Which gets me to my final rant, and sorry for the extremely long post. If I hear one more "analyst" lump MCLD in with the Winstars, and 360s, and North Points of the world, I am going to puke. If you are an interested investor, download Patrick's Powerpoint slides of the GS presentation from last week, and look at the slide on "sources and uses of cash, 2001 and 2002."
THIS COMPANY IS FULLY FUNDED TO POSITIVE FREE CASH FLOW BY THE END OF 2002--WITH A QUARTER BILLION DOLLARS OF CASH TO SPARE. How dense can these guys be? MCLD is already EBITDA positive, next year their EBITDA will become greater than the total debt service load of the company (and thus, the company becomes cash flow sufficient), and in 2003 the company becomes accounting bottomline profitable.
So the summary--this is a company RIGHT NOW that is a $2B annual revenue firm, with a 40% earnings growth rate, that you can buy for 4 bucks a share. It sells for less than book value, the company is fully funded, it has superb management, and is the de-facto industry leader in an environment where Congress has just about given CLECs the golden stamp of approval (and are ready to gut the RBOCs in return) thanks to the imminent death of Tauzin-Dingell.
And when the poorly managed, poorly financed, poorly motivated CLECs fail, who will be there to pick up the market share and equipment base on the cheap? MCLD.
You have my analysis; you have this guy's analysis. Do your own due diligence and decide which you think is more accurate.
And always be careful when you get an "investment report" from a firm that also makes a market in the same company's stock, as this Dain brokerage does.
I tend to agree with your comments. I am a former AT&T analyst who has worked on Wall Street for the last three years. These analysts have little or no working experience in telecom and are corrupted by a system that reward over valuing companies in good times and undervaluing them in bad times. Basically the analysts are trailing indicators.