Wireless Industry Analyst

• The largest US handset maker may potentially get acquired by an Asian/European competitor. This can weaken US's position in the wireless/telecommunications industry. Further, its position as the US market leader is an extremely attractive proposition to other vendors.
  
• In the case of an acquisition by a non-US company, I can see QCOM's position strengthen internally. As a handset vendor, Motorola had vested interests in keeping QCOM at bay in the wireless standards. If the company ceases to exist in this space, then QCOM will likely get unconditional backing from the US wireless industry and perhaps the government as well.
• With Nokia unlikely to be a buyer, it is further good news for QCOM in terms of increasing its market share. If it is any indication, the recent announcement from Motorola that it will go with QCOM 3G chipsets may be a deliberate positioning effort to bring in more suitors. LG or Samsung will perhaps be most ideal for QCOM's fortunes.
• Chinese vendors who are having a growing clout in the industry, may post heavy bids to emerge as bigger forces effectively redefining the industry's geopolitical alignment.
• I can also think of dark horses like Google as buyers.
  
• While a spin-off itself may be good for the other two profit-making ventures, it will also enable the new entity to focus on winning back some market share.
  

• Increasing footprint beyond its core competency areas is essential for its long-term growth. An acquisition like Firethorn can help Qualcomm achieve this. Besides, it will give Qualcomm more visibility as the mobile revolution takes center-stage. As a chip vendor or as an IP powerhouse, it will not get attention from the consumer. Software offers a better brand-marketing avenue, especially if the related domain hits it big.
  
• Offering an integrated solution has always been one of Qualcomm's strengths. In fact, it has been one of its market-share strategies, its differentiator in the market place. Ask for the chipset and you get a bunch of drivers for free. Now, with software prowess in a domain that could potentially be ubiquitous in tomorrow's mobile world, it can provide a complete silicon solution. I would love to carry a phone and only a phone. If it can replace my credit card etc that I carry in my wallet, it will be perfect. With its hardware design leadership, this sounds like a good synergy.
  
• Looking at this initiative in the context of Android adds more glitter. Android is perhaps a bull-dozer effort. Google can pump in the money and the effort to get its platform into mobile phones. With smart-phones and other convergence devices slowly becoming the norm, an acquisition like this, as offbeat as it may sound signifies some vision. The timing is perhaps more important and indicative of Qualcomm's gamble. Announcing this close to the heels of the Android announcement reinforces its belief in the future of communications.

Boy, I am looking at the attention the article in Business Standard and Rediff is getting and I should say that the web-site has succeeded in yet another of its publicity stunts. And of course, it has also helped build the gPhone aura. No wonder Google backed off from any comments.

This being said, let me re-iterate that a gPhone in its full glory in a fort-night is either a figment of imagination by a couple of fertile minds or is just wrongly processed information. I can see some kind of a service agreement in the cards between the carriers and google and this may have been mistaken for a gPhone launch.

Another possibility that a friend pointed out is an announcement in a couple of weeks about the gPhone availability. As he said, and I will readily agree, if google wants to go the apple route, then the first thing it should learn from the 'fruit company' is the market intelligence and the creation of the hype. They have the brand, they need a product to pitch it in the mobile space. They definitely need hype and fever around such a product. Well Google, here you go! You have a good start, even it was not entirely intentional.

Treat yourself with this laugh riot on gPhone -

http://www.business-standard.com/common/storypage.php?autono=295658&leftnm=1&subLeft=0&chkFlg=

It is probably the case of an overzealous reporter with a key-board in hand. The article talks about gPhone heading for a world-wide launch in a fortnight. Improbable! And here are some of the reasons -

- Prototype to Product: This is a long process. Any prototype that is OKed by the carriers will have to go through rigorous test procedures not just to pass regulation but also to meet performance metrics defined by standards. The product cycles are definitely not a fort-night long.

- GPS and other features: The gPhone is likely to be a model that thrives on GPS and Wi-Fi. These features present additional issues that need to be tested. Not trivial!

- Technology: GSM or CDMA? 2G or 3G? The article talks about a lot of carriers and to suggest that a phone will be out for each of them in 15 days is outrageous. Apple is not stepping beyond GSM for the moment. Why would Google gamble on fairly new mobile concepts for various technologies simultaneously?

I could enumerate a 101 more reasons. But it would sound silly. I do wish though that journalists are more responsible and apply a little more logic rather than going for a few additional hits to their sites.