Thread regarding Qualcomm Inc. layoffs

Qualcomm: Not So Excessive

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4235682-qualcomm-excessive

The short thesis is that losing the lawsuit will decimate the royalty business, though countless lawsuits in places like China and South Korea failed to make anything other than minor adjustments to royalty rates.

...

In the case of Apple, the company has 30%+ gross margins on smartphones that cost over $1,000 in some cases. With the average iPhone having an ASP of over $700 now, Apple is generating over $200 in gross profit per phone, easily absorbing the license fees.

For FY18, the tech giant made $12 per share in net income and generated a massive $59 billion in profits. It doesn't appear that Apple was harmed at all.

by
| 1123 views | | 3 replies (last January 26, 2019) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+XjvfILP

3 replies (most recent on top)

Third world logic. If the OP is a Q employee, we now know why its all going to sh-- !!

Lets use this bizzaro logic on IC design.

The phone battery is quite large enough to power the 14nm handset for 12 hrs with spare capacity. So the battery is obviously 'excessive' and there is no need to move to 7nm to reduce power consumption. Work done, lets go home and enjoy the 'excessive' evening.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @kzk+XjvfILP

Perhaps the 250 million consumers in the US were harmed ?

A $5B lawsuit says so.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @nmg+XjvfILP

So your saying Apple should be banned from such high profits because you think so? And also saying Qualcomm should be left alone to earn equally excessive profits through royalties because you say so? If yes then I suggest you get your head examined. I don't buy anything Apple makes so don't care about them. I am greatly affected financially by everything Qualcomm so I feel opposite. But I'm not stupid enough to form an illogical argument thst Apple makes to much profit, so should pay Qualcomm more than they have to just because.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @kht+XjvfILP

Post a reply

: