Heh, I took a look at Yahoo, and the "quality" of discussion there is amazing.
Let's try to be somewhat more professional here...
So far I've just referred to a couple of web sites, so maybe it is time to give some views of my own. And frankly, my boss hasn't got a foggiest on what I write here, and probably could not care less. This is individual thinking from a happy GSM user since 1997 with exposure to the telecom world, so I can claim to have some grasp on the fundamentals behind this game.
I think that QCOM did three major mistakes, and those have now offered NOK five major opportunities to squash CDMA off the map. In my opinion, this is not end of the world for QCOM, but neither does it spell the brightest future for QCOM.
Feel free to countercomment: after all, the CDMA wisdom is clearly on your side...
First of all, I think it is fair to say, that from technical point of view, I totally agree - CDMA is the better technology, and it will exist for a long time as WCDMA. But pure CDMA will find its way on the same shelf as Betamax and the recently found Dodo skeleton. Why?
Error 1: the design of CDMA ecosystem fails to address roaming issues. All individual networks were allowed to divert, so that there is no provision of using your phone abroad, or even having a better deal inside the same country via pay-as-you-go SIMs (case India and Europe to some extent).
This wider network divergence means that testing CDMA phones is much harder, and hence inherently more expensive. There is no concept of "generic CDMA phone" and will never be.
Due to this, you can't buy the spiffiest new CDMA phone in Singapore and expect it to work in the US, which is common practice in GSM. This potential for cross-border trade helps to keep even brand new phone prices at bay, as ANYONE can sell a phone that works ANYWHERE (especially with the quadbands of today). I recall seeing many offers for Euro/Asia GSM phones not sold by US carriers on eBay.
Error 2: QCOM seems to have underestimated the law of big numbers that makes GSM HW cheaper every day. Despite all the cries from operators and manufacturers, the licensing cost has not been touched. When was the last time you heard anyone complain about the cost of GSM licenses? There usually is no smoke without fire.
Error 3: QCOM and NOK are in a binding contract situation that brings constant revenue to QCOM. Yet QCOM bombards NOK with lawsuits that require NOK to cease all sales in the US. Hello? It is not surprising to me that NOK had enough.
Now this chain of events is putting CDMA between rock and a hard place for the following reasons:
Reason 1: I searched the web for operators who switched from CDMA to GSM, and found big ones in South Korea, Australia, Chile, and minions in Central America and the US. I did not find a single transition to the opposite direction.
As Nokia's market share is 10% in CDMA and 20-50% in GSM, it is in their interest to convert as many CDMA operators to GSM as they can. Ollila's only glaring failure regarding announced targets was not to meet the 40% market share, now NOK can do it by ensuring as many CDMA dominoes to fall to GSM as possible.
Reason 2: NOK recently started managed network services and has billions of dormant cash. What better way there is to use this money than offering CDMA operator a turnkey "pay as you go" GSM solution with zero initial cost?
Reason 3: as there is no longer need to renew a CDMA contract in 2007, the litigation issues can be put in a backburner. Expect years before any resolution, and the NOK management can concentrate on ensuring opportunities 1 & 2 instead of discussing a losing proposition with QCOM top brass.
Reason 4: CDMA ecosystem features in handsets were different from mainstream (e.g. Brew), and caused overlapping work in R&D. Not any more. The focus improvements inside NOK must be substantial.
Reason 5: last but not least, the major competitors can NOT follow similar route: both MOT and Samsung are forced to serve the CDMA customers at their home turf for the time being. Sony Ericsson similarly in Japan. So while competition has overlapping R&D activities for what does more or less the same thing from end user point of view, NOK can focus entirely on the highest growing segment.
Last time MOT hung on to losing technology was during the switch from analog to digital, and we all know what happened. I think MOT and Samsung must be having serious reviews of the new situation in the next couple of months. If NOK with their streamlined operations & logistics chain can't make good margins from CDMA, how would it be massively easier for MOT and Samsung?
Also, with the recent announcement, NOK has taken the wind out of CDMA sails. From now on, there's always a shadow of doubt over this technology - if the undisputed telecom market leader does not want anything to do with it, there must be something wrong?
In any kind of business, a public dispute like this is a big issue. Markets behave like lemmings, and the money goes where the majority goes, and the majority avoids any fogginess.
These changes take some time to have effect, and by no means is the game totally over, as QCOM will retain WCDMA licensing income. But as the WCDMA pool is larger and is having serious pressure to be reduced further, this haul is bound to diminish even as the WCDMA usage grows.
For a growth stock, this usually is a poison pill.
In short, CDMA is excellent technology but the execution in the marketplace has now failed due to shortsightedness in business practices and minor initial technical omissions by QCOM. Law of big numbers favors GSM, and the end users don't care, they want cheap handsets and love to roam with their own handset with all the contacts inside.
I am off to the US next week, and again appreciate the fact that I don't have to shed a single thought on my wireless access, just pack in my phone and charger. Voice roams. Data roams, and with Cingular EDGE, the speed is sufficient for my surfing needs.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
