% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Clearwire Corporation (CLWRD) Message Board

  • nycdlp nycdlp Feb 1, 2013 10:42 AM Flag

    On this mornings Faber report ...

    ... what NEW minority shareholder with 4+% shares was he talking about?

    Sentiment: Hold

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Read the 13e.. the issue of a 4% minority holder is only important in context.

      Sprint-SB (the report uses cute names for the various parties depending on which proposal is being discussed) needs about 50.1% of the outside shareholder votes to gain approval. The report shows results of Kellett's phone poll - ~39% of respondents said they opposed the S-SB deal. Other information tends to confirm that if a higher price were offered, S might get needed votes. Analysts estimates for price range target value is from $1.76 to $4.00. The low numbers are suspect as pre-offer values that have not yet reflected the deals. The company and their financial advisers have estimated various scenarios, including single and multiple partner cases. In the best, future value case, the stock price could be as high as over $15. However, that is a highly speculative scenario of DISH, SB-S and other participants making use of the network while CW were to remain independent/publicly traded.

      There is a glimmer of hope for the now seemingly far fetched scenario: The reports point out that Clearwire could become cash flow positive and relinquish the funding gap IF multiple partners somehow came together. Why is this analysis any different that what has been discussed over the past few years? It basically isn#$%$ just that now its spelled out in more concrete terms based on the funding gap brick wall reality the company faces.

      Multiple partners can spell success... for all partners. That is ultimately what might force the burying of the hatchets in order for Sprint-SB, DISH, Clearwire, and perhaps AT&T and others to come together with a multiple-partner use of the spectrum.

      Why that could work when it has not in the past? Because time is of the essence. The parties are pressed to sit down with the FCC, DOJ to decide how the spectrum licenses will be congregated: transferred as a whole to Sprint-SB or split out in some way to give the other parties a crack at making the business case for the spectrum viable? It has to go one way or the other.. the FCC has to make decisions that either open it up for participation or lock it into Sprint-SB... or they could help orchestrate a coming together of the minds of the partners under an FCC approved/orchestrated arrangement. The basics of this are now laid on the table: "Multiple partners = profitability down the road. Single operator scenario, (exclusive of outright acquisition in which the losses would fall into broader operations of the parent), equals $4 billion in additional funding gap through 2015+.

      That helps make the picture clearer for the FCC as these parties butt heads in their verbal and written assaults on each others positions.

    • Thats what anti-clubbing agreements are for and even a marginally competent BoD would have them in place (not sure where the Clearwire BoD falls however).

      That being the case, I don't think DISH can be the one buying so they can throw the vote for SB-S.

      • 1 Reply to fineinvestor
      • I agree I don't think Dish would be buying to throw the vote to S, (lawsuit) but I can see them buying to force S/SB to make a higher offer or to allow Dish to buy all or a portion of CLWR. They had mentioned wanted to buy 25% of CLWR if S didnot want to sell their shares. I also see what you are saying about VZ or T waiting to see what the FCC says about the deal.

        Sentiment: Strong Buy

    • That will be the question until they get to the 5% level. I missed the Faber report so I simply hope it was heard correctly.

    • I missed it, what did he say about the NEW minority shareholder. Thanks

      Sentiment: Strong Buy