Tower companies are the smart way to play wireless, ludwig von dopehead.
They have real assets, and are ESSENTIAL to the network coverages of wireless carriers.
We'll see who is right in the end. A company with 4 billion in debt, and already making 1.2 billion in yearly revenue and EBITDA positive, is a lot stronger than most think. Especially when the growth rate is 40%, and margins of about 55-60%.
SITE has 3.5 billion in debt and only makes 440 million in revenue. I would be more concerned with SITE than AMT at this point.
Hello I run a very large movie theatre and we see many people each week. I can tell you, cell phones and other wireless devices are being embraced by more and more people of every age. It is pretty clear that they have become a necessity to many people....just like their car. I'd say 60% of our customers have a cell phone with them and that just grows every day. I think anyone that downplays the opportunity with the tower companies just doesn't understand what is going on. This is going to be like a utility on steroids...huge cashflows but no real authority like a public service commission limiting return on investment. There basically won't be much capital expenditure at some point and at these prices management will either be able to buy back huge quantities of stock or pay dividends. Warren Buffett went after a fantastically well run little cable TV outfit in 99 but was outbid by Cox. I dare say that both AMT and SBAC definitely are interesting to value investors like him in the not too distant future. I find it a bit odd that both CCI and SBAC are trading higher ( Right at book), while AMT is down here a bit.....but the reason is AMT has a lot more acquired towers that aren't quite as mature. I'll be quite surprised if AMT isn't back up in the low double digits by sometime in the third quarter. This should be a great longterm play...certainly $50 to $80 in the next 3-5 years.