Qualcomm keeps quiet about Apple deal value following lawsuit settlement

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 28
    FatmanFatman Posts: 513member
    Keep quiet? LOL. $2 x 1.2billion shares outstanding = $2.4 billion. Why would they keep quiet if they can move the stock and all add money to their stock portfolios.
  • Reply 22 of 28
    yuck9yuck9 Posts: 112member
    yuck9 said:
    Apple had no choice. The Intel modems are junk. Look at the XS line. Reception problems. Intel cant make a 5G radio and If Apple were to wait then they will be so far behind the 8 ball they would never catch up.
    Apple gets the modems and Qualcomm gets the $$$ both win. 
    They aren’t junk. I have had Intel modems in my iphones and never noticed anything. Supposedly the max speeds were lower but never cared.
    Google iPhone XS problems. Reception problems that can't be fixed with updates, slow Wi-Fi, other's returning phones to try to get one that works, etc.
    I returned mine after 2 exchanges. Good think I kept my 8 plus.  There were more bad then good on the intel vs Qualcomm. 
  • Reply 23 of 28
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,842moderator
    Hmm, Apple didn’t need to settle this immediately.  It’s unlikely 5G modems are going into 2019 iPhones regardless.  They could have played this out a while, played their hand in court, which I think was a strong hand on the merits of their complaints, and let the FTC case get underway, all before striking a deal.  It’s likely the deal Apple would get might have gotten better and better as time and the league actions proceeded forward.  Up to a point.  It would likely have served Apple and not QCOM to delay a settlement for several months, but not throughout the entire appeals process that most assuredly would have followed any jury verdict.  And so going into the trial it would have been Qualcomm that would have been more eager to reach a settlement, before its dirty laundry was aired and reputation knocked in front of the general public, its customers and the FTC, which no doubt would have been looking on with interest.  

    And while Qualcomm may not have caved, they might have offered up some incentive to strike a deal now, something they likely held very firm against in past negotiations. And it was enough for Apple to bite.  Something that would make the FTC look with favor and that Apple would see as an ethical win.  My guess... double dipping.  
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 24 of 28
    mattinozmattinoz Posts: 2,319member
    Hmm, Apple didn’t need to settle this immediately.  It’s unlikely 5G modems are going into 2019 iPhones regardless.  They could have played this out a while, played their hand in court, which I think was a strong hand on the merits of their complaints, and let the FTC case get underway, all before striking a deal.  It’s likely the deal Apple would get might have gotten better and better as time and the league actions proceeded forward.  Up to a point.  It would likely have served Apple and not QCOM to delay a settlement for several months, but not throughout the entire appeals process that most assuredly would have followed any jury verdict.  And so going into the trial it would have been Qualcomm that would have been more eager to reach a settlement, before its dirty laundry was aired and reputation knocked in front of the general public, its customers and the FTC, which no doubt would have been looking on with interest.  

    And while Qualcomm may not have caved, they might have offered up some incentive to strike a deal now, something they likely held very firm against in past negotiations. And it was enough for Apple to bite.  Something that would make the FTC look with favor and that Apple would see as an ethical win.  My guess... double dipping.  
    Indeed I didn't realise how huge 5G hardware is. Image From https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/12/dont-buy-a-5g-smartphone-at-least-not-for-a-while/ . Considering Apple may or may be able to replace the snapdragon with the Aseries your 5G phone is going to be larger, run hotter, have less battery life than a really good 4G phone for a few years to come and for what. 5G iPad or laptop makes more sense than making phones ever larger. 


    edited April 2019 watto_cobra
  • Reply 25 of 28
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,683member
    mattinoz said:
    Hmm, Apple didn’t need to settle this immediately.  It’s unlikely 5G modems are going into 2019 iPhones regardless.  They could have played this out a while, played their hand in court, which I think was a strong hand on the merits of their complaints, and let the FTC case get underway, all before striking a deal.  It’s likely the deal Apple would get might have gotten better and better as time and the league actions proceeded forward.  Up to a point.  It would likely have served Apple and not QCOM to delay a settlement for several months, but not throughout the entire appeals process that most assuredly would have followed any jury verdict.  And so going into the trial it would have been Qualcomm that would have been more eager to reach a settlement, before its dirty laundry was aired and reputation knocked in front of the general public, its customers and the FTC, which no doubt would have been looking on with interest.  

    And while Qualcomm may not have caved, they might have offered up some incentive to strike a deal now, something they likely held very firm against in past negotiations. And it was enough for Apple to bite.  Something that would make the FTC look with favor and that Apple would see as an ethical win.  My guess... double dipping.  
    Indeed I didn't realise how huge 5G hardware is. Image From https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/12/dont-buy-a-5g-smartphone-at-least-not-for-a-while/ . Considering Apple may or may be able to replace the snapdragon with the Aseries your 5G phone is going to be larger, run hotter, have less battery life than a really good 4G phone for a few years to come and for what. 5G iPad or laptop makes more sense than making phones ever larger. 


    That image is of the X50, not the X55.

    Being multimode, the X55 in theory won't require a separate modem for 4G.

    Huawei's Balong 5000 5G modem was multimode from the start, so doesn't require the separate 4G modem either.
    gatorguymattinoz
  • Reply 26 of 28
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,929member
    Hmm, Apple didn’t need to settle this immediately.  It’s unlikely 5G modems are going into 2019 iPhones regardless.  They could have played this out a while, played their hand in court, which I think was a strong hand on the merits of their complaints, and let the FTC case get underway, all before striking a deal.  It’s likely the deal Apple would get might have gotten better and better as time and the league actions proceeded forward.  Up to a point.  It would likely have served Apple and not QCOM to delay a settlement for several months, but not throughout the entire appeals process that most assuredly would have followed any jury verdict.  And so going into the trial it would have been Qualcomm that would have been more eager to reach a settlement, before its dirty laundry was aired and reputation knocked in front of the general public, its customers and the FTC, which no doubt would have been looking on with interest.  

    And while Qualcomm may not have caved, they might have offered up some incentive to strike a deal now, something they likely held very firm against in past negotiations. And it was enough for Apple to bite.  Something that would make the FTC look with favor and that Apple would see as an ethical win.  My guess... double dipping.  
    I suspect you're probably right - I'm just trying to figure exactly how Intel's decision to stop developing 5G modems fits into the whole picture. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 27 of 28
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,929member

    avon b7 said:
    mattinoz said:
    Hmm, Apple didn’t need to settle this immediately.  It’s unlikely 5G modems are going into 2019 iPhones regardless.  They could have played this out a while, played their hand in court, which I think was a strong hand on the merits of their complaints, and let the FTC case get underway, all before striking a deal.  It’s likely the deal Apple would get might have gotten better and better as time and the league actions proceeded forward.  Up to a point.  It would likely have served Apple and not QCOM to delay a settlement for several months, but not throughout the entire appeals process that most assuredly would have followed any jury verdict.  And so going into the trial it would have been Qualcomm that would have been more eager to reach a settlement, before its dirty laundry was aired and reputation knocked in front of the general public, its customers and the FTC, which no doubt would have been looking on with interest.  

    And while Qualcomm may not have caved, they might have offered up some incentive to strike a deal now, something they likely held very firm against in past negotiations. And it was enough for Apple to bite.  Something that would make the FTC look with favor and that Apple would see as an ethical win.  My guess... double dipping.  
    Indeed I didn't realise how huge 5G hardware is. Image From https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/12/dont-buy-a-5g-smartphone-at-least-not-for-a-while/ . Considering Apple may or may be able to replace the snapdragon with the Aseries your 5G phone is going to be larger, run hotter, have less battery life than a really good 4G phone for a few years to come and for what. 5G iPad or laptop makes more sense than making phones ever larger. 


    That image is of the X50, not the X55.

    Being multimode, the X55 in theory won't require a separate modem for 4G.

    Huawei's Balong 5000 5G modem was multimode from the start, so doesn't require the separate 4G modem either.
    The 855 is a SoC - processor, graphics and modem. Even if the x55 has 4G/LTE capabilities it's still an extra chip with extra power consumption. 

    I honestly don't know with iPhones if the modem is integrated with the processor or separate. I think it's separate, so it would actually be less of a difference, then. My main concern would be the fact that early generation chips like these are generally not well optimized and more power-hungry. Given the exteremely limited availability of 5G for the next few years you'd end up paying the price in terms of power for no real benefit. (disclaimer - this is speculation based on history; I don't know what the actually power consumption of the x55 is relative to other LTE modems.)
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 28 of 28
    carnegiecarnegie Posts: 1,078member
    gatorguy said:
    carnegie said:
    gatorguy said:
    Funny if the deal were: "$1.  But Qualcomm gets to make a public statement about Apple making a payment."
    With QC announcing that with the settlement it should contribute about $2 earnings per share in this quarter I think it's a whole lot more than $1
    Where did Qualcomm announce that?

    If you’re referring to the estimate Qualcomm provided yesterday with its press release about the settlement, that wasn’t for this quarter and it wasn’t from the one-time payment. It was the incremental EPS Qualcomm expects to see as a result of the patent licensing and chipset supply agreements, and “as product shipments ramps” rather than right away.
    Hey thanks Carnegie, I went back and re-read after your prompt.
    "Qualcomm said (it) will add $2.00 of incremental earnings per share to its 2020 financial results"
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-04-17/qualcomm-rally-has-room-to-run-after-apple-pact-analysts-say

    Thanks for pointing out I was in error in the timeline. 
    You're welcome.

    I would have expected a deal which included Apple getting its 5G modems from Qualcomm to contribute more incremental earnings for Qualcomm. But maybe that's a conservative estimate or the amount of additional income is expected to increase further down the road.
Sign In or Register to comment.