it was Liars who was interviewed). Anyway, ericy's strategy was to keep cdma down as long as possible, even if you have to lie to the public about it. All's fair in love and wireless I suppose. The stories about the misinformation are true, believe it. Look for posts by Chris Reeder, Maurice and others. If you think folks rag on each other now, check out the past! We are all angels now. On a final note, opposing views are great. Feel free to give me grief anytime. Caxton

To: Leif V Singman who wrote (2886)	3/5/1999 2:36:00 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 5390

Leif, It wasn't so much that the Frezza article was the only thing I could come up with, it's more that trying to convert religious beliefs to reality is a waste of time. Ericy is about to appear in court, charged with illegal acts in regard to false statements about Qualcomm's technology. The trial will be in Texas. I presume you are aware of that? For a company to actually have to appear before a court over such things, you can be sure that there were some egregious 'mistakes' on their part. Courts don't hear frivolous actions. Usually companies can say a lot of things and get away with them because they don't have an overall intent to be illegal. L M Ericsson made such a meal of it that they are might suffer a HUGE penalty. Maybe the delays in cdmaOne acceptance due to the lies will be capitalized into a huge damages award to Qualcomm. A bit like Texaco was floored by the judgement against them when they casually ignored the USA legal system. Soon we'll know what the judge thinks about Ericy's actions. Also, I forget whether it was Motorola or L M Ericsson which had a couple of employees arrested in Mexico, along with some Mexican officials over attempted bribery in a tender. I think it was Ericsson - Motorola stole a Q-Phone casing from a Q! supplier. How about addressing the other points Caxton made now that you aren't puzzled about why Ericsson is considered a reprobate in some circles? Frezza was in the pay of L M Ericsson when he wrote those articles, yet you find no ties to L M Ericsson? There has been no past poor performance of Qualcomm though I realize you simply mean the share price rather than the company itself, but the way you wrote it, people could mistakenly think you meant the company hadn't been doing well when Q! has in fact had 15 years of amazing progress, with the latest quarter blowing socks off! I've got far better things to do that look around for scapegoats. Incidentally, my returns on Q! are now around 3x what I paid, which is okay by me. Congratulations to Q! are in order, not scapegoats. L M Ericsson is a competitor which has used unethical [possibly illegal] tactics to disrupt the development of Qualcomm's technology. So I focus on them to point out their deficiencies. Immoral organizations are not good ones to back. I say L M Ericsson is an immoral organization. They lie. For example, they say they don't need Q! CDMA technology for their VW40. So why are they wanting to get access to Q! property? Accusing Q! of holding up the wireless industry etc? They say they invented CDMA? What? Yes, they appear to be serious. If you are investing in Ericy, you had better understand more about them. Maybe at current prices it is worth buying. I doubt it. They either have or don't have, depending on which of their two claims you believe access to CDMA technology sufficient to run a WWeb network. If they have, then they sure are a good bet. If they haven't, then they will have to stick with their GSM and other stuff while the rest of the world goes CDMA in mobile. Maurice