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: JGoren who wrote (25433)	3/28/1999 7:24:00 PM
From: Ruffian	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

The Deal From A "Good Source"> Notes from the Deal by: Tubed_1999 16369 of 16372 I had a great conversation yesterday with a soon to be ex-infrastructure QCOM employee. Following are some notes on the conversation. As you read this please keep in mind that this individual was not offering any kind of "insider" information. The following are purely this person's opinions only. 1. He/she thinks that Ericy purchased the infrastructure division for approximately $250 million. 2. QCOM could not continue in its effort to operate the infrastructure division due to the expected vendor financing from customers. When a CDMA manufacturer bids on a project the Buyer expects a certain level of vendor financing. The more the manufacturer is willing to offer vendor financing the better the chances of winning the bid. QCOM can not compete in this area because they do not have the money to finance potentially high-risk loans unlike Lucent, Nortel, MOT and now Ericy. The reason QCOM did not JV with ERICY on the infrastructure is because they would have been expected to participate in the liabilities in vendor financing. As a shareholder I would not want precious dollars heading out the QCOM door to finance high-risk deals (you know, like Russia!). So, as a result of the sale to Ericy there aren't incurred liabilities from future vendor financing! 3. In regards to WCDMA his/hers comments were "it's all the same just a derivative of CDMA, QCOM benefits regardless". Although this person indicated that they would be out of a job soon they felt very strongly that the Ericy deal was a fantastic arrangement. They also compared QCOM to the likes of Intel and Microsoft in that QCOM will benefit financially from anything and everything in one way or another to CDMA (and WCDMA). You do the math. We have a long ways upward to go! Tubed

To: JGoren who wrote (25433)	3/29/1999 2:05:00 AM
From: John Stichnoth	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

JG, I think I'll be showing some ignorance here, but I was fairly pursuaded by what Jon K wrote. The pressure on institutional holders to tender in the face of a bid is enormous--especially if their holdings are a significant portion of their portfolio. If an offer was made today for Q at $150, the shares would of course immediately jump to that price. The money manager would have to report a value of $150 at month end. (Great for last quarter). But, if the tender is rejected, there is a real possibility that the market value will fall to its previous level--say $111. Come June 30, the manager's going to have to report that as part of his results. To say that a manager is not going to tender in the face of those second quarter results denies the enormous pressure he is under to provide short term gains. And here's some ignorance: Are you implying that there are some countervailing pressures/regulations that might prevent or at least dissuade a manager from selling into a tender offer? I should add here that I hope and plan to be a long time Q holder. I do not want someone coming in. Unlike Maurice I have not set my sights on 200 in 2000. If Q were to increase earnings 30% per year for the next few years that would be fine by me. Any multiple expansion would be gravy, but not necessary to keep me happy with my investment. Best, JS