That comment comes on the heels of Sprint's purchase of Craig McCaw's stake in Clearwire to boost it's position above 50%.
That comment comes on the heels of Sprint CEO Dan Hesse's comment that he'll buy more clearwire stock from major shareholders for the "right price".
That comment comes on the heels of Softbank's bid for sprint (eg: NOT T-Mobile or somebody else)... and, of course, Softbank's data platform in Japan is the SAME as clearswire's TD-LTE at 2.5ghz.
That comment comes after Clearwire's Cochran was asked why there's no urgency to re-finance clearwire's debt at a substantial discount in a vastly improved debt market for clearwire... eg: why re-finance when there's something bigger on the horizon that would make such a re-financing un-necessary or premature.
As I've said, McCaw was HAPPY to sell his shares to sprint to placate softbank's financier's concern that sprint own "most" of clearwire... as long as he got a "make-whole" arrangement to ensure he does well in what LOGICALLY COMES NEXT.
Craig McCaw and I are positioned for the impending buyout of clearwire by softbank/sprint... are you?
What Sprint needs is more sub 2.3GHz spectrum. Do your reading: Sprint is Clearwire's 90%+ customer and Clearwire has always been eager to sell more access to them. That is the purpose for which Clearwire was set up as a combined spin-off of Sprint and old Clearwire spectrum and network subscriber momentum.
You should not have to say this: Clearwire is begging for Sprint to use more of their jointly held through ownership and corporate structure and usage spectrum.
What Sprint has needed is a profitable, growing business that can use more of Clearwire's spectrum. A Sprint made up of debt ridden, end-of-life networks that is starved for more Mobile spectrum to meet growing competitive threats is bad for Clearwire. Therefore, you idiots who think Sprint only should need Clearwire as if it were an operator of fully Mobile spectrum make only distorted, one-sided sense.
A healthy Sprint-Softbank that has a complimentary mix of spectrum makes the most sense for Clearwire shareholders. That is what will drive revenues and demand so that more of Clearwire's spectrum will get used.
Clearwire is an overlay, extension band wholesale utility operator that can best sell what it has to those who have the money to buy it.
Sprint's spectrum priorities are to get more sub 2.3GHz, particularly the AWS-4 and probably participation in TV digital dividend spectrum auctions in a 12-24 months. Sprint has access to Clearwire's network... all they want. Clearwire's hope is that they they come to need a lot more.
Spok, I was just wondering ( not meant to be bashed) that can government/FCC take take back clearwire spectrum if they are not using it? I guess what I was wondering is that what is the point of view from government? I remembered that when Obama and Romney second's debate, they were debating about Obama's ( government) administration took back Public land from Oil's company because they are not drilling it even though they have licences. ( I read several threads that you wrote views on current administration) Clearwire has also large amount of spectrum and they are not utilization it. I guess what I want to know is that can FCC intervene/ demand/ took back clear wire spectrum if they are not using it?
Did you note the arrogantly bullish attitude of the entire management team...Obviously Stanton told them something, and obviously McCaw knows it.
My dilemma is:
On a buyout you will get a max of 3X. This is clearly a 10X in two years.
Sentiment: Strong Buy