We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Sequans, the investors board
SQNS 7.860-0.3%4:00 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
From: frmrVZguy7/20/2019 2:54:12 PM
   of 290
What we learned from EUTC COMP/39711 Qualcomm (predation) (No Public Version available) 18.07.2019
- the penalty was LESS than the Enterprise value of Icera
- the time-to-settlement was NINE YEARS
Reflect on ^THAT^ SEQUANS shareholders.
Notice the highlighted quotes in RED are the arguments also relevant to Sequans vs UNNAMED DEFENDANT.
We began 2014 and 2018 with Statement of Objections if I read the news correctly. Thus the pace MIGHT be quicker but the UNNAMED DEFENDANT is a well-known master of delay tactics to create a Pyrrhic result.
FIRST this old report
Nvidia buys UK’s Icera for $367m | Financial Times
May 10, 2011 · Nvidia, the US chipmaker, on Monday announced a $367m cash deal to buy privately held UK rival Icera. The deal will allow Nvidia to compete better …

SECOND these reports
“Our investigation found that, during two crucial years for Icera’s development prospects,
Qualcomm offered three of its leading-edge chipsets at prices below cost to both these key customers,” Vestager said. “The prices set by Qualcomm did not allow it to cover its cost for developing and producing these chipsets.” “The evidence we have seen shows that this was done on purpose to prevent Icera from gaining a foothold in the market, at a time when Icera was Qualcomm’s main contender in the market segment of chipsets for data cards.”
Ultimately, such anticompetitive behaviour prevented Icera from gaining reputation and scale as a supplier of chipsets for data cards and from entering the larger smartphone segment. It was bought in 2011 by Nvidia, which decided to abandon the baseband chipset market a few years later. “In short, Qualcomm’s behaviour deprived consumers of a wider choice of technologies and affected Icera’s ability to develop chipsets for the next wireless technology generations,” Vestager said. “This is why we have fined Qualcomm 242 million euros; the fine reflects both the seriousness and the duration of the infringement.”... She also spoke about the amount of time and effort it took. The
Commission opened its formal investigation and sent a Statement of Objections to Qualcomm in 2015, and that was just the start of deliberations. From that point, Qualcomm was sent a supplementary Statement of Objections; two oral hearings were held; and the Commission engaged in “detailed exchanges with the company concerning additional information required for our investigation,” Vestager said. “Qualcomm has also appealed one of our information requests to the General Court and, after losing in the first instance, it appealed the Decision to the European Court of Justice.” “These procedural steps are a key part of the checks and balances that ensure the procedural fairness of our enforcement system, but they do take time. We have made progress in this mandate in expediting our anti-trust procedures, but that is a challenge that will also stay with us for the future,” Vestager
Qualcomm’s Mollenkopf on Its Anti-Trust Battle and the Rise of 5G: CEO Daily
By Alan Murray and Katherine Dunn July 18, 2019...
Yesterday, Mollenkopf was back, and discussing another challenge—a ruling that the company’s licensing practices violate antitrust laws. Again, he was confident. And adding to his confidence was a Department of Justice filing this week that sided with Qualcomm and cited the need to protect the company’s business model for national security reasons. (Qualcomm is critical to “the race for 5G.”). “We think we will prevail,” Mollenkopf said....
After his interview, I asked Mollenkopf whether the regulatory battles were changing the way his business operates. He said the main change is that the company is spending more time documenting its licensing negotiations and practices so it can show that “we don’t do a lot of the things we are being accused of.”...

EU fines Qualcomm $272 million for modem antitrust violations Reuters July 18, 2019 8:23 AM
(Reuters) — Qualcomm, the world’s number one chipmaker, was fined 242 million euros ($272 million) by the European Commission on Thursday for blocking a rival from the market about a decade ago, its second EU antitrust penalty. The European Commission, the EU’s competition regulator, accused Qualcomm of predatory pricing between 2009 and 2011 aimed at forcing out British phone software maker Icera, now part of Nvidia. “Qualcomm’s strategic behavior prevented competition and innovation in the market,” Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager said in a statement... The fine amounts to 1.27% of Qualcomm’s turnover in 2018. Qualcomm said it would appeal the decision, saying it was “unsupported by the law, economic principles or market facts.”...
Qualcomm Fined $272 Million by EU for Predatory Pricing By Aoife White
July 18, 2019, 3:45 AM MDT Updated on July 18, 2019, 5:05 AM MDT
Company sold below-cost chips to eliminate U.K. firm Icera
Second EU antitrust fine for firm after $1b fine last year
Qualcomm Inc. was fined 242 million euros ($272 million) by European Union antitrust regulators for deliberately pricing some chips so low they could eliminate a smaller rival....
The Qualcomm investigation targeted 3G chips for internet mobile dongles sold between 2009
and 2011. Regulators said these were sold below cost to Huawei Technologies Co. and ZTE Corp., "two strategically important customers," in order to push Icera, now owned by Nvidia Corp., out of the market...
Companies have complained about the slow pace of EU antitrust enforcement in fast-moving
technology markets. Icera sought to draw in the EU by filing a complaint in 2010. It was sold to Nvidia a year later in 2011. The EU opened an investigation four years after that.

“The commission’s decision is based on a novel theory of alleged below-cost pricing over a very short time period and for a very small volume of chips,” Qualcomm’s general counsel Don Rosenberg said in the statement...
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext