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 (28114)	4/22/1999 4:33:00 PM
From: llwk7051@aol.com	Respond to of 152472

Another factor to consider in earnings projections is fixed costs. Once they are covered each dollar of sales increase has a much larger percentage effect on the bottom line. Good luck to all, Robert D.

To: SKIP PAUL who wrote (28114)	4/22/1999 4:33:00 PM
From: Ruffian	Respond to of 152472

Remember This Guy> To: marginmike (16500 ) From: Rajala Thursday, Oct 15 1998 8:37AM ET Reply # of 28115 >Dave are you eve a shareholder? We have heard your IPR argument... >.... >The bottom line is that CDMA will grow by leap's and bound's >with or without ETSI or European integration. This has nothing >to do with IPR's! We have all conceded that nobody knows how >the IPR debate will end. We are saying that, To Us, it really >doesnt matter. So leave the horse alone, the damn thing's dead! marginmike, to us, IPR really matters. And because nobody knows how it will end, and the result may swing this stock a lot, we'd better debate this particular issue. Among other important issues such as are there more buyers than sellers and who should get a life. Dave, thank you for very informative postings. - rajala

To: SKIP PAUL who wrote (28114)	4/22/1999 4:35:00 PM
From: Valueman	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

If you look at the options out there and the common outstanding, I think you'll find you are already over 100 million. That's why they couldn't do a 3-1 split since only 300 million are authorized.

To: SKIP PAUL who wrote (28114)	4/22/1999 5:07:00 PM
From: John Stichnoth	Respond to of 152472

15% is a risk premium of 10% over treasuries!! what would you use? Oops! Got my numbers backwards! What I meant to say was that the market is not discounting most companies anywhere near that steeply. The discount rate is too punitive. In fact, recent literature (which might be taken with a grain of salt) suggests that there should be no risk premium given to the stock market over treasuries. If that is the case (since we can all build our own diversified portfolios) there shouldn't be a risk premium for any single company of usual risk. In any case, 15% seems too risk averse a number to choose, as you seem to indicate in your response. As you say, you are being amply conservative.