John Malone of Liberty Media may yet be interested in Broadband satellites. He's probably waiting to see whether or not the DOJ is going to give Charlie a monopoly in DBS and thus a possible boost for Tuna's broadband satellite . The DOJ would be crazy to trust any of the Tuna's promises. Only competition will make Ergen toe the line. Maybe.
However if they block one of the few ways that rural fast internet can be attained and won't give some favorable treatment to achieve it, then they appear to be impeding what they espouse to wish to attain. Personally, I wouldn't be a bit surprised how slow rural subscriber Satnet expands if the merger isn't negotiated.
Efficiency in capital application may be old, but net present value calculations on application of capital are still the norm. Hughes and Raytheon were still demanding them on the last day I worked there. Every proposal for a project of any signicant size was to addressed to the Corporate Treasurer on this issue.
I don't understand what twelve year old ash heap you are looking at. Are you somehow interpreting the demise of totalitarian socialism as the end of a period of state run capital allocation? If so it isn't the same thing that I'm addressing.
I'm not desparate. I'm just speaking the case for the negotiated settlement merger.....and suggesting that their are deal-breakers. I may look at what happens if this doesn't go together from time to time, and guess at the losses to the public/potential subscriber/stakeholder. Does that make me desparate? I would say that those that are not willing to consider the downside appear more dangerous to the public than those that will.
I can sell out of my GMH anytime I feel that there is no worthwhile reward/risk potential. Just as you can sell your Gemstar and break your allegiance to El Rupo. Truthfully if the merge discount were only five percent I wouldn't be in until after the announcement.
This time around my average cost is about 10 1/4. Desperate? Come on. You're the one that is trying to make me sound twelve years out of step and a Marxist chanter.
It isn't that difficult for me to understand that each of the recognized cable companies have made a decision on how far they will run their cables, based on whether the income stream/profit/cash flow/reputational gain make it worth while. In most cases it only boils down to what present value profit amount can be generated with what present value amount of capital investment. Whether you believe that to be Marxist (whereever you got that from) or capitalistic isn't relevant. But the capital usage efficiency may dictate the cable only "creeps" forth from where it ends now.
I have DSL and have been told by Pacific Bell technicians that there are some flaws in the phone delivery structure (the copper wire to my computer) that are somwhat unique to my service area. When asked when they will get it straightened out, they in effect said that if I cannot live with the problems I had better find an alternate way for internet connectivity....it would cost too much to "rewire", considering the decrease in trouble calls and potential new subscribers. Thatsure sounds like someone made a capital decision. For my DSL purposes I'm not happy with the answer and it's not good public relations, but it's a real consideration.
Now there are plenty of people that are willing to tell both Echostar and Hughes what they should do, individually, to expand one sort of service or another. And they can "demand" that it be done. But that doesn't mean that it makes sense from a capital efficiency point of view. It is not Congress', Justice's, State's Attornies General or the FCC's right to tell Echostar to invest more in the Gilat thing to enhance/expand/promote SatNet capability and forget about the efficiencies of a NewCo system. They can suggest to the public that this is a consideration, but generally they cannot direct capital allocation.
Smokey; are you a lawyer? if so do you know more than 12 state AG's who are opposing this merger.
It is simple; monopoly means one company dominating a market.
I corresponded with Nixon staff, and suggested to them that local coverage can be provided without the merger; just let DISH/GMH use the spectrum requested by Northpoint to provide full coverage, No need for super-satellites.
GM BOD may have made a judjment call back then. The market and politics are different. Your friend Taunzin has been grilled on Enron payoff, and unless GM/DISH buy him for $million. He did job and supported the merger as far as the market and politics go.
We are all here with a purpose! Ours is to defeat the merger and protect consumers.
My position still is that there will be a negotiated acceptance, and a "National price, Local-for-all, Pert-chart-commitment for Spaceway-to rural" will be the hinge-pins. I think this is the position of almost all "yesters" here. I even thinks that the Bumster agrees, if Echostar would return an unused frequency/slot (he is not an investor, he is a Murdoch supporter). I don't think it will go that far - in fact the demand would be a deal-killer. Then the vote. Someone has to get to FAX/OPS with a better deal on the ownership ratio.
Does the N in Nixon stand for naive? Does the R in Nixon stand for realistic? Slam-dunk denial advocacies have been on the plate for months. But none have been "swallowed".
Maybe they are most tempting to the cook, not the diner.
It IS in the nuances and emeliorations. And Wink, wink is certainly a consideration.
JJ48849, do you really think that General Motors is so naive that they did not test this thing pretty well before they committed themeslves to it? We all know how little the poster and lurkers to this message board generally thinkthink of the effectivity and
dedication of the General Motors Board of Directors. But do you really think that no one demanded names and forms of commitment that would assure measured, nodding acceptance by the Regulatory Authorities and Administration? Do you think the Board thought that they didn't have to have assurances? No Wink, wink. No negotiable fall-back?
Misery Nixons ADVOCACY is nothing new. He doesn't really care who doesn't get "fast" internet beyond cables' end and he thinks that both DirectWay and Gilat Whatever will deliver because of competition. He is lost. He doesn't deserve re-elcetion or reappointment, based on his position on this issue. But he is getting name recognition. He is a lawyer that gets into the law as he can/will interpret it and overlooks the other consideration. Maybe Missouri wants him. But the rural "show-me" children will not flourish under his tutelage.
Somehow the contra-advocacy of miresy Nixon still reads about the same about six months later. Certainly he should realize that if his brief strikingly demonstreated a Governmental no-brainer decision, there should have been a straighforward denial announced by now. And has it occurred, JJ48849? Is it really a slam-dunker?
In the final analysis misery Nixon is demonstrating that, while he is very good at brief writing, time lapse is indicating that his words may not cover the truthful totality of the considerations and nuances. In truth he is (and always has been) an advocate. (Though he may have more impact than Al Sharpton or the NRTC) And he perhaps is somewhat naive in his assumptions that greater competition will be generated
among/between all the present pay and free providers. He overlooks efficiency amd cost of capital and Boards of Directors and wants to have you believe that competition will yield the greatest results. He possibly still doesn't understand why cable stops where it does. He possibly also still thinks that, whether or not Hughes and Echostar do actually merge, cable will extend beyond their present end places to give rural America competition to attain "fast" internet customers. And the countryside will be wirde like spaghetti on the dinner plate with numerous cable systems (even in competition with one-another of course). Sure! And he knows the technology (and can find the new capital) well enough to project the future. Again Sure!
Continuing in next post......
Trailer park rent of a couple hundred a month...please crapo. Take care little man and get prepared to work for Honda or Toyota when they buy GM out. Ford and GM will both be in big trouble after the free financing ends. They can't keep doing it and they have conditioned customers like you who have leased POS Cadillac's(i'd take my Lexus LX 470 anythime in a front end collision to your cadillac) to expect it. Sales will tank big time on both. Look for a Japansese bailout eventually. Ford will go first, Nasser buried that company.