Here's a question for you all:
When Softbank's Masayoshi Son says he will pay $20 billion dollars for 70% of Sprint, what do you think that he has in MIND for Sprint?
Does he want to rape and pillage Sprint for the sole purpose of enriching the mother company, Softbank? Or, does he want to build and empower Sprint to extend Softbank's clout into the U.S. so that he can offer an international, borderless answer to Verizon & AT&T. Personally, I think he want's Sprint to succeed.
So, now Mr. Son is saying that he would be content to own 66 or 67% of Clearwire, and that begs a question: Does Mr. Son want to keep pounding all over clearwire like Dan Hesse did with threats of going a different direction with LTE, or partnering with Lightsquared... or does he want to launch a powerful TD-LTE solution on Clearwire to offer metro data users 150 megabit data speeds that bury the competition, with a strong and solvent Clearwire?
As I've said, once Sprint is bought out, the need to "flog" clearwire ends because Hesse no longer has a need to offer someone like Son a cheap clearwire to secure his own, top-dollar buyout offer. Now, the attention turns to Mr. Son owning 66% of a strong clearwire, and 70% of a strong Sprint... to kick some wireless Buwtt.
I, for one, want to be around for the launch of that, with my clearwire stock that I retain as a result of next tuesday's "no" vote. There's something to be read into the fact that Mr. Son only wanted 70% of Sprint...
... and that may well be that he's fine leveraging his enterprises with other people's capital, as long as he has the control he needs to accomplish his big dreams. I'm OK with that, and I think that's how this is going to go down.
I get the part about Son not having any real interest in pounding on Clearwire.,, and if it looks like the line of least resistance to accomplish overall aims is to leave CW as a majority owned subsidiary, so be it. I don't get this conceptualization of the past of Clearwire as Heese having beaten them up.. and that LightSquared was any more than being used as a big excuse.. that is a lie and you know it..come on, do the math.
Clearwire largely dug their own grave hole of debt by spending far too much for too little direct retail return. Sprint's part of the bargain resulted in all but 1.2 million of overall subscribers.. short by only 40-50% of initial goals versus Clearwire being short by about 90%. What spreadhseet are you using, the one on Bizarro World where up ids down?
TR, you can't be serious about thinking that Sprint not hammering clearwire the past couple of years. What do you think that joke of a press meeting in Oct. 2011 was all about?
With lightsquared eons away from getting use of their spectrum while getting hammered for it's CEO's financial indiscretions, all they ever WERE was a convenient way to cast doubt in Clearwire shareholders minds about the future of their wholesale arrangement.
Do you REALLY think there wasn't a reason for waiting until zero hour to strike a funding deal on that Dec. 1st deadline for Clearwire's debt payment?
A lot of people on this board were here for every swat of the whip that Sprint layed on Clearwire's backside over the past few years, TR, so... who was the guy using the Teamrep moniker all that time... somebody else?
Your suggestion that Sprint WASN'T manipulating clearwire with it's past, de-facto control over it's revenue stream was the first such account that I've seen anywhere...
... and hopefully the last such nonsense that gets pasted out here.
Yes, WiMax was the wrong protocol and yes, it was a major shift for both companies to change course... but getting the stock price of something as valuable as clearwire down to less than a buck required a whole lot more than that... and you know it... and Hesse provided it. End of topic.
I believe the somewhat odd 70% ownership with a combination of cash and stock is intended to sidestep what the law considers and actual change of ownership, since the shareholders will retain a significant interest in the "New Sprint". Why do this, well some research into the Revlon rules/duties and what constitutes "Revlon-land" will likely answer that for you. My layman's research showed this:
In Revlon, Inc. v. MacAndrews &
Forbes Holdings, Inc.,8 the Delaware Supreme Court explained that when a target board of directors enters Revlon-land, the board’s role changes from that of “defenders of the corporate bastion to auctioneers charged with getting the best price for the stockholders at a sale of the company.”
They may well have a problem at Clearwire with this, as the deal is currently an all cash deal.
Not sure about the SB's 70% sprint deal. Maybe foreign ownership rules prevented a 100% purchase. Now as far as Clwr. I believe S & SB want 100% ownership for control of the spectrum and I also believe Stanton Hesse and Son agree on that. All the news suggests a failed bid at 2.97. Will Son send a signal soon? We'll know soon enough.
Hard to say i have already gotten 3 white proxy and a Gold so seems to me someone is not happy .
But i do know I made sure I voted both by mail with signed joint accounts with signatures and also by internet and all four times was the same AGAINST