Sprint & the Cable Cos have conspired to lock out the SAT providers and keep the CLEARWIRE Super Highway from openning.
Sprint MUST BE REMOVED from the CLWR spectrum holdings.
Sprint does not have the American Public's interests at heart and has shown that they cannot be trusted with this valuable Public Asset - Spectrum.
Sprint's talk of being "green" and having consumer's interests at heart are all bull excrement!
The 2.6 GHz Band, Band 41 potential will not re realized under Sprint's stewardship.
A NO VOTE by FCC and an investigation by DOJ of Sprint's attempt to DEFRAUD CLWR Minority share holders is in OUR COUNTRY'S BEST interest.
Sell the 2.6 GHz Band to the OS guys (GOOG, AAPL, MSFT) and let them develope the Open Network our nation needs.
You had your chance Sprint and you have shown yourself to lack leadership and to be unworthy of controlling this vast swath of spectrum.
Time to bring this to a vote, a NO VOTE it will be.
BK is best option for CLWR minority holders.
Sell the spectrum and come closer to realizing true value!
NEVER allow Sprint to STEAL for $2.97.
Without CLWR, Sprint has NO NETWORK VISION and will follow CLWR in BK Court.
Let justice be served!
$8+ NO LESS or into BK Court! That's MY VOTE!
Apple or Google could SO EASILY step-in and SMACK Sprint and solve this problem.
My take.... Google saw what was going on, vomited, and got out last year only to return this year to shove a tower up Sprints #$%$e.... we can only hope!
What would Hope and Saw and others say about CLWR potential, CLWR plans and how they were thwarted EVERY step of the way by Sprint. How THEY wanted to do the right thing by sahreholders but Sprint was set on stealing the shares!!
Ques: Won't the TD-LTE phones that SB is using in Japan work on CLWR network right NOW?
SAW: Yes - but you'll have to ask Sprint. Yes, we support VoLTE, always have but you'll have to ask Sprint.
Yes we will have 2000 TD-LTE Towers on line (already have them) and 5000 by years end but Sprint won't let us turn them on.
Yes we have shown 60Mbps download speeds in Phoenix using only 20 MHz of the 160 MHz we own in the top 100 markets but Sprint doesn't want that to get out. Yes we own 15000 towers that could host DISH spectrum and with VoLTE we could exist nicely without Sprint.
Yes we have and will meet our target of achiving the 5000 site TD-LTE build for the $600 million we stated and could (will) do are very good business hosting EVERY handset in Band 41. Sprint is trying to keep us off the market long enough to close this deal and steal minority shares and the spectrum that goes along with them.
TD-LTE provides a 2X coverage improvement but I'm not suppose to say that!
Yes we wanted to refi at lower rates but Sprint said NO only if you use US with our preferred redemption rights. We said we can do better and Sprint said TOO bad - who do you bow to? Us or the other shareholders? Fiduciary duty??? Oh come on - bend over folks.
'Can't wait for the depositions' .. are you feeble? What depositions? The only lawsuit is Crests which will not reach the trial stage until after the acquisition of Sprint by SB and of Clearwire by Sprint-SB are nails hammered into the coffin. The 'depositions' will be weighed in the court battle it that does not get settled before then b Sprint stepping up, in a decisively belated timing, to offer Crest a few dimes more to get the puck out of dodge. Crest will take it. That's because despite the apparent screw ups, Crest and other investors bought shares with enough legal disclosure of the facts to not have a case base on malpractice or fraud as some suggest. Fraud comes when idiots are not warned of the frailties which is not the case. Whether the set-up was screwy is what it is... it was the arrangement of the structure that had been disclosed. Whether there were decisions made behind the scenes to defraud investors is a fallible argument.. Sprint and Clearwire can simply argue, "...no fraud was undertaken, we were just being normal human idiots with normal idiotic decisions made along the way. Sue us for being human?" Whether Clearwire was Clearlywired with shackles that prevented full effectiveness as a 'new technology' leader might be a nice debate for this and other forums, but it will be unlikely to have any merit in court.
You are bellyaching too late. By the time Crest's left-field lawsuit hits the courts it will have been history and most people will have their thoughts elsewhere.
You and many others, including Forbes Joan Lappin are delusional: Clearwire has not been in a position to grow out of the corner to become a profitable business using their current business model. The time to have asked questions, such as why hasn't Clearwire developed and sold their own mobile phones or lead the industry into small cell rather than waiting to be clobbered by its as part of the powerful 4G evolution use by competitors?
Largely what the Clearwire BOD and management can say is simply this: :"We are screwed!"
Its been too late since before the current management team took over with the possible revisionionary viewpoint that if gut-wrenching changes had been imposed from day one when Stanton and Erik took over, just maybe the current situation could have been avoided. Its easier to look back and say what should have been done. The issues needed to be addressed starting when New Clearwire was formed: the way the network was deployed and marketed should never been allowed to result in the once $400+ acquisition cost per subscriber. That was a death knell show stopper. Why didn't Joan and others ask questions about the strategies earlier? Mostly because Joan is a noob... she does not understand the business, the regulatory environment, or how New Clearwire was set up with entanglements that now seem to come as a surprise.
You and others say "Clearwire should cast off Sprint and sell spectrum and everything will be just dandy!" are naive children who have failed to do their homework.