There is a special section in the Museum of Preposterous Financial Disclosures devoted to charts that purport to clarify financial performance but leave the numbers off. A prize example came at Sprint Nextel’s presentation on Friday of its plans to upgrade its network.
Sprint’s share price, which was already down nearly 30 per cent this year, fell a further fifth after the presentation. This seems a perfectly reasonable reaction – given how little anyone knows.
The above is the beginning and the end of the article as FT discourages cutting and pasting their contents.
Read the entire article here:
The financial world is lining up to say Sprint is not "investable."
This is the real problem when the company will need more money.
This is an unbelievable development.
I'm still coming to grip with what happened on Friday.
The whole world has gone crazy.
Everyday something unbelievable happens.
No, that is not correct, they did not explain it in the moderate voice you just used and they were extremely intolerant of other opinions.
Reasonable people should be able to disagree without insults but neither Sprint management or the analyst were able to manage this.
>>Look again at the list. Several items are trends of numbers or qualities that create further positive trends of numbers.
The request stands that you quantify these "numbers."
Maybe you yourself might see that they don't add up.
Of your entire list, this is the only number:
* Sprint has $4B in cash with no major concentration of debt maturities, ie, financial flexibility.
In five months Sprint has to pay $2.3 billion in debt maturities.
That leaves what?
Maybe now you can understand why Sprint is not plugging in the iPhone impact.
yes but i learned a lot about sprint's management team from that episode and it made me very uncomfortable..with the exception of hesse they all sounded shady including the comment of how they add 10 bucks to iphone plans and that they have ways to make money...
>>I have always found that correctly quantifying risk in an uncertain
investment yields the greatest profit. The safer the investment,
that is, the more it's quantified, the less the return.
Well, please, go ahead, quantify.
That's the whole point of this thread, there are no numbers.
It's an oxymoron to keep talking about calculation and quantity with no numbers.
>>Calculated risk is certainly present and anyone who can't handle it should invest
in a safe dividend payer, such as Microsoft, etc.
The original thread is about lack of calculations.
And due to the complete lack thereof analysts are saying Sprint is not investable.
That it's not a safe investment as you say above we can all agree on that.
Don't know what you're arguing about.