I would like to re-post this mega-hurtz post from deep within another string and I would like to take a poll of how many people on this board agree with him. Here is his post:
"In the only true test of value which is the marketplace, CLWR's total value including its spectrum has slid from about $14 Billion to about $3 billion. And during this time no transactions on CLWR's spectrum have been done. $14B -> $3B is a significant decline"
... and the link:
... now, I'm not passing judgement on his assessment of the value of CLWR's spectrum...
... I'm just wondering how many of you out there thinks that mega-hurtz needs to schedule time with a psychologist as soon as is humanly possible?
The value of spectrum is what someone is willing to pay for it or, if its being put to use by an operator and thus hasn't been and is unlikely to be put on the market, it based on how much revenue and profit margin is generated from it. New Clearwire V1.0 started out with spectrum that Sprint contributed that analysts, including myself, valued based on what spectrum had sold for and reasonable expectation for use at around $8-$12 billion by itself... that is not considering the value of the spectrum Clearwire/Eagle River also contributed. The overall package of spectrum was considered to be worth at least $12 billion. Clearwire was able to use only a small portion and sales have fallen off despite some new partners to help stimulate use.
That makes the existing WiMAX use tainted by poor/over execution of the retail strategy that burned through capital, caused increased debt at ridiculous junk bond rates: overall leading to a drag on the value of the spectrum because whoever now wanted to build a grand plan for its use must also take on the debt and conversion from WiMAX. Sprint had effectively started the conversion of WiMAX by turning their back on it for new devices... instead accelerating the roll out of higher capacity LTE networks in their own spectrum and 3G+LTE multiple mode devices. Over time without any new network effort in 2.6GHz, Sprint would have siphoned off their use via conversion of subscribers... a way to 'conversion' in this multiple network world of wireless.
So, how is an analyst going to value Clearwire's spectrum today? It is no longer as if Clearwre were a start up in terms of heading into new deployments with a bankroll and almost no debt as had been the case a few years ago. Now anyone must consider the overall can of worms... Being a can of worms, it contains some dead ones and some good fat opportunities that can be used to catch bigger fish (new markets)... however, that is at the hands of the new fishermen since Clearwire itself is haplessly dependent on fishermen Softbank and Sprint.
So what's the spectrum worth? It worth more than ever in the skilled hands who have shown they can fish in the 2.6GHz stream. What's it worth to Clearwire V1.0 investors? Who the heck knows? Clearwire does not own the spectrum to the degree that can be determined in a straight forward way.. anyone who suggests they can is simply nuts. Its a formula that starts out with the unknowns of guessing what the undisclosed plans of SB-S will be and what the timing will be and what the disposition of the sorry carcass of Clearwire will be.
I guess we aren´t that different from animals running in herds in that sense.
I heard a good example of contrarian thinking when it comes to grocery shopping yesterday. Most people are inclined to buy perfect looking fruits and vegetables while avoiding items that come scarred with insect bites. In today´s world of genetically modified agricultural products laced with agri-toxins, one could argue that the "damaged" fruits and vegetables are healthier to consume given the fact that they were carefully "selected" by insects that are repelled by the chemicals. The less agrotoxins, the more appealing they are to the insects and worms...
Like stocks, all that glitter ain´t necessarily gold.
... momentum-investing disorder than I am in policing his propensity to bash clearwire via fabricated facts.
He is of a mindset that he is so right to "ride with the herd" that I sense that he is a good 15 to 20 years, if ever, from looking past his ego sufficiently enough to actually study the lessons of Rothschild, Lynch, et-al that are there for the taking.
The bad-news-stock-down and good-news-stock-up mentality can be put in prospective by something as simple as the fact that market bottoms always occur when the headlines are bleakest...
... but learning how to leverage investment success off of a principle to simple is very, very difficult since such contrarian thinking runs so counter to human nature.
Wow Spok, aside from being a brilliant Sensei in the art of contarian investing, I didn´t know that you managed to take investment psychology a step further by attempting to "treat" (in both sense of the word) people like Mega-Hurts. Not sure if Mega-Hurts would ever be able to afford your help unless he sheds his CDS (CLWR Denial Syndrome).
At $4.44 the risk is low as that's the most I can lose if I'm wrong. A short in the twenties, or a long buy, had too much risk, IMO. I also had no interest in telecom at the time because i thought of it as a commodity without much differentiation to make one company stand out. I only got interested in telecom when a friend started a telecom business. That lead me to CLWR, again. When I saw how much it had dropped, I though that it might be worth digging into for a possible buy.
So, if you shorted at $29, congrats. You won. That was then; this is now. That paradigm has changed. There is very little downside risk at $4.44. The new paradigm is insatiable demand for digital data via the airwaves and smart phones rather than wires. CLWR has the highway / toll road to help satisfy that demand...
... 7 months and judge the veracity of what you posted.
You forget that people can confirm the fabrications and inconsistencies that you post out here for themselves.
Yours is a very strange world, hurtz.
... 7 months on this board and judge for themselves the veracity of your psychotic post, hurtz.
You forget that the things you say out here can be readily verifiable and reflected back onto the true nature of what you're all about on this board.
You exist in a very strange world, hurtz.
My downside protection is a price of 'zero' with CLWR. That limits my loss to $4.44 if I'm wrong. Also at the time I was not interested in buying into telecom. My friend was asking me where he should put some money. He was not sophisticated enough to be a profitable short trader and neither am I. He asked me because I was making tons of money on LVS. I was smart enough to buy that. So, I just stick with what I know... value... value in a beaten down oversold company with lots of upside potential and very little down side.
If you have been shorting since the twenties, congrats. You were correct. I believe CLWR has bottomed and has tremendous upside reward potential now, with little downside risk.
We live in a dynamic world, especially when it comes to technology driven businesses with insatiable data demands. Paradigms can change quickly. You seem to be stuck in static world dependent on old paradigms; at least when it comes to CLWR.
I guess that's where the old saying, "One man's trash, is another man's treasure" and vice versa. So, start my bankroll at $4.44 on CLWR and your at the same place and we'll see who makes more money a year from now... and who the real moron is using a new paradigm.