SI
SI
discoversearch

Technology Stocks
Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting
An SI Board Since June 2000
Posts SubjectMarks Bans Symbol
140915 938 2 QCOM
Emcee:  slacker711 Type:  Moderated
This thread has a long history of collegial discussion of Qualcomm and its place in the wireless industry. While disagreements are fierce, we have been able to keep the discussion focused and generally civil. These rules are intended to try and continue those traditions.


This is a discussion forum, not a chat room. These rules have been in place since '01 and have served us well, however I am tacking on a new explicit rule concerning political discussions.

RULES

First and foremost, use common sense when posting. We have a long history to draw on and most should have a good idea as to what is considered on-topic and times when there might be a small amount of leeway. That leeway does not apply to politics.

No political rants/slams or even value judgments. The political discussion which is allowed is the impact of specific policy proposals on Qualcomm. For example, the IMPACT of changes to the H1B visa program is fair game, but I do not want discussions on whether increased immigration is a good or bad policy idea.

No cheerleading, stock quotes, or discussions of short-term price movements or your own holdings.

No off topic posts.

No flaming.

Please use discretion when linking or posting articles that are only marginally related to Qualcomm.

Please ignore IQ challenged posters.

Consider PM's when making posts of little value to the larger thread.

.............................................................................

Posts that violate the above rules will be met with a warning and the 2nd offense will earn a ban of varying length. Unfortunately, I know it is impossible to make everybody happy, but I believe that the above rules will allow us to continue the valuable types of discussions that we have had for so long on this thread.
Previous 25 | Next 25 | View Recent | Post Message
Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):
ReplyMessage PreviewFromRecsPosted
140915David/ Slacker, re: Bruce Sewell $4 / iPhone- BRCM Licensing cuts The most surpJim Mullens-3 hours ago
140914David, another Must Read-- Foreign Regulators Should Not Be U.S. Competitors’ Jim Mullens34 hours ago
140913 Who Do You Antitrust? Foreign Regulators Should Not Be U.S. Competitors’ SecretDavidRG76 hours ago
140912Meet the Silver Lake Partner Who Helped Engineer the Qualcomm Bid By Ian King DavidRG16 hours ago
140911Qualcomm wasn't chasing low margin discrete modem business. Apple had the scJeffreyHF-6 hours ago
140910I still minimal reason for Qualcomm to have given into Apple in 2009 and zero rewaitwatchwander38 hours ago
140909Exclusivity and vertical tying. The anti-trust people don't like exclusivkech29 hours ago
140908<i>Apple no choice but to go with Qualcomm for their Verizon phone, especikech-11 AM
140907Remember the Credit Suisse trial ballon issued August 7 2017? Mutual self-interDavidRG211 AM
140906 The most surprising part of that interview for me was that Sewell put a numberslacker711111 AM
140905Apple no choice but to go with Qualcomm for their Verizon phone, especially in 2waitwatchwander111 AM
140904Thanks for posting. In hindsight nice context to have for Bruce Sewell's latDavidRG111 AM
140903Very interesting table and thanks for the detail. It looks likes the MIA agreemkech110 AM
140902Silver Lake, Silicon Valley Deal Pioneer, Plays Unaccustomed Role: Predator PriBill Wolf310 AM
140901 FWIW, a roadmap of the various agreements from CSFB in January. Note that theslacker71119 AM
140900Maybe it was an after the fact reward. It sure went on for a long time though wwaitwatchwander-9 AM
140899Googling Sprint and 5billion investment brings up end of 2007 and mid 2008 timinkech-9 AM
140898 In the case of WiMax, there was an existential battle afoot. Intel sloshed $5slacker71118 AM
140897In the case of WiMax, there was an existential battle afoot. Intel sloshed $5 biJeffreyHF-8 AM
140896 Qualcomm Extends Cash Tender Offer for All Outstanding Shares of NXP NEWS PROVIslacker71118 AM
140895Personal opinion is that apple was threatening a push for wi-max and they were bslacker711-8 AM
140894Yes, I have heard that take before. I put that in the same boat as SM going to waitwatchwander-8 AM
140893The problem is Qualcomm and Apple aren't playing the same game. Q plays InfiJeff Vayda37 AM
140892 FWIW, a filing from the USITC case. FIRST SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE JOINT REPOslacker71137 AM
140891Personal opinion is that apple was threatening a push for wi-max and they were bkech27 AM
Previous 25 | Next 25 | View Recent | Post Message
Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):
Copyright © 1995-2017 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.Stock quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes - See Terms of Use.