Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
And exactly what is TDMA's share of the global handset market? Lets see, hmm, IDCC is just now getting paid for "past 2G" sales while still not getting current dollars from 3G majors and you expect people to believe that IDCC holds the keys to the kingdom? Compared to Q,who is everyone's bane,and yet, you act like IDCC is the undisputed leader. So I am to believe that you and others like you can recognize what the industry has had how long to analyze? Face it, you missed the boat on Q and assumed that 2G would translate equally to 3G and therefore IDCC would come out on top. The problem is that 3G and 2G are not the same animal. IDCC is but a pipsqueek compared to all threatening Q. I also like the fact that although people like you claim IDCC has the most goods you somehow are happy with 1%. Why is that? Hmm, TDMA is the basis of GSM which demands upwards of 15% yet IDCC with the most goods only asks for one. Well, which one is it? Are they so strong that they give up at minimum 4 points or are they like all lawyers linning their own pockets at the expense of shareholders. Why should you, the one with the goods accept only 1 instead of 5, 8, or ten?
So you're proud that you have 20/20 hindsight? Since you are so smart must I assume you sold short all the way down? It was an easy call, right?
You are assuming all patents are created equal and worthy of 5%. IDCC wished they got 5%
If the previous license did not include a pass-through then the absence of such with the renewal will not represent any change to the status quo. How is that bad for Q exactly? Granted the possession of such a pass-through would be nice for QCT sales but the absence will not affect the overall march of time.
"Nokia's way of avoiding Qualcomm cdma royalty." There is no way to avoid Q's royalty. If there were such a way everyone would be doing it and there would be no such thing as a royalty. The price will be paid no matter what. The only questions are how will it fall on the books and how much control over product development do you want. The royalty will be paid by the ODM and therefore show up in NOK's COSGS. Or NOK will continue with their own CDMA development and recognize it thus. The bottom line is that partaking in CDMA results in a payment to Q. THEIR IS NO AVOIDING!
I erased it all. Why bother.
Would you for once quit expecting Q to carry IDCC's water. I think you may have a serious case of Q envy.
"including well over 30,000 at Deutsche Telecom and tens of thousands more at Alcatel Lucent, Nokia Siemens, and AT&T BellSouth."
GSM.
GSM.
GSM.
and finally,
GSM.
Huh?
They all can't be G&A. But we are the fastest growing and most advanced technology! Come, sail to GSM, maaaan. Accent assumed. Did I mention that we have a lot of patents but that we don't get paid very much for them? It's strategic ya know? Hello my name is Gump. It's called new-age business and time "does not equal money." Surely enough to negotiate a really great deal. What the hell are these people thinking? Must be some kind of Greek tragedy. Wonder how it ends?
How is it exactly going to go down? Will the insiders buy what the institutions sell or will small retail investors buy them? I doubt either one has the need or wherewithall to make up for the sheer volume. What do they have outstanding 1.6 billion shares. You can only wish your beloved IDCC had such similar scale. I know, I know they are the wireless king of the future. You may make money off of IDCC and I can only wish you well in that endeveour. However, the fact remains that when it comes to industry influence and or change the history books will be written about Q and not IDCC. Wait a minute, we already have one book how about IDCC?
One year shaved but also how much more complex?
All good and well but can they monetize them?
How will this dovetail with BRCM? On the one hand we are attempting to value IPR with respect to a cross license agreement while at the same time "giving away" royalty free agreements. I think that the provision of CDMA only provides (thinking NOK and GSM) a cover under the handset manufacturers license. They are based on average wholesale prices are they not? Added BOM results in a higher priced unit. At some point the added value has royalty applied. It must be chipset level related. How would, or, could anyone apply this template to BRCM? The more I think about it the more I can't ignore the fact that Q announced a "royalty free" deal while at the same time, is embroiled in several matters that are directly related. Please don't mistake me. I have long been a Q long and continue to be so. I just wonder. I smell something in the wind.
Honestly, I don't know why I bother. Why is this not an example of a company keeping its focus on its core competentcy while at the same time promoting the drive towards 3G? What better way to counter claims of monopoly than by promoting overall growth. I suspect that this is a function more of DVB-H being more in the puplic realm: while at the same time stunting WIMAX.
I would think those are EMP chipsets. Therefore, Q's chipset customers will fill the void. Sounds like this is good for QCT. QTL still gets the royalty. Sounds to me like they cannot compete.
All because you predict and Intel plans or hopes does not mean any of it will come true. I suspect that Q has a better chance of garnerning royalty's off of GSM than of taking a hit to CDMA. Time will tell and fortunately it won't take long. However, Intel's plans are several years off.
The market is a bunch of nerveous nellies right now. It is you who are wrong.
I'm not saying that, only that I don't think they are as strong and you like to believe. Look at when GSM is cited. Who is mentioned as the inventor's? Moto, NOK, and ERICY. Not IDCC. Say what you will but the facts are born out in revenue, licenses, and market cap. I suspect you are backing an old sway-back mare here and not a racehorse.
Do you know why it is that whenever NOK and ERICY talk of patents in the 3GPP there is almost never any mention of IDCC?
The point is that when the first quarter of 07 rolls around IDCC's EPS will drop. That is what the headlines will say. They still don't have 3G deal with NOK yet do they. I suspect they will finally get paid for 3G when the world moves to 5G. After legal battles of course.
What will happen to the stock once earnings fall after the 2G NOKIA $$ are fully amortized?
Are they also trying to say that if you're signed up for one standard you are signed up for all standards? More specifically, are they trying to say that what was agreed to in CDMA/WCDMA must transfer over to GSM?
So are they saying Q has essential GSM patents? Hmm.
Get over it already. Think of it like NOK taking Q's patents for the fuel injector and blower and adding them to the little old four barrel that is TDMA. How is TDMA doing BTW and how much $$ did IDSillySilly make off of their invention and how long did it take to get paid? Ignored as a child?
I have been waiting for the answer too. How do people know it was him? Did he identify himself as Punky prior to asking his question?
What in God's name are you on? Nok is alledged to have taken some of Q's CDMA patents and applied them to GSM in order to improve the performance. No go back to the home it's time for your med's.
Biz, thanks for the info. I too was lucky. I watched the ground war part of Gulf 1 from my parents couch as I was on leave from Korea to Fort Drum, NY.
What unit or units were you with? I was with the 1/14 at Scofield with the 25th ID and the 1/506 in Korea with the 2nd ID. Additionally I was with the 2/14 with the 10 Mountain Division at Fort Drum only briefly while I awaited the end of the first Gulf War. Did you do basic at Benning? If so was it Harmony Church or Sand Hill?
If it were backwards compatible there would be no need for additional sprectrum. I don't recall Verizon or any other CDMA carrier requiring any new spectrum to roll out EV-DO.
Don't count your chickens before they hatch.
Although I gennerally agree with what you state I can't help but think that the so called work around was plan A while plan B involved watering down the standard so someday they could claim proportionality.
Face it IDCC is nothing but Q's Festus. I'll stick with Matt Dillon.
Q makes more each quarter than IDCC could ever hope for. How much did they get for all of pastG coupled with current 3G form big ol NOK? Face it you backed the wrong horse years ago. I know, I know, but IDCC is the wireless company of the future. HA.
Remember early last year? Same old story.
Oh for God's sake can you say something of substance? You like many others continue with the same banter quarter over quarter. The fact is earnings continue to grow and we at least get paid for 3G unlike other so called IPR holders. You have not changed much from the old AOL board.
It's nice that they have improved their IPR position but what good is it if the pack leader still increased his lead on you?
Anyone have a comment on the WIPI CDMA convergence in Korea? I wonder if it will be treated similarly to FLO. So we have the Samsung chip house, FLO, and now CDMA/WIPI.
CDMA is Q's tech. CDMA is is the basis for 3G. Let me guess, you think CDMA will be replaced by the much newer and better TDMA. To funny. If that is the basis of your analysis I suggest you run and hide.
Keep telling yourself that.
If so it will be only because they have more patents within 3GPP in which to contest but then again the courts have already upheld their patents so where does that leave you?
Depends on what chips you are talking about. I know Q signed them up to be a fab house for them.
So if what Q says is true about using CDMA patents on GSM what does this say about their policy of respect?