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.
Take a look at QCOM on a 18 mo daily chart. At the risk of sounding foolish, this looks kike a huge cup-handle. This 44.44 price is the highest since last spring and at the right of the handle.
With all the legal issues, I really can't see some huge clean break out ---but the pattern is nice. AND if earnings do look nice tomorrow, we could well see a nice boost here.
Biz My guess is that this has something to do with some software company that hoped to have its mickey mouse software included on Korean phones, only to ind that QCOM made the phones more comtatible with some other software (like a Brew program)or possibly just included much of it with the ASICS.
""used its dominant position in wireless technology to seek excessive royalties""
I am not so sure that I could agree that QCOM has a dominant position. I wish that they did.
stricklybiz -- My experience in hireing executives and top managers from outside the company is that best choices have a 50-50 chance of success. It this critical juncture, it would have been totally insane for the Board to take those odds.
Looking inside QCOM, PJ may have well been the best choice. Plus it allows for a smooth transition out by Dr. J, who is a most valuable and willing encyclopedia of knowledge.
Nepotism is wrong on its face.
Is it really ALWAYS WRONG?
Mindy, There are other options, but most have less certainty. For me, the most danger comes from the risk of an economic downturn due to greatly reduced hausing construction with no alternate form of captal investment popping up. This could sink all stocks.
Broadcom Fails to Win Ban on Qualcomm-Based Phones (Update2)
By Susan Decker and Peter J. Brennan
Oct. 10 (Bloomberg) -- Broadcom Corp., a maker of chips for consumer devices, failed to persuade a judge to recommend a ban on U.S. imports of mobile phones that use Qualcomm Inc.'s newest chips.
International Trade Commission Judge Charles Bullock said in a decision released today that Qualcomm chips and the phones that use them infringe a Broadcom patent. Still, the judge said he ``does not recommend' that any order banning Qualcomm chips in the U.S. cover cell phones made by other companies.
The ruling may indicate whether San Diego-based Qualcomm will be able to continue collecting royalties on handsets that use newer chips for fast Internet connections. Sales of such 3G, or third-generation, handsets exceeded $1.3 billion last year, a Verizon Wireless lawyer estimated in July.
Broadcom, an Irvine, California-based maker of chips for TV set-top boxes, is trying to enter the cell-phone market and accuses Qualcomm of blocking the way. Broadcom had said it had an edge before the ITC because commission attorneys backed its patent-infringement claims in May and administrative law judges such as Bullock often follow their advice.
Shares of Qualcomm rose $1.19, or 3.3 percent, to $37.43 in Nasdaq Stock Market trading at 11:06 a.m. New York time. Broadcom fell 34 cents, or 1.2 percent, to $29.25.
Broadcom spokesman Bill Blanning and Qualcomm spokeswoman Christine Trimble didn't immediately respond to messages seeking comment.
Decision Review
Bullock said two other Broadcom patents weren't infringed. His decision will be reviewed by February by a six-member commission made up of three Republicans and three Democrats. The ruling then may be challenged in a federal appeals court in Washington.
The commission, which is charged with protecting U.S. markets from unfair trade practices and patent infringement, in the past has blocked imports of knockoff pens and disposable cameras. In 2001, the ITC persuaded U.S. President George W. Bush to impose tariffs of as much as 40 percent to protect the U.S. steel industry.
Broadcom and Qualcomm, the world's second-largest maker of cell-phone chips after Texas Instruments Inc., are battling in courtrooms and before regulators in California, New Jersey, Washington, Europe and South Korea. The dispute began two years ago when Broadcom said it would start competing with Qualcomm after the companies had worked together on a project.
New Jersey Suit
U.S. District Judge Mary Cooper in New Jersey threw out Broadcom's antitrust suit against Qualcomm in August, concluding the evidence was insufficient. Broadcom appealed, saying the ruling was based ``on an incorrect reading of antitrust law.'
On Oct. 2, U.S. District Judge Rudi Brewster in San Diego denied Qualcomm's request for a preliminary injunction to block Broadcom's shipments of processors that Qualcomm claims use stolen trade secrets.
The judge ordered the two sides to work together on a preliminary injunction involving trade secrets that Broadcom acknowledges possessing but says it hasn't used. The companies' billionaire chairmen, Irwin Jacobs of Qualcomm and Henry Samueli of Broadcom, failed to reach an agreement when they met for more than five hours Oct. 4 in court-ordered mediation in San Diego.
To contact the reporters on this story: Susan Decker in Washington at sdecker1@bloomberg.net ; Peter J. Brennan in Los Angeles at pbrennan3@bloomberg.net .
Last Updated: October 10, 2006 11:16 EDT
IT's beginning to look like the QCOM 1 chip CDMA phone was long overdue in the developing countries. QCOM was evidentally relying on NOK to produce the least expensive CDMA phones that competed with the least expensive GSM phones. But , with Engineering samples delivered 1Q, 2006, the question is how fast these QSC6010, QSC6020 and QSC6030 chips will be incorporated into phones that hit the market.
One has to suspect that there was a Trojan horse effect here.
One has to suspect that the customer appeal of the phone design was shortchanged on these CDMA phones. One has to suspect that the price points on these NOK CDMA phones were a likkle high compared to their GSM phones.
Then after a year or so of this, we see ERICY giving away GSM networks.
Clearly this has been a good strategy from NOK and ERICY and it appears to have blind sided QCOM's Jacobs.
NOW we have QCOM finally producing its three 1 chip CDMA ASICS for developing countries. QCOM said that they had to begin all over with the design of this chip and it was a most difficult project. But it is complete.
Now we have MOT saying that it plans to build CDMA phones to compete "where others could not compete" (meaning NOK's low end CDMA phones just didn't compete with NOK's low end GSM phones).
I expect MOT knows something about both phone styling and building phones inexpensively.
Now we see that the so called 1 chip LoCosto GSM/GPRS phone is not a one chip phone at all ---it is a two chip phone.
Now we find that Good ole NOK has poached QCOM IP to build the fuel injectors and super charger used to replace the 2 barrel carbourator that was running antique GSM. So Nok will be paying QCOM royalties of something less than 14% (40% of the 30% max royalties the GSM cabal has demanded on GSM phones) on its pure GSM phones.
This is sweet. I don't think QCOM has ever agreed to be FRANDLY in PURE GSM because it simply doesn't build pure GSM phones.
How about trading those Pure GSM IP rights to mot for a little consideration in WCDMA ASICS.
SWEET !!
IMS now has a competitor. As of today NOK, ERICY and TXN announced a competing Euronut initiative that is similar to IMS but 10 times better. It is called:
"Special High Intensity Technology for Brains in Wireless"
Wonder how many towers it takew to cover isle of wright<GG>
Manx Telecom (a wholly owned subsidiary of O2), Lucent Technologies (NYSE: LU), and QUALCOMM (NASDAQ: QCOM) today announced they are conducting a third-generation (3G) UMTS (Universal Mobile Telecommunications System) and HSDPA (High Speed Downlink Packet Access) field trial using 900 MHz spectrum on the Isle of Man.
Telecom vendors revising systems-WSJ - Usually customers work one-on-one with vendors, but the request from Verizon Communication's (VZ) and Vodafone's (VOD) Verizon Wireless was so unusual - and potential - is so huge that five major telecom-equipment makers have been working for the past year to revise their systems. Cisco Systems (CSCO), Lucent Technologies (LU), Motorola (MOT), Nortel Networks (NT) and Qualcomm (QCOM) are working with a new technology, known as IMS, for Internet Protocol Multimedia Subsystem, that will allow consumers to switch between phone, TV, and Internet services.
Execution of Cheng Kejie -- Victory of Justice and Law
Our Daily publishes a commentary Friday to hail the execution of a former high-ranking official "a victory of justice and rule of law".
http://english.people.com.cn/english/200009/14/eng20000914_50538.html
Entitled "Severely Punish Corrupt Officials and Ring the Alarming Bell Ceaselessly", the commentary marks Thursday's execution of Cheng Kejie, a former vice chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPC).
Cheng, who was also former deputy secretary of the regional Party committee and former chairman of the government of the Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region in south China, "used his powers to accept huge amounts of bribes and was severely punished according to law," the commentary says.
Cheng has only himself to blame and deserves the punishment, the commentary adds. It calls Cheng a "typical corrupt element", as his criminal activities have damaged the reputation of the Party and the government.
The execution of Cheng indicates that the Party and the government have further heightened penalties for punishing corruption in accordance with the law, which is sure to further consolidate the confidence of Party members, officials and local residents to combat corruption, it says.
Cheng is the highest-ranking Chinese official executed for bribery since the founding of the People's Republic of China in 1949.
The severe punishment against Cheng has displayed the determination of the CPC Central Committee to strictly control the Party and severely punish corruption, the commentary stresses.
Opposing corruption is a serious political struggle which is decisive to the fate of the Party and the nation, it says.
Cheng's case shows that the CPC is completely capable of eliminating cancers invading into the body of the Party, by its own powers, to maintain its progressive nature and purity, the commentary points out.
The judicial judgment on Cheng's case symbolizes the requirements for governing the nation with law and the principle of equality of all people before the law, it says.
Cheng's case serves as another warning to Party members and officials, the commentary says, asking them to think about this when holding leading positions.
Phrasing it as a long-term and difficult task for the Party to fight against corruption, the commentary urges to further strengthen the crack-downs so as to firmly curb the spreading of corruption, on the one hand, and clean up soils for the birth and spreading of corruption by deepening reforms, on the other.
It proposes that the Party's internal supervision and public supervision be improved and judicial departments at different levels make full use of legal means to harshly punish corrupt officials.
CHINA's DEATH VAN BRINGS JUSTICE TO YOU
http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/06/18/chinese-death-van/
JUSTICE IN CHINA BY EXECUTION
China's execution frenzy
China’s execution frenzy
Even as the international spotlight was focused on China’s bid for the 2008 Olympic Games, the Chinese authorities embarked upon a frenzy of executions as part of their latest "Strike Hard" campaign against crime. Between April and July this year at least 1,781 people were executed - more in three months than in the rest of the world for the last three years. A total of 2,960 people have been sentenced to death across the country during this period for crimes as diverse as bribery, pimping, embezzlement, tax fraud, robbing petrol and selling harmful foodstuffs, as well as violent crimes. Hundreds have been executed for drug offences under the slogan "treasure life, reject drugs".
For those sentenced during the "Strike Hard" campaign "justice" is swift and ruthless. Under pressure to produce results, police have been reporting extraordinary "successes". In Hunan province during a "Spring Thunder" operation from 23-25 April, police boasted of "solving 3,000 cases" in two days. In Sichuan province, police reported that they had "cracked" 6,704 cases, including 691murders, robberies or bombings, in six days from 19-24 April, apprehending 19,446 people.
Under such circumstances, the possibilities of miscarriages of justice and the execution of innocent people are immense. Police and prosecutors have been urged to cut corners, and not to "get entangled in the detail", so as to achieve "quick approval, quick arrest, quick trial and quick results". At meetings to prepare for "Strike Hard", lawyers were reportedly called on to cooperate with the police and prosecution, and not to hold up the judicial process. Courts have boasted of their speed and "special procedures" during the campaign.
Many of those sentenced are likely to have been tortured in order to extract "confessions". There are also persistent allegations of organs being harvested for transplantation from the bodies of the executed without consent.
Ironically, sports stadiums were the last places where many of those condemned to death were taken, to be subjected to ritual humiliation in front of large crowds, just before being executed. In the past stadiums like the Beijing’s Workers’ Stadium, which may be used as the Olympic football venue in 2008, have hosted such macabre events. Other condemned prisoners are paraded through the streets past thousands of people on the way to execution by firing squad in nearby fields or courtyards.
Tens of thousands of arrested suspects and thousands assigned to "re-education through labour" without charge or trial have also been subject to public humiliation at "sentencing rallies". In most Chinese cities, invited audiences, often numbering several thousand, are required to attend such rallies to learn to obey the law and the government. One rally in Yunnan province was reportedly broadcast live on state television and 1,800,000 spectators are said to have attended rallies in Shaanxi in April and May 2001 alone.
Not for many years have mass rallies and sentencing been seen on this scale. Like other "Strike Hard" campaigns before it, this crackdown is unlikely to have a lasting impact on China’s growing crime problem.
AI believes that rising crime rates in China show the failure of the death penalty as an effective crime deterrent and calls for this callous and counter-productive policy to be replaced with more effective and humane criminal punishments, in line with global trends. It appeals to the Chinese government to demonstrate that it upholds the spirit of "fair play" and respects the human rights of the people of China.
olddog967 Yes, as far as it goes, "charging what the market will bear" says it all."
The market in this case includes:
1) associations of operators who have been thoroughly hosed in Europe,
2)Govt bodies in Euronut land other than Finland, Sweden, and Switzerland who may see their citizens as getting screwed by the scheme to build a "walled garden" for certain phone builder companies bu charging huely for the ARBITRARY, RANDOM, TRASH IP that has been stuffed into the WCDMA standard to the point that it took yars to get it to work,
3) countries like China/India that can totally shut your technology out of a huge country if you appear to be unreasonable.
It is reasonable to postulate that there is an upper limit on the total royalties that the WCDMA cabal is going to charge a Chinese company and still do business there. They can simply reject the scheme to deploy a Euronut "Walled Garden" royalty system on WCDMA in China. QCOM will be getting their 5%. QCOM is going for a fraction of the max 30% royalty on the GSM walled garden royalty on PURE GSM. Possibly, QCOM really wants a fair shake on WCDMA/CDMA and really doesn't care much about PURE GSM royalties.
Companies like Interdigital and the CABAL have stuffed the WCDMA standard full of ARBITRARY, RANDOM, TRASH IP are not up against one weakling operator. They are up against associations of operators who have been thoroughly hosed recently as well as governments that can simply shut you out.
Also, while bribery and corruption may be the norm in India, there is a rather short chain of justice for bribery in China. They simply 1) march into the offender's office, 2) remove him to the nearest parking lot, 3) execute him by fireing squad and 4) ship his lifeless body to the family's doorstep. These measures do get the attention of those tempted to take bribes.
olddog967 -- I note that 99.99999% of your posts are on the Interdigital Board. And you post a lot on that board. This may, in fact, be your first post on any other board. What did I do to deserve the honor of receiving this reply.
I AM ABSOLUTELY HONORED BY THE ATTENTION, EVEN IF IT IS NOT A COMPLEMENT.
JohnG
"proportionality of essential patents" ANOTHER TWIST -- the Arbitrators of this dispute -- operators and courts and governments.
NOK, ERICY and the cabal have packed the WCDMA standard with ARBITRARY, RANDOM, TRASH IP. They have used the standard to ENABLE the ARBITRARY, RANDOM, TRASH IP (ie, enable the cabal to extract royalties from non-cabal phone builders) rather than having the IP enable the standard. QCOM has supplied NECESSARY, FOUNDATIONAL IP without which no workable CDMA standard could be developed. Thus QCOM has supplied the IP for the ENGINE, DRIVE TRAIN and WHEELS (using the automobile analogy) whereas NOK, ERICY and the cabal have supplied IP for the ASHTRAY, FLOOR MATS and GLOVE COMPARTMENT.
NOK, ERICY and the CABAL argue that all IP is of equal value because, after all, each piece of IP is required to meet the self serving standard they developed. Thus they argue that they have created a WALLED GARDEN for themselves once again, just as they did with GSM. They say that they have created a future profit advantage for the CABAL by means of the royalties they can now charge non-cabal phone makers for the privilege of supplying phones containing the high proportion of ARBITRARY, RANDOM, TRASH IP they have stuffed into the standard.
In fact they stuffed so much ARBITRARY, RANDOM, TRASH IP into the WCDMA standard that it took several extra years, Moore's Law, and QCOM working feverishly to develop phones that would actually work using the standard.
The maneuver delayed WCDMA to the point that the GSM operators who paid 6 billion for Euro licenses have been waiting many extra years to use those licenses and HAVE lost billions. What they get is a WCDMA phone that is barely 3G at all. Now this WCDMA phone comes with a baggage train of ARBITRARY, RANDOM, TRASH IP intended to force high prices and limited competition for CDMA phones.
QCOM says it expects a 5% royalty for its NECESSARY, FOUNDATIONAL IP above and beyond and royalty those in the CABAL charge for their ARBITRARY, RANDOM, TRASH IP. Also, QCOM would like substantial pass through rights for all this ARBITRARY, RANDOM, TRASH IP the CABAL has attached to the WCDMA standard in order to enable a competitive market among phone builders. QCOM says it is valuing much of this ARBITRARY, RANDOM, TRASH IP stuffed into the WCDMA standard at ZERO for the purpose of cross licensing.
NOK, ERICY and the CABAL choke and turn purple due to QCOM's negotiating position. They bluster in public and accuse QCOM of charging too high a royalty based on a theory called "PROPORTIONALITY OF ARBITRARY, RANDOM, TRASH IP"
So far it looks like a stand off doesn't it. However there are some other factors. First, even in Europe, customers do have a little voice in decisions. After being first hosed by Euro governments and forced to pay $6 billion for useless licenses AND secondly being hosed by NOK , ERICY and the CABAL who forced long delays in getting a workable WCDMA, they are not nearly as bashful. They want some limit on the WALLED GARDEN of royalties that NOK, ERICY and the CABAL would like to create. They want a selection of competitively priced WCDMA and especially HSPDA phones that they can use to increase ARPU by providing value added services to their customers.
The TWIST is that the GSM operators in the developed countries have a political voice in the royalty matter. They want to make some money and have a selection of innovative phones. The twist is that they want HSPDA phones and not just those barely 3G WCDMA phones. However QCOM is so far ahead in HSPDA phone chips that QCOM chips are the only way they are going to get those HSPDA/WCDMA/GSM phones they need to increase their ARPU. Thus, the thoroughly hosed GSM operators in the developed countries want the same thing that QCOM wants to provide and can provide. Thus the operators are QCOM's natural political ally.
The TWIST is that some government want their countries and citizens to be enabled by the multimedia, high ARPU phones that are available in the US, Japan, and Korea. They can see WCDMA operators like Cingular in the US and DOCOMO in Japan moving ahead with multimedia, high bandwidth, high ARPU services; while those WCDMA operators on Euronut land are bogged down with NOK's barely 3G phones. Europe is dropping behind the developed world due to the technological ineptitude of the GSM CABAL. How can the governments in Europe stand buy and let this happen. Thus the Governments in Europe may be natural allies of QCOM (excluding the low population countries of Finland, Sweden, and possibly Switzerland).
The second TWIST is that QCOM plans to enforce its royalty claims for QCOM IP that the GSM CABAL has poached to increase the efficiency of GSM by 40% or so. Thus QCOM can demand royalties of something less than 12% (40% of the max 30% royalty = 12%) that the CABAL charges for GSM. This is a serious claim as is substantiated by the evolution of NOK's public positions on the matter. First NOK said that they had already licensed QCOM IP for use in GSM, Then they said that QCOM had not approached them with a royalty offer that was a FRAND offer. Guess what, QCOM is not a subscriber to the CABAL's internal FRAND swap of IP for GSM. Now we have QCOM proceeding with IP lawsuits in the US against NOK and BRCM and in Britain against NOK. These suits are quite winnable. Thus QCOM will be in the position to extract substantial royalties from NOK, ERICY and the CABAL for PURE GSM phones used around the world. If QCOM wins these suits, then it has additional leverage against not only NOK and BRCM, its chief antagonists, but also against other makers of PURE GSM PHONES.
The question is how the phone industry and countries involved might move forward in a showdown over IP between NOK, BRCM and QCOM. We can be sure that government will not allow phones sales to be cut off in N America, Japan, Korea, Euroland or even China (if it ever gets to 3G). Possibly HSPDA/WCDMA/GSM phones based on QCOM chips will ship in US, N. America, KOREA and Japan and possibly Britain, but not in Euroland. This will put the hapless Euronut operators farther behind the curve. Also, the EVDO rev A phones will continue to ship in US, N. America, Korea and Japan. These countries simply will not stop progress due to an unresolved IP dispute between NOK and QCOM. QCOM will benefit from this movement as will the operators who move forward to real 3G. Euroland will become a 3G wasteland where HSPDA/WCDMA/GSM phones are not available. In such a circumstance, US based BRCM might be under more pressure to conclude a license with QCOM than foreign based NOK and ERICY. TWICE HOSED European operators may be HOSED A THIRD time as they watch real 3G moving ahead everywhere but in Euroland. Various phone builders using QCOM ASICS will see that their license agreements and WTO agreements require that they not work with a patent infringer like NOK (assuming that QCOM successfully enforces its claim that pure GSM infringes its IP)and will be reluctant to ship phones based on QCOM HSPDA/WCDMA/GSM chips to NOK (because it will have been found to be a patent infringer in the US and Britain.
NEEDLESS TO SAY, this last paragraph is reaching and it is impossible for me or anyone on this board to say what might occur in a showdown. However, the fact that NOK is infringing in the GSM realm could prove to be quite quite beneficial in QCOM's efforts to deal with NOK in those WTO countries that have GSM but no WCDMA (like India and China).
""proportionality of essential patents""
The term "ESSENTIAL PATENTS" sounds impressive. All it means is that a patent is essntial to meet the standard. So those who want to believe that "ESSENTIAL PATENTS" are all of high value simply design a standard in such a way that it is required that numerous pieces of intellectual property from the club creating the standard be required to build and use equipment that operates according to the standard. Thus the added intellectual property does not enable the standard --Instead the standard enables the intellectual property to be called "Essential". Thus the standard is written in such a way that it creates as much "Essential" intellectual property as possible for those writing the standard. For the most part, this "Essential" intellectual property was not at all essential before the standard was written because there were numerous ways to write the standard that could either include or omit most of this so called "ESSENTIAL" intellectual property while generating an excellent standard that worked well.
QCOM's intellectual property is not only "Essential", but it is also "NECESSARY" that it be included in the standard in order to write any workable standard at all. Most of the "Essential" intellectual property added by NOK and ERICY is only "ESSENTIAL" because it was purposfully written into the standard but not "NECESSARY" to write a perfectly fine and workable standard.
Thus the arguement is made that, if the WCDMA wireless standard were an automobile, then NOK, ERICY and others patents would be like the patents on the a) ashtray, b) the carpet and c) the radio. Whereas, QCOM's patents would be like the patents on the Engine, transmission and wheels. It would be quite possible to build a fine automobile (i.e. design a fine WCDMA standard) without a) an ashtray, b) a carpet or c) a radio but it would be impossible to build a fine autompbile (i.E. design a fine wireless standard) without a) an engine b) a transmission or wheels.
Seen in this way, the random IP designed into the WCDMA standard is simply in there in order to try to attempt to give NOK, ERICY et al a continuation of the monopoly that they has on GSM. Essentially they seek to use the inclusion of this random trash IP in the standard as a means of preventing competitors from building competing phones with the same cost as the good ole boys who supplied the random trash IP for the standard. The royalty that they wand to ask for this random trash IP would serve as a barrier to entry (an up frount profit penalty) for those not in the club that would love to build phones.
The problem that NOK, ERICY and club members have is that QCOM is saying that all of this random trash IP designed into the standard has a value of ZERO and that the QCOM IP that is NECESSARY to have any CDMA standard is worth 5%. This is simply not something that NOK and ERICY want to hear. It is simply not the way European monopolists want to work. If they are forced to accept QCOM's view of the world, they will not be able to pertetuate the monopoly that they created for GSN.
So now we hear NOK saying that NOK does not give pass through rights on their IP for ash trays carpets and radios. This is strictly a negotiating posture. After all, they have created this WCDMA standard filled with random, trash IP to the point that it took years and Moors law to get it to work at all. How can they admit that the standard was an overstuffed bag of random, trash IP. How can they give up royalties on this random, trash IP that they need in order to keep competitors from competing in the WCDMA space.
It is a tough situation for the Euronuts. Theu hope that the Euronut Commission will rescue them and their desired walled garden WCDMA monopoly.
Even worse, QCOM has some patents essential & NECESSARY to making the improvements made to good ole antique GSM work. Now QCOM says that, if our IP made antique GSM work 40% better, maybe QCOM deserves royalties on antique GSM of something less than 40% of the maximum 30% royalty monopoly (i.e. 0.40 x 30% = 12%) that the club built around Antique GSM. Now QCOM has suits against NOK in US and Britain and against Broadcom in US to enforce those patents on antique GSM.
WHAT TO DO?? Clearly things are not looking so good for NOK, ERICY and others' effort to recreate the walled GSM garden for WCDMA. Also QCOM is way ahead in HSPDA (remember that WCDMA is barely 3G) both in having chips for sale and in IP..
Also, QCOM is way ahead in OFDM chips and IP (which may be the 4G which replaces 3G. Also, QCOM is executing remarkably well -- kicking out new next generation ASICS at a fast pace -- and with market segmentation and pin compatibility. Also QCOM has a one chip low end CDMA asic that competed well with those inexpensive NOK GSM phones (which, buy the way are inexpensive partially because any would be competitor would have to overcome NOK, walled garden IP advantage.
Lesson, never let a Euronut monopolist get a monopoly. Always be aware that they will try to "CLAW BACK" any monopolies that they are about to lose. For example they will try to reach out beyond 100 years of general use of the word "PARMASAN" to denote a style of cheese and try to give a mpnopoly on this word to some little town in some little country in Euronut land. Similarly, when fased with losing their telecom monopoly, they will try to create a WCDMA standard packed with "RANDOM TRASH IP" and force would be competitors to pay royalties on this "RANDOM TRASH IP" because it is "ESSENTIAL" even though it is far from "NECESSARY".
The problem is that phone operators hare wise to the game. They have lost billions of Euros while NOK, ERICY et al bungled through the implementation of the WCDMA standard.
WHAT TO DO?
1) Stall --perhps you can catch up in HSPDA, FLASH OFDM and Market segmentation
2) Bribe officials to block competative standards in India by penalizing efficient and succeswful technology.
3) Fire sales on GSM networks to0 developing countries to slow the path toward 3G. Vendor finance these.
4) Bluster in public and trash talk QCOM
5) Get BRCM to sue in the US and cause a big disturbance
6) Try to stop or block QCOM's 4G standard using Flash OFDM
7) Stall re uping your royalty agreement with QCOM as long as possible ans trash talk this
8) Bluster and refuse QCOM low cost pass through on the RNDOM, TRASH IP you have packed into the WCDMA standard.
Jim M. Yeh, Good work. I looked at the schematics too. It's pretty clear that the "so called one chip LoCosta" is not a one chip solution at all-- it is a two chip solution and possibly a little slow to market:
PAGE 20 of the TXN Guide
http://focus.ti.com/pdfs/wtbu/ti_wireless_solutions_guide_2006.pdf
The QCOM QSC60XX Chips appear to be true single chip solutions:
http://www.cdmatech.com/download_library/pdf/diagram_qsc60xx_cs.pdf
It looks to me like QCOM may have caught TXN by surprise such that TXN just didn't have the time to develop a true single chip solution.
Since QCOM samples Q1, 2006, we likely will see these phones hit the market in Q4, 2006. Now TXN is said to be working with NOK to get these phones in the market in the 2nd half of 2006.
It looks like they both may likely hit the market about the same time. Clearly QCOM is the agressor here and has surprised NOK by probably a true 1 chip phone solution to the market in quantity, possibly before or at least at the same time TXN/NOK woll get their LoCosta two chip solution to market.
I can see why TXN took off to India to promote Locosta. It is a little slow to market and is really a two chip solution.
John G
I don't really understand the Reliance difficulty in growing market share.
A) Perhaps this all is a price negotiation scheme on the part of Reliance & the govt
B) If there is a Problem,
Some Explanations could be:
1) Indians are sold on the NOKIA brand name
2) Reliance has crappy billing and/or service
3) Reliance has a crappy call dropping network
4) Calls from CDMA phones to GSM phones are not connected
seamlessly and reliably
5) Calls from CDMA phones to wired phones are not connected seamlessly and reliably
6) There is an unpleasant surcharge on calls from the CDMA network to other wired or wireless networks
I seem to recall that the Great Government of India stuck
Reliance customers with heafty charges when they connect out of the Reliance network
I seem to recall complaints about Reliance having poor billing and customer service.
There is obviously some explanation for why Reliance is not growing customers.
It is pretty clear that the Information Minister is not neutral on the technology. He would penalize spectrum allocations to Reliance by 50% on the grounds that CDMA uses the spectrum more efficiently and thus only takes half the spectrum as does GSM to make an equivalent No. of calls.
These Developing countries that join WTO are uniform in complaining loudly about paying fo using intellectul property.
CAX Could this be converted to a moderated board like Ramsey's and people be kicked off after their 99th warning?
The general problem in Europe is as follows:
1) The huge PC revolution was and still is controlled by Intel and Microsoft. The Europeans just stood buy, watched it happen, and paid up.
2) By acting as a block, the Europeans seized control of the world cell phone telecom market by acting together and raising high patent barriers against all who would enter.
3) Now we see that 3G cell phones will become the universal world wide must have, ubiquitous appliance. The capacity to do Photos, movies, TV broadcasts, LBS, music, purchases, computing and much more is essentially here for EVDO phones and WCDMA phones. These phones are the next big thing on this earth.
4) Unfortunately for the Euronuts, the key 3G technology to do all of this is owned by QCOM for the whole earth-- and all major phone builders have licensed it and agreed to pay royalties to QCOM. Thus, the aparant European control over GSM has just not translated to 3G wireless to the huge disappointment of euronut companies.
5) This is a bitter pill to swallow. It is especially so now, with the sagging European econimies so needing a boost.
6) Now QCOM has strengthened its claims on key OFDM IP. It must appear to the Euronuts that QCOM may well maintain its technoggical lead on into 4G. QCOM has apparantly taken the technological lead in HSPDA too. They feel that they are set up to follow the QCOM lead indefinitely. They are committed to doing whatever can be done to stop QCOM and keep various QCOM WCDMA ASIC users out of Europe.
6) Thus we will re-enter a period of global telecom war. Assertion of QCOM's rights to GSM royalties is a counter to the attacks Broadcom and NOK launched at the governmental level. It is also a counter to the GSM cabal's plan to knock out QCOM ally Samaungs by extracting huge royalty rates on GSM phones Samsung must have to complete its product line.
7) Clearly NOK and Ericy have been slowing 3G roll out and pushing cheap worldwide GSM to set the stage for this battle.
pajaso-pajaso -- you are some kind of plague on this thread.
"interpret this news from China"
HA, HA. A mystery wrapped in an enigma surrounded by dense fog.
"Nokia says Qualcomm never made a licensing offer, let alone one it could refuse"
QCOM made commitments to license its patents to others in as part of the agreement to standardize WCDMA and CDMA2000. This agreement surely applied to phones that combine GSM, GPRS or EDGE with CDMA. There is no evidence that it applied to GSM phones.
No one has asserted that QCOM's agreement covered pure GSM phones. Yet, NOK proceeded to use key QCOM patents to improve function and data rates on pure GSM phones used in US, Europe and developed countries. Knowing NOK, it is like them to be too arrogant to admit that they had to resort to the use of QCOM IP to make their phones work better. I think they would resist putting a "QCOM INSIDE" lable on the phone.
Then Broadcom's new Euro derived president precipitated a suit from QCOM to assert those patents as they applied to pure GSM phones. NOK watched QCOM take leadership in HSPDA development and small form factor WCDMA chips -- a terrifying indication of things to come. Then Nok got excited and found a group of sheep to run with it the the European Commission to attempt to force a reduction of QCOM's WCDMA royalty rate.
I don't believe that US patent law requires you to license your patents to a particular party that demands you do so. It may not require QCOM to license its patents to GSM phone maker NOK. Why should QCOM do this. Perhaps QCOM just doesn't want to set the precident of placing a value on one or two of its patents. Why be cherry picked or ever go down that road. The answer is that they don't want to do this and they don't appreciate NOK's effort to change the deal when its current agreement expires in 2007.
Perhaps NOK will be pressured to decide to re-up its agreement right now rather than wait until 2007 (and to include HSPDA).
NOK's problem is not paying the 5% to QCOM. Their problem is funding a R&D/manufacturing combine that executes so well that it leaves NOK in the dust and speeds up product life cycles to a pace that NOK can't deal with. Asside from creating earthquakes, fires, tornadoes in the area north of San Diego, their only cover for failure to perform/compete is to try to cut off the money flow to the QCOM research/development.mfg combine and associated value chain. With QCOM's improved ability in FLASH OFDM, NOK can see that it may face QCOM's ability to better execute for years to come. Like it is with compound interest, the company that executes best outpaces the others a little more each year until, ultimadely, it becomes clear to all just who supplies the better solutions.
Now operators are seeing that QCOM can give them the form factors, user interfaces, price points, software, and media flow ideas that will drive their ARPU up in the years to come.
If the European operators turn on the Euronut phone building monopolists then they are sunk. Surely those operators, after being bled to death by the WCDMA debucle, are aware that NOK has a performance gap that costs them dearly.
QCOM has put together a value chain that shares the wealth and induces the best minds to buy into that value chain because they caqn get well paid for excellent and successful efforts.
2:01 PM QUALCOMM Moves Lower Amid Optimism
QUALCOMM (NASDAQ:QCOM) continues to be under pressure today, yet options players
are still piling into call options on the security. Today's call volume on QCOM
is in excess of 20,000 contracts, which is about four times the stock's average
call volume. The Schaeffer put/call open interest ratio on the security of 0.56
is already lower than 84 percent of readings taken during the past year. Given
that QCOM shares have been showing weakness amid this display of optimism, I'd
expect further weakness for the shares over the near term.
The slide in QCOM reflects the slide of the NAZ
http://stockcharts.com/def/servlet/SC.web?c=$COMPQ,uu[h,a]daclnyay[db][pc13!b50!c20!b200!b30!f][vc60...
The Naz has slipped from about 2137 to 2037 in the last 5 sessions. This is a 4.7% drop. QCOM has dropped fron about 45.2 to 42.35 in the last 5 sessions or about 6.3%. QCOM has dropped
6.3/4/7 = 1.34 times as much as the NAZ. It is normal for QCOM to fall or rise this much faster than the NAZ.
In summary, the NAZ had been holding better than the DOW or the SPX. Now it too has sunk below MA200.
Jim M. These Numbers represent a 6.4%/Yr avg annual world wide growth rate in cell phones for 4 years. Do you understand that these No's include replacement phones?
JohnG
""EoNex Technologies Incorporated, a company founded on April 17, 2000 in
Korea, designs wireless modem chips and protocol stack software focusing
on the 2.5G and 3G wireless technologies.""
Who believes that this company has successfully caught up with QCOM--developing all these CDMA products in
3 years? Do you suppose they also have Zero IF ASICS?
""EoNex will successively introduce the following products from 2002 through
2004.
W-CDMA single-mode modem.
W-CDMA / cdma2000.1x dual-mode modem.
W-CDMA / GPRS / cdma2000.1x triple-mode modem.
W-CDMA / 1x EV-DO / cdma2000.1x triple-mode modem.
W-CDMA / TD-SCDMA dual-mode modem.
http://www.eonex.co.kr/abouteonex.htm""
Zeev. Why do you never trade Diamonds, DIA
http://www.nasdaq.com/asp/indexshares.asp?symbol=DIA