The information about a post 2012 deal between CLWR and Sprint, so far, is saying that Sprint will commit to using LTE on Clearwire's network beginning in 2013... but that sprint doesn't plan to infuse capital into CLWR.
By my reasoning, what company would commit to using something that still requires $600 million to build...
... without having a very strong indication that the funding for it will be there?
The inference is... that sprint KNOWS how it will be funded... and for me, a pretty good assurance that it WILL be.
I want to see Hesse come out and say by working a long term deal with Clearwire, he is saving "Sprint" money. In fact it seems a most board members are forgetting the fact that Hesse still wants to spend billion of dollars on Sprint's LTE buildout.
Again, I ask the question that everyone keeps asking. Why does Sprint want to spend 5 to 10 billion dollars (which is doens't have) to have its own limited 4G network, when for 600 million to one billion it can have it LTE network with Clearwire, which it just happens to own 54% of.
Yea a deal with Clearwire for 3 to 5 years is great, but come on. Sprint should be saying we want a permanent relationship with Clearwire, invest a 200, 300 hundred million to start Clwr TD-LTE and then watch Clearwire and Sprint stock soar higher.
As far as I'm concerned all Dan Hesse wants to do is spend, spend, spend, on things he really doesn't have to pay for.
while Hesse is playing for a tie, trying to look pathetic and gain concessions. Metro is positioning for both concessions and a win if they don't happen.
I would no want Hesse as the quarter back for my team, down by 3 with 2 minutes to go in the 4th qtr...
Why do you play the game! You play the game to win!
I already posted this earlier... but there was a lot of peer pressure placed on Dan Hesse at this circle jerk dinner meeting on 10/10/11. Hesse, McCaw and Stanton were there.
The deal Sprint spoke about on EC was for excess capacity (what Sprint couldn't handle) would hand off to CLWR.
If you look at it that way, it answers your questions. Very similar to the LS2 deal, it is only upside for Sprint. If CLWR can't deliver, Sprint is no worse off for having signed the agmt.
... that MetroPCS is interested in CLWR... high density POPs metro coverage.
If the other carrier's cells are overloaded and it's expensive for them to ratchet down their radius's in those areas, Clearwire helps them handle the volume.
Clearwire has many, overall advantages... like their 2010-vintage infrastructure and all that spectrum. Another, however, is their closely-packed cells that are overwhelmingly in populous metro areas.
Their original reason was 2.5ghz propagation requirements but now that it's built so densely, it also has far more cells per POP and can handle the volume requirements via 3, tough to replicate methods: 1) tighter cell radius, 2) Higher frequency and 3) More spectrum.
I agree and there is not much left to lose in making that assumption.
Clearwire has made a double volume at a level that has established a very high trading volume of support. Recent moves have confirmed the assumptions that Clearwire would not go bankrupt.. either Sprint would step in with the relatively low about of capital needed, or, because Clearwire now has broader objectives, S would go along with their intent to seek partners and funding for an expanding role regardless of Sprint's plans. That places the onus on Clearwire to finally nail down more funding or outside partners. Sprint's recent gambit was to create somewhat of a panic that they would withdraw support from Clearwire to the extent that they would not be able to get the outside funding or would look viable for partnering and thus would concede to whatever was needed to sustain the relationship. However, the way to look at this situation is from a cost-benefit perspective of other operators. The situation under TD-LTE shapes up much differently: from refusing the argument about lower cost-bit compared to 3G because they have not seen that as mainstream, to being OK with use of wholesale capacity from Clearwire because that has a low bit cost that is enabled to be used on their existing networks as well at a low cost and development threshold.
What caused the knee-jerk move back by Sprint? As no surprise, metroPCS chimed in that they see use of Clearwire's network as being an ideal fit. When any company executive says something like that you must ask, 'Is he blowing smoke or is that a true statement?". By now most here should not have to ask. If you don't know exactly why that makes sense and would, with the degree and particulars being somewhat different, with other operators, then dig into it because I'm tied of regurgitating it. If you don't think so. you should not buy this stock.. buy a mutual fund or bond.
Clearwire should be able to lock down deals and funding because the analysis of the business going forward should add up for partners and for outside financial sources. However, I won't put that as 'Clearwire rocks and will have financing next week, count on it'.. because until they follow through its all just more major b.s. If you want me to give an opinion, I say they are at least 80% certain to get the funding from somewhere.
At this point, the stock chart says a lot: This stock is peanuts as far as a speculation. Do not mortgage the house or sell your first born, but if you have money to make a fair gambling bet, put some on CLWR.
Strong speculative buy imo... strong long term buy as well. If you lose it all, do not blame anyone but yourself.. although I don't think that liekly.
Clearwire's situation is more exposed and while awareness of it is still sinking in with some investors, the chart looks the same as prior to the quarterly results and conference call.
Still rates a speculative buy and long term buy for NASDAQ casino players.
"although I don't think that likely"
I agree, but what is likely is that most amateur traders/investors here seem to only worry about PPS up or down. They will be shaken out b4 the spectrum is monetized.
That is why I am on the sidelines until I see a path to spectrum monetization. BR would be one path, but there are lots that will happen prior to that (debt renegotiations) By waiting I may miss the move, but it also stopped me from buying at $7, $4, etc.
Sprint has committed to their network, and the mkts doubt they can afford that. Many here are mad that S didn't commit to CLWRs network, when S can hardly afford to invest in their own network. It just doesn't make any sense. I question how many wholesale customers CLWR needs to make its business plan sustainable, and if it is even viable, especially if ATT/VZ who control the mkt and aren't willing to play. Why would they? GLTA.
Jeesh, I admit to abomination of the English language at times. I am, unfortunately a bit dyslexic, and use that as an excuse for lazy writing/not reading what I scribble. Hopefully it has some value in this minor discourse. I will limit my posts... and readings on this board to who I think contributes.
Look for vendors to provide needed funding for TD-LTE buildout. Any vendor investing millions in the future( Clearwire's) would want an agreement in place like Sprint is now proposing to Clearwire. Hope Cochran CFO has eluded to this type of an arrangement more than once. Once everybody involved is comfortable with their position, this will all come together very quickly in a series of announcements. IMO.
THNK bj. I agree that this deal will open the doors for more partners.
I'm still concerned about the capital contributor part. Do you think ld-lte spectrum partner will put up the 600 mill for spectrum use? Or will this long term deal w/S let them borrow the 600mil themselves?
Another good post.
The relationship has evolved to better fit what the market as well as each of these companies want: ease of access to 'overdrive' capacity using what will become the most common BB network for that purpose. Clearwire has gotten lean and focused on TD-LTE which, combined with being an 'agnostic' wholesaler, makes a good fit with about all mobile or hybrid cable/satellite + terrestrial operators. Sprint, meanwhile, does not fit the role of a wholesale 'utility' because they compete more directly and have existing relationships that can come into conflict in putting together new partnerships. That's not to say that Sprint won't pursue partnerships where they find a good match of capabilities and objectives. A good fit might be with cablecos because S can bring their mobile marketshare development strength that combines well with the fiber-cable plant and content strengths of the cable industry.
We are approaching a window during which putting together new partnerships looks increasingly likely. metroPCS, DISH, cable companies, and other mobile operators are possibilities. The window is gated more around the devices than the network equipment imo because that can be upgraded to improve compatibility and other refinements. Devices must be crafted to some extent based on operators precise spectrum and market requirements, tested and qualified with regulatory authorities, and enter a production pipeline to end up available for volume sales. My guess for most likely new partner is metroPCS due to their modus operandi and market needs. And guess for that happening are within the next three months.
The time between decisions and roll out of TD-LTE can be made in short order compared to Sprint-Clearwire decisions to deploy WiMAX or Verizon and AT&T's decisions to deploy 3G-LTE (the first, pre- IMT-Advanced LTE version).
Ericsson is very unlike to furnish direct financing. That is not their way or position in the industry to pick sides. Their 'agnostic position' is as an equal opportunity enabler for networks. Do you think before you post junk?