Skip to main content
Update
Non-financial boards have been closed.

Non-financial boards have been closed but will continue to be accessible in read-only form. If you're disappointed, we understand. Thank you for being an active participant in this community. We have more community features in development that we look forward to sharing soon.

Fool.com | The Motley Fool Community
Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
No. of Recommendations: 0
Please don't misunderstand me, I think the Gardners practically walk on water, but I was reading the RB port posts from January on, and Wildcat and a college student named Jared (can't remember his user name) repeatedly mentioned QCOM and were ignored by the whole board. Is there something glaringly obvious about QCOM that the head Fools don't like which I cannot yet see because of inexperience?

It's tough for me to evaluate companies that are infants in the tech revolution--I think everything looks great when I read the articles on QCOM, but I have a hard time judging things like management (although their joint venture with MSFT looks like smart backing to me).

Anyone have any ideas why the Breaker port would thumb its nose at a great looking opportunity like this? I think I might buy next week (lots of reading to do this weekend before I decide).

Thanks!
Amy
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Amy,

you wrote:: Anyone have any ideas why the Breaker port would thumb its nose at a great looking opportunity like this? I think I might buy next week (lots of reading to do this weekend before I decide).

Basically, QCOM was ignored because it is far from a RB stock using the TMF criteria. Wireless is far from a new arena and QCOM is far from a first mover in the arena. Admittedly cDMA gives them an advantage, at least for now, but only over a few rivals in their end of the game..

Addtional RB criteria failed at the time would likely include: RS<90, not being called overvalued by the media, and given the lawsuits with Ericsson the sustainable advantage through patents etc criteria, not to mention the branding criterion about people knowing about them cuz while QCOM makes the stuff that (right now at least) drives celluar and other wireless technologies it is not a direct consumer purchase necessarily.

Note that this does not mean it was a bad investment at the time, IMO. In fact these days the RB port ignoring your stock of choice might be a good thing ;^)

The high risk RB approach to investing is looking for companies that are hitting new and open fields with no competition or no real competition for their products. Examples are amazon and AOL about 2-4 years ago. Though personally, I've never liked or picked up on this approach so its hard for me to choose.

Frankly, to me, it seems as if qcOM is growing into more of a RuleMaker type of company rather than a rulebreaker..

That;s my 2% on that one.. hope it helps.. cheers,

ps.. I have been thinking of getting in too. my main concern is with CDMA versus other more internationall accepted standards in Europe and elsewhere for long term sustainability of growth. Comments??

cheers,

jgc



Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Thanks for your reply, jgc.

...given the lawsuits with Ericsson the sustainable advantage through patents etc criteria, not to mention the branding criterion about people knowing about them cuz while QCOM makes the stuff that (right now at least) drives celluar and other wireless technologies it is not a direct consumer purchase necessarily... Frankly, to me, it seems as if qcOM is growing into more of a RuleMaker type of company rather than a rulebreaker...

Ok, remember I'm new to all this info, so bear with me if I don't have it right. It is my understanding that since they won the Ericsson suit it all looks good in the patent department and they will get $8 for every CDMA phone sold. I also read that something like 10 of the largest 14 wireless companies say they will use the CDMA technology.

In fact these days the RB port ignoring your stock of choice might be a good thing ;^)

Do not blaspheme the Brothers in my presence! No, but really, could you elaborate? I think the Rule Breaker port is fabulous, mostly.

...my main concern is with CDMA versus other more internationally accepted standards in Europe and elsewhere for long term sustainability of growth...

Is GSM the standard in Europe and elsewhere? Is it a serious competitor? What is your favorite site for wireless news?

Thanks again,
Amy

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<Is GSM the standard in Europe and elsewhere? Is it a serious competitor? What is your favorite site for wireless news?>

GSM is definitely the standard in Europe and some other places. But, networks are reaching saturation,
quality tends to be poor, and you need a lot more infrastructure (aerials) than with CDMA, so think about the future.

I live in Australia now, we have 3 GSM networks,
2 AMPS networks being phased out and a new CDMA network.
CDMA provides better quality, it´s going to be a hit
I think.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
jgc asked, "my main concern is with CDMA versus other
more internationall accepted standards in Europe and elsewhere for long term
sustainability of growth. Comments??"

I don't have any hard numbers, but i do know that in Japan CDMA (provider: Cellular) is getting rave reviews for sound quality and is cutting into NTT Docomo's reputation as the high quality provider here.

-Abdul
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<Please don't misunderstand me, I think the Gardners practically walk on water, but
I was reading the RB port posts from January on, and Wildcat and a college
student named Jared (can't remember his user name) repeatedly mentioned
QCOM and were ignored by the whole board. Is there something glaringly obvious
about QCOM that the head Fools don't like which I cannot yet see because of
inexperience? >>>

Not only did the RB board ignore QCOM, the Gardners told Wildcat to stop posting on the RB board and to go away. Pretty rude, actually. (So much for trying to learn together) But I guess Wildcat is crying all the way to the bank.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
...the Gardners told Wildcat to stop posting on the RB board and to go away. Pretty rude, actually...

I have to defend David here; Wildcat (although understandably frustrated) got nasty and attacked the RB portfolio and David personally, which precipitated a counter-attack.

http://www.debry.com has great articles on wireless!
Have all you guys seen it? I think it might be too late to make any kind of killing on this technology, especially since there are so many legitimate players.

What do you think?

Amy
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I think it might be too late to make any kind of killing on this technology, especially since there are so many legitimate players.

I need to retract that statement. I have a ton more reading to do. Just disregard my rambling.

Amy

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<I think it might be too late to make any kind of killing on this technology, especially since there are so many legitimate players.>

Dear Amy,

I think I will be making a killing in this industry for the next 50 years. It reminds me of the Railroad industry in the 1860's-1910 just hand over fist in profits or the Standard Oil of New Jersey oil powerplay that lasted 70 years before being split up into the Seven Sisters that we have now. The great thing about wireless is that there are no monopolies as of yet. You can call an end to the profit train when an industry has just one real player and can no longer raise prices. Kellogg is the king of Cereal but the industry died for there is no longer any room to grow (CHINA , India Maybe)and the competition what little there is refuses to work together and the consumer will never pay more then $4 for a box of cereal, The supermarkets are making their own brands but the cardboard boxes that they put the cereal in tastes better then their cereal.
Wireless is just getting started, just look at the bars of soap ERICY has sold and the Nokia 918,2185 etc were just terrible compared to the superphones that you will see in the next decade. 3g ,WAP, CDMA, Ricochet Modems @384kbps wireless. I can see out 5 years easily and am just now starting to see 10 years out . No matter what you buy in this industry you will make money, can you say that about any other industry. Wireless will be to the 21st century what the Drug Industry was to the 20th. I have no doubt whatsoever.

MYCROFT
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Amy,

Ok, remember I'm new to all this info, so bear with me

Basically, all I meant was that, given the 6 RB criteria in the book and somewhere on this site I am sure, QCOM doesnt meet them. RB's tend to look for breakthrough stocks. The main argument against what I just said would probably be something to the effect that CDMA is their breakthrough and that they do have the IP protection etc for sustainable advantage and on and on...

Do not blaspheme the Brothers in my presence! No, but really, could you elaborate? I think the Rule Breaker port is fabulous, mostly.

Well, while I am mostly a Rule MAKER type investor, and hence my interest in QCOM and its technology, I may not be too fit here. Basically, what I have seen on the RB port lists in recent months has been squabbling and lots of hissy fits basically.

As for the port itself I find that it is a great port and a great way to invest if you have the stomach for it (I dont). They basically hit great on two (AMZN and AOL), and the final tally may not too great on the rest. The key to that port, if you follow it (IMO here), is to follow the CONCEPT not the port. I think many folks on the boards over there missed that point. I.e. being in AMZN when they got in is great, being in AMZN thsi past 6 months or so hasnt been (I'm neither fyi). I suspect that you, Amy, have the right idea going out there looking for the NEXT RB companies.

For mycroft about wireless being the next wave::

Hmmm, I agree. However, I also think networking is the next big thing in the next 10 years too so I am sweating how I allocate my $$. Admittedly the two concepts are related (MCOM being a great example). What do you think of Teligent versus MCOM's approach??

Back to Amy:: did that help clarify what I said.. Sure hope so my fingers are tired..

cheers,

jgc

Print the post Back To Top