Free cash flow is benefitting from the sale of a few billion of dollars of device accounts receivables.
Why FCF is a mixed bag: Achieving positive FCF is very important for the mobile industry because dollar sales are highly leveraged on debt and the bulk of payments for devices are (and have been historically) stretched out over 2-3 years. That results in operators having to spend billions of dollars upfront to build inventories and pay for devices delivered to customers who pay on leases or as installment purchases/loans. Softbank had aggressively done financial structuring of device revenues similar to what has been done more recently at Sprint: Sprint has sold its device receivables, at a discount, to a company set up and funded by Softbank. In return, Sprint gets immediate access to the cash - acceleration of the receivables. That is not new sales/money but it increases cash flow over the near-term. The increase in available funds can then be used to pay for operations, debts, and other needs.
Profit is a related figure: The increased cash flow may result in doing more businesses or reducing costs. That is why watching the results is so important - until then, how well the pulling in of cash has been put to use is just speculation.
Debt holders are, duh, concerned about the status of S's debt: FCF improvement helps assure they will be paid interest and debt repayment when it comes due.
The long-term picture, however, is not so simple or immediately simple: Think of it like a Boa constrictor snake that has swallowed a prey: It may have eaten smaller prey over a period of time but instead swallowed a pig. The meal will take a long time to digest. The snake is satiated from near-term needs but will have to go back on the hunt for new prey (funds) when the current meal is used up.
Softbank cannot be done with Sprint because they are stuck with it. Who says they are done with it? They are buying out its core assets of spectrum, networks, and device revenues. You shareholders are left owing $34 billion which continues to grow each quarter because Sprint continues to lose money. Discuss that, do not shunt it with more of your lies and deflection.
Softbank will retain the assets, leaving Sprint to handle the debt. If Sprint cannot come up with billions in profits, it will lose those assets and possibly default into bankruptcy. Softbank will come out owning those assets minus debts and shareholders. That is how it is arranged and is heading. Miracles sometimes happen.. but have failed to happen for several years. If they somehow do, it will take years over which you will be able to see the billions in profits coming in. You are holding your breath and asking others to place a plastic bag over their heads to join you. Good luck. If fresh air is being breathed into this beast, others will observe and buy based on that change rather than the pumpmobile hype spun by losers. .
Read the fine print: "After the 3GB, usage will be limited to 2G speeds. Third-party content/downloads are add’l charge. Int’l svcs are not included. Pricing may vary for existing customers. Quality of Service (QoS): Customers who use more than 23GB of data during a billing cycle will be de-prioritized during times and places where the Sprint network is constrained."
Amy Young is another cherry pick among financial analysts.. who has now been proven to have gotten the basic analysis wrong. Amy, WF and a few others figured that Softbank would pump up financing of Sprint to prevent a reconning of its financial fate.
Bombeligaza!!! Softbank decided NOT TO GO DOWN THAT ROAD of the hair-brained money for nothing (unfavorable ROI thesis).
Amy Wong and Wells Fargone need to do more work at understanding this industry or they will continue to be viewed as second rank (at best) analysts.
Something does not add up. Sprint cannot be port-positive against T-Mobile unless the numbers are cooked.
Legere "there must be some way Sprint is looking at their numbers.." then acknowledged that the major takeaway is gaining on Verizon and AT&T.
The fears of an uncontrolled bankruptcy have been eliminated. That applies to classes of investors who have senior positions to the common mud pucker idiots, er. common shareholders.
What fantasy are you shilling out? What major build-outs? Are you mentally brain-dead? Can't you read? Sprint has reduced capex spending fellow idiot.
Sprint came out with quarterly results at a point where the stock had soared up from lows around 2.10 to more than double on the expectation that the company would beat analysts estimates. Sprint did manage to beat deflated expectations.. by a marginal amount. It actually came in with a gain of 173K prime postpaid subscribers! Whoopdie doo dah day. The problem is that they lost prepaid subs and turned in another loss during a period of business development when they should be turning in net-net profits (no funny business profits) in the billions of dollars per year in order to repay past debts.
What I fail to understand is how what they drilled into my head in the MBA program can be made to explain how Sprint's business results make sense. Each business, I was taught, has it's business cycles during which it makes investments based on its vision of the future in order to reap 1+1 = something more than 2 gains. Sprint spent $34 billion in borrowed funds and should have been, over the past three years and now, been making billions plus in profits in order to pay back those loans plus the interest. Every lemonade stand in America (or the rest of the free enterprise world) must buy and build stuff that it sells for a profit in time to buy and make more stuff to sell for a profit. Sprint continues to sell stuff at a loss, forcing it to borrow more to pay back Tony Soprano for the 'bridge loans'.
When will Sprint gain the 10 million prepaid subscribers needed to make the business model work (pay for itself)? The answer, It isn't going to happen.
The problem is the network strategy has been bankrupt for the past 10++ years. 2.5+2.5 does not equal 10.
Sprint is up 40% for the past 12 months... It is up over 100% from the low near 2.10, at which point I said it was extremely oversold strong buy and to consider covering short positions. My long-term view on Sprint has basically not changed because S's performance has not fundamentally changed and its debt is being rolled out, not paid off by internally generated profits with the added kicker that assets are pledged to the new loan-lease agreements.
Looking at the 2 , 5 and 10-year chart comparisons with TMUS, T, and VZ is not something longs will want to do on a full stomach. On a 10 year chart, T-Mobile also came in as a loser. Verizon was the best long-term performer with AT&T also beating out the junkyard dogs Sprint and T-mobile. And that is without adding in the dividends.. with that considered, get out the #$%$ bag if you owned either of the dogs.
What a punk attitude. Sorry charlie, there are several ways to invest in the markets. The investments include stocks, bonds, futures options, other derivatives of stocks including funds, hedge funds, and sector and market stock indexes. Shorting shares is just as legit as buying it long, buying or selling an option and the other means of trading. The US government allowed the brokerage/investment industry to create all of these investment vehicles. There are rules on how they are established, traded and reported.
Each investor has the choice of how to invest. You can do so with a sense of ownership and allegiance to the companies. Or you can do so with cold calculation of the odds of investing. The market is computerized tally of trades in all the above. it does not give ratatosuies aresenio what investors think - it is solely up to the investor to make or lose money. You can decide not to like whoever you want.. that and the shisa you step on from the dog down the street is worth nothing to anyone.
Show a single post on any reputable financial site or news service that says that money Softbank received has been put into Sprint's accounts. You bozo liar... you cannot be this stupid of a punkarse.
That's right. T-M has been walking along the knife edge between debt leverage and developing profitable growth extremely well. That started years before it became widely recognized.. for a long time TMUS was considered in a worse position than Sprint because they were small, had a bit lower ARPU. However, a lot of that perception was because Sprint spun its position based on marketing gimmicks - naming each stage of network development as if it were a major revolution: "Network Vision" was what Sprint/Hesse called building of multiple-band/multiple-carrier networks that ALL major US operators had begun to pursue. If anything, Sprint lagged far behind competitors because they had not put together a spectrum and network roadmap years earlier that would migrate more easily to the much hyped N.V. All operators have a vision for how their networks are likely to evolve. That is needed in order to plan for and acquire spectrum and build synergistic networks. That ground work needs to start 5+ years in advance of the use by the end markets.
Four+ years ago T-Mobile was knitting together spectrum and building the earliest early 4G LTE network. Technically they beat Verizon's rollout by 3 months.. although VZ's was much larger. They shifted from HSPA to concentrate on LTE and now have among the most advanced networks.
Major differences include TM is largely self-funding and able to borrow on its own behalf. They have devices that are more common with international and domestic norms. New spectrum-networks are able to integrate easier with the existing.
Sprint is unprofitable and is selling off core assets to pay down debt. They pay twice as much interest on debt due to higher interest rates. S lacks low band spectrum and can't afford to participate in the 600MHz auction. Sprint's asset value is decreasing due to sustained losses and the sale of assets for blood money.
What I advised was to bias trades using momentum following stop-loss orders. I can't help it that some fellow idiots here do not know how to invest or trade stocks. I recommend that they go back to schooling themselves on the basic methods.
There are many strategies methods to invest: 1. Buy and Hold - most suitable for stocks with proven track records and expectation that the momentum will be maintained. 2. Trend-trading - based on technical analysis, events, cyclical trends. 3. Short-term and day-trading. Usually based on technical analysis and observation, and program trading.
The odds for the direction of price movement on a day-to-day and intraday basis varies within the context of broader trend moves. Saying that a stock has reached resistance or high end of a range or extreme condition is never an absolute certainty. However, the odds can vary to bias the investment/trading. but even if you think a stock is at an extreme you may follow the momentum until it reverses outside of the normal volatility/beta amount. Every seasoned trader/investor has witnessed stocks that went far further down and up than they thought rational, only to see them correct afterward. I have been caught both long and short, teaching painful lessons to either practice disciplined trading or use program trading that does it for you.
Sprint (S) is a trading vehicle. Absolutely yet unproven as a long-term hold.
If you think that, why don't you respond to what I post instead of bashing the messenger? What is your response to the mention that financial analysts have moved their earnings expectations down? Can you site sites that contest that or are you just mouthing off?
I have pointed out some good changes including that Sprint is achieving higher FCF due to its financial arrangements. However, I balance that with the fact that cash comes at a cost of selling off assets. Do you dispute that? No, you can't so you bash the person who posted it because I am not part of the circle jerk 'perpetual longs'.
Yes, Sprint has grown wings and now the pig can fly!
Sprint gained 173K subs for a revenue increase of about $9 million per month. However, sales have declined with the gain in subscribers figured in. Sprint boasts having made gain from all three of its major competitors for the first time in over 9 years. However, this is shallow because it is not summing up to increased sales and profits.
The one aspect of Sprint's business that has improved is its debt service capability. That makes the bond market happy and has the investment banking firms salivating at the prospects of floating a new round of debt as Sprint pays down the old. That is because the debt sponsors ring the cash register. The bond market went through a major drop early this year with business for the Wall Street bankers all but drying up. They are now eager to issue new debt to firms willing to take on the fresh exposure. T-Mobile had already lined up financing for the spectrum auction and build. Ditto Verizon and AT&T. With those firms unlikely to go beyond current plans, listening to the conference call, it is clear they have their sights set on issuing new debt to Sprint. In the meantime, the need to hedge existing debt has eased because Sprint's ability to make payments over the next two years look assured.
The problem with the picture is that competitors are gearing up for higher capacity networks with wider area footprint of coverage than Sprint can achieve with their low capex capability. There is no free lunch: higher capacity networks require end-to-end pipes in a market where "coverage is (remains) king".
"You Say Tomatoes, I say Tomautoes"
The market is eager to interpret any improvement as a sign more is to come, that a corner has been turned after which Sprint will reap rewards. The problem with that is the results do not show substantial market gains: the ~170K gain in subs is
One thing led to another. PV became entwined with lawyers early on. -from PV website:
"Mr. Robert G. Sterne has been a Partner of the law firm of Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox PLLC since 1978 and provides legal services to Parkervision Inc. as one of its patent and intellectual property attorneys. Mr. Sterne has been an Independent Director of Parkervision Inc. since September 2006. He served as a Director of ParkerVision from February 2000 to June 2003." Around the time Mr. Sterne was the director is when they set about pursuing a patent litigation strategy and gave up legitimate product efforts. I say legitimate because none of PV's product efforts, none, has resulted in more than token and flimsy/falsified revenues. Hail to the Flim-flam man with a plack on the wall.
The idea that 'Good Quarter' will be reported to bolster the stock is a fabrication. This is dumbing down of what is needed for Sprint to resurrect itself. Why has NOBODY on the long maggot side attempted to discuss what a 'Good Quarter' is in sales, subscriber gains, lower losses (earnings are not on the table for this quarter, unless it comes from slight-of-hand accounting gimmickry). CFO Terek came on the scene being astute and direct enough to tell it like it is: Sprint can gain 1 million core subs and that will not change matters much until that is repeated quarter after quarter for at leat 6 quarters (my estimation). Even then, it is questionable if that would come in time to prevent further sell-off of assets to the point Sprint is left a shell operating company based on cash flows while operating assets are leased, devoiding Sprint of potential to carve a future that is other than as a shell company.
What would amount to being a 'Good Quarter'? Sprint has been puking up stories about how it is going to turn around and all of them have been half-truths at best. Scamerama. What do Sprint's management think the public is, a bunch of idiots? Well they may be mostly right about that... the public investor is one fickle #$%$ lot.
Huh? What is a August 30 cent call? .. that does not exist. No S calls are traded at that volume. Is this a 'dumb and dumber' joke?
BS. Masa acquired Sprint thinking it would be a high cash-flow business that could be added to Softbank Mobile, Japan. You ignore all that has gone on and say he is "building an empire".. what juvenile simplistic nonsense. Grow 1/10th of a brain and the honesty to go with it.