SiliconInvestor
     Advanced Search   [ sign in ]

sponsor
Sponsor

 Technology Stocks | Nokia (NOK)

Previous 10 | Next 10 
To: tero kuittinen who wrote (6438)7/21/2000 8:51:11 AM
From: DaYooper   of 33026
 
Thanks Tero.

I think the disagreement is about the relative value of different companies' IPR. That's always tough to determine objectively. Everybody always thinks their own contribution is crucial. Of course a new standard can have crucial contribution from half a dozen companies. How do you put a dollar value on that?

Didn't several companies do exactly that in agreeing on the GSM standard? Admittedly I'm not familiar with the history but I'm sure you know it well.

Does expiring time somehow put additional pressure on Q from NOK's perspective?

But let's put that difficult issue aside for the sake of understanding the other issues. Does holding out as long as possible on a 3G cdma deal provide NOK with any other advantages such as w- vs 2000 perceptions? Or does it provide additional leverage that would then be lost on some other issue or negotiation?

Or is the inability to come to a royalty sharing agreement simply the bottom line?

Best, Rory

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: DaYooper who wrote (6440)7/21/2000 9:06:58 AM
From: tero kuittinen   of 33026
 
That's the problem... the industry tradition is that companies fight a lot and then agree in the end to split the licensing fees. Nobody wins a lot, nobody loses a lot. But that stops working if one company has claims for much higher fees than the rest. So the way past disagreements have been resolved does not help here.

I don't think there needs to be fancy strategic theories about the W-CDMA disagreement. I think the royalty disagreement really is the bottom line. Though there are many who think this is the most sinister conspiracy since the Kennedy assassination. Conspiracy theories are the biggest fad in telecom investing right now.

Tero

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (6438)7/21/2000 9:13:03 AM
From: t2   of 33026
 
tero, What you think of Nokia's earnings for next week. My guess is that the company is really kicking butt. To me the ERICY and MOT earnings are signalling this.

Considering how NOK stock has stalled with this handset worry (which has been mostly or entirely an ERICY and MOT problem)-----we could be due for a breakout to new highs on this NOK.

I am expecting a great earnings report and a good forecast for the 2nd half of the year.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: t2 who wrote (6442)7/21/2000 11:36:25 AM
From: gdichaz   of 33026
 
Tero: Since you are now a card carrying TheStreet.com hit man, (hired gun comes to mind - using words as weapons), viz. MOT article (still think that was easy - like shooting fish in a barrel, since MOT excels at shooting itself in the foot), when should we expect your hit piece on Qualcomm? Or will that be preceded by a rave piece for Nokia? Best. Chaz

PS Just for chuckles, a slight, small, even miniscule bit of objectivity might do wonders for your credibility.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (3)

To: gdichaz who wrote (6443)7/21/2000 12:05:38 PM
From: Puck   of 33026
 
Credibility? He's getting paid for his views. Someone must find him of value, unlike many of the other posters on this board.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: gdichaz who wrote (6443)7/21/2000 12:14:15 PM
From: tero kuittinen   of 33026
 
This is getting creepy - couldn't we focus on McDonalds lawsuits and cancer research? Why does this thread keep sliding off topic? I would like to point out that I was definitely positive on Mot in December 1998. That was the point when it made sense.

Tero

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (6445)7/21/2000 12:23:36 PM
From: gdichaz   of 33026
 
tero: You need to run for political office in the US. Even the soon departing Clintons could learn from you. My admiration for that "answer" fits TS Eliot's poetry.

So have out slicked "Slick Willie". You are a master - in words.

Best.

Chaz

PS Not nitpick unduely but even in 1998, the handwriting for MOT was on the wall - terrible problems - wrong choices - mismanagement - and on and on......, but that is neither here nor there and certainly of no relevance to this thread.

PPS Would just hope that Nokia would learn from Churchill's remark about history, best to learn from the MOT debacle, not repeat it. And sadly Nokia shows every sign of failure to adjust from the lessons of history. You of course, do not have that problem.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: gdichaz who wrote (6446)7/21/2000 12:36:51 PM
From: tero kuittinen   of 33026
 
Do you discuss your own work by using your own name on the internet? No - you don't. That's just something you ask other people to do. Your "questions" don't make any sense. No writer can discuss unpublished material in advance or refer to future topics.

This and other discussion sites would be a lot better if people wrote here using their real names. I have never posted one message anywhere hiding behind a pseudonym. And the price for this total disclosure is dealing with people like you.

Your behaviour is exactly what drives so many posters to use pseudonyms. Is that what you see as a healthy development? Discussion forums full of pseudonyms, nobody knowing who the writers really are and what their past is? Would that make you happier and more content with what you read here?

Every time a pseudonym attacks a poster who uses his own name this site slides a little lower.

Tero

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (6445)7/21/2000 12:45:23 PM
From: Mark Marcellus   of 33026
 
Just for the record, I thought the MOT piece was quite good. The ERICY piece is even better. Do you have any further thoughts now that ERICY has announced much worse than expected losses on handsets? Do you buy their explanation that it was mostly due to a fire at a component supplier?

For that matter, have you noticed the types of severe product shortages implied by Ericsson's announcement, and (resolutely trying to stay on topic) has Nokia benefited from them?

BTW, my theory on why this thread wanders off topic so much is that Nokia is so boringly consistent that there isn't much to discuss. <g>

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: Mark Marcellus who wrote (6448)7/21/2000 12:58:59 PM
From: tero kuittinen   of 33026
 
"Fire damage" is an original explanation - but I doubt it has much to do with the margin situation. I don't see how component shortage impacts on profits - lower sales growth doesn't mean lower profits. Motorola specifically dismissed any component shortage, Philips did mention it as a factor. I guess it depends on how well the companies anticipated future demand.

In the past, suddenly dropping margins have simply meant lack of consumer demand. What's troubling is the fact that T28 is now shipping in volume. This model is relatively new and it was designed to be the new Ericsson high-end flagship - it hasn't even been launched in USA yet.

Tero

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)
Previous 10 | Next 10 

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQ
Copyright © 1995-2013 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.