We have major, conflicting statements here.
Clearwire brass is suggesting that these are desparate times for clearwire and that if we don't vote yes for Sprint's ridiculous, $2.97 offer, then the company will be in serious trouble.
Yet, Masayoshi Son was very casual when he said he'd be fine with 67% ownership of clearwire and that it would be business as usual building out Network Vision alongside Clearwire's powerful TD-LTE assets.
WHICH IS IT?
My take: the only thing "desparate" about the plea coming from Clearwire's brass is simply that if this thing doesn't get a yes vote....
... then those greedy crooks won't get their golden-parachute payoff-scheme loot from Sprint because they failed to ram this ridiculous merger down our throats.
In the end, a "no" vote creates dozens of options or potential outcomes for Clearwire... whereas a "yes" vote simply relinquishes your shares to Sprint for pennies on the dollar.
If you think Sprint will continue to exploit and manipulate Clearwire if they end up with 67% of the stock (I don't), then you also need to consider Crest Financial's statement that when sprint DOES end up with 67% of the stock, that they intend to hold the resulting board of directors "regularly accountable" for their fiduciary duty to ALL shareholders with every decision they make.
I, personally, doubt it will come to that given that everything that happens to clearwire after next tuesday will also impact the 67% of clearwire's stock that sprint owns. Just ask Moody's, Fitch, and Standard and Poors about that.
You poor slob!! you can't let yourself admit to this board that you have been wrong at every turn. You should be ashamed of yourself with your blind ramblings of always looking at things in a mire of illusion. These poor sheep actually believe you and you have guided all of them to financial ruin. You have not one dime invested in this tub, just another paid stooge on a message board. GET A LIFE and leave these sheep alone!!!
Sentiment: Strong Sell
Its 'this way or that'.
If Son/SB-Sprint do not get the vote, they still increase controlling intrest of Clearwire to 67% and the company falls increasingly into their grasp. If that happens, then Clearwire's warnings that the company faces liquidity problems that can result in need for additional capital at high interest rates and terms similar to or worse than current evolving debt with options can occur.
I don't see how that is a conflicting set of statements as it is a fairly correct laying out of the options given the degree of controlling interest Sprint-SB currently hold and are in line to obtain shortly. The result of not obtaining the votes could simplified to, "either we get the votes and common stock shareholders get $2.97, or we go deeper into debt obligations that will likely result in lower value being placed on the common due to further dilution." That is pretty clearly the situation.
The recourse remains that this is, as claimed, manipulate to squeeze out shareholders who might otherwise see the value of the stock rise as LTE gets deployed and usage ramps starting late this year. Further claims might be made about the valuation of the spectrum and also about value of the common versus other classes of stock. However, these and other claims remain likely to be resolved ex post facto in 2014 while not interfering with M&A of Sprint & Clearwire by Softbank.
DISH/Ergen remains a possibility - despite efforts to reduce the barriers to their bid, including lining up of some of the funds needed, it remains likely that Sprint BOD will reject DISH's bid as inferior to that of Softbank due to its greater debt leverage, delays, and lack of 'secret sauce' small cell network and device technologies and market inputus.
Sprint-Clearwire are effectively saying: Suckers, er, common stock investors, you are being squeezed out. It sucks but is this so unusual? No. Common shareholders serve a purpose and are expendable.
You could be right, TR. There's no guarantee that sprint owning 67% is going to prevent them from trying to lay a boot on the company's head just like Donald Trump did to Trump Entertainment over a decade ago. It happens... it's been happening for 3 years as Sprint has been working so hard to trash this company and steal it's assets.
Me?... I go with "motives". Sprint has had a motive for 3 years to get a great buyout offer from the likes of a softbank or dish... an offer that's enhanced all the more by the company's ability to present to the aquirer clearwire's bloody head on a platter for mere pennies on the dollar.
That was then... and May 22nd is May 22nd... which will be sealed by sprints final purchase by dish or softbank.
What's indisputable once the mergers are done, is that Sprint's motives are dramatically changed. They've been screwing around with Clearwire for a long time while they stumble around with what they want to do with Network Vision and falling further and further behind Verizon and AT&T. Sprint/Softbank/Dish knows that they've got to turn their guns on COMPETING now, and keeping the "consolidated" financial statements (including 67% of clearwire) looking good to investors and ratings agencies alike.
To succeed, they need a healthy clearwire more than they've needed it for years.
So yeah, you may be right about "deeper debt obligations" and "manipulation"...
... but you're swimming upstream against a swift current with that one given the dramatic change in sprint's "motives" that are likely in the months ahead.
TR, in all honesty I think that was one of your better posts, but there are still so many possible outcomes that you so casually dismiss the same way you dismissed the notion Sprint would make a buyout offer in the first place. Admittedly it wasn't the buyout offer some were hyping. Everytime I try to think what is the most likely way this will go I hit endless forks in the road even with your line of thinking. Where will the share price be in 4 months as TD-LTE makes the headlines and SB is accountable for the debt and negative earnings?
So I've come up with a fun approach. What if you are wrong about everything? Sprint won't sweeten the offer as you originally thought and the vote will fail. DISH will win the bid for Sprint, allow Clearwire to remain independent and sell spectrum to obtain FCC approval. Charie will making a killing off his 50% ownership of Clearwire when the shares go to $14 and he won't have to pay a dime or take on any debt other than buying out Sprint.
We get it you don't want us to buy, or hold our stock. Whatever long winded way you take you always wind up at the same conclusion.... and you have nothing better to do all day than spin your drivel, you write thousands of words and spend hours, for no other motive. You are a weasel and a liar. You have never predicted anything correctly.
You Sir are selling cynicism and it's the simplest way to generate despair. THAT is pathetic and beneath most, certainly smacks of the same desperation coming from Clearwire during this voting period.
You only need to listen to Ergen's Q1 CC to know only the Clearwire management is desperate, as immense value is in Clearwire (almost all of the synergies for both SoftBank and DISH are with Clearwire). Use each of their synergy expectations and you can come up with your own value for Clearwire...it is way above the $3.30 per share by a factor of 3X. Start listening to the CC at 1:13 (near the end) and how Ergen answers the question from the Financial Times reporter...the value is made very clear and it doesn't lay with Sprint except indirectly.
Teamrep's point is a valid rebuttal to your valid point, dps.
Ergan's hints about value are there, but measured, since Ergan himself doesn't want to overpay for clearwire in the event that he prevails over Softbank and buys sprint.
He still needs to point up the fact that Dish can leverage Clearwire's assets much better than Softbank can in order to prevail over softbank in his quest for sprint, however, and he can't do that without admitting to clearwire's true value to some extent.
Nobody's parsing their words in this matter more than Ergan these days.
That is hardly what many have interpreted Ergen's comments to be. Ergen is the guy looking in from the outside... the one who must prove his offer is superior to Softbank's, not the other way around. Besides that, do you listen to the barkers outside the tent at the circus side-shows who claim to have the two-headed bearded lady on display? CEO's presenting their case in conference calls, symposium, Wall Street analyst presentations are there to make their case, not the other guy's. Of course it sounds like he has the upper hand.. what do you expect the man to say.."our offer has not been looked at by the full board yet and we think we are far over-stretched financially and lack network, small cell and device capabilities of SB"?
Ergen makes a good case for being a US operation, having some complimentary spectrum, and being in position to market a combined product-service mix. However, it still falls short in ability to provide what Sprint needs more of at this time. Its an inferior offer imo. I see little chance of Ergen overcoming Softbank. The recent move to secure $2.5 billion financing has maybe backfired: it fulfills only a part of the funding while it stirred up ire of bond holders who discounted current debt. That confirms to the financial industry that DISH would be stretched too thin. There is more to this I won't go into here... SB-S can pursue more desired 600MHz and AWS spectrum that better balances the portfolio among other things.