The world is currently at a brink of deflation, especially Europe. In addition, the US carriers have dramatically lower their capex in 2015 to position their cashflow for the upcoming 600 MHz auction (2016) which means there won't be much wireless deployment in the US and globally for various reasons.
The BRICS countries such as India has an obligation to conduct its businesses with other member BRICS nations which means India will be dominated by Huawei and so does Russia (though because of sanctions).
Russia is basically at war with the West (US) while China has close ties with Russia in economic cooperation (energy and currency swap), political, and military alliance (joint massive naval exercise in Mediterranean) . China has declared that it intends to replace all of its foreign made (US) technologies with homegrown which means Huawei and ZTE will dominate the Chinese and the BRICS' markets.
As far as IP products for general usages in China ALU will likely capture lion-share next to Huawei and ZTE and take away businesses from US companies such as (Cisco, Juniper, Ciena, etc.). This is because China no longer trusts US made networking products. More importantly, China has started to build the first world's longest hacked-proof network using fiber optic with crypto quantum technology (Quantum Network) to protect its cyberspace from possible attacks (eg. NSA).
As I recall NOK has hardly had any businesses in N. America before so doubling of what they had is meaningless. The comparison (gaining business) should be made based on its peers. Besides, NOK doubling of its business is the result of NOK replacing ERIC on Sprint's TDD LTE contracts.
That's the most idiotic assessment and it's nothing but hyping. Few month ago when ALU was below $2.20 NoK had the chance to acquire ALU at $4B less, so why would NOK wants to pay $4B more now?
You do realize that commercial banks in the US are not allow to trade with their own money or deposits based on Volcker Rule on proprietary trading, right?
Boko Haram (Western education is forbidden) and there goes Combes' dream.
If you're wondering why ALU gained 5.5% today it was all due to ECB announcing asset buying of $1.3T ($69B/month) in QE. Just as the Fed's QE has benefitted the US stock markets investors see the EU QE will also benefit EU's stock markets. Lower yields for EU bonds mean higher corporate earnings from lower borrowing costs and more consumer activities for the European economy.
What you have failed to understand is that this is exactly what the Chinese government has been expecting. Currently, China is in a economic transformation where the country is shifting from manufacturing to service on the supply side and investment to consumption on the demand side.
The slow down of Chinese labor market has been relatively small due structural shifts of economic activity toward labor intensive service sectors. The difference between the US and China is the way China has always planned her economy 20 years ahead while US' plan is based on the next 3 months (quarterly earnings) or perhaps until the next election. President Xi of China has recently stated that China intends to replace all of its US made high tech products out of its domestic markets. This will be a major blow to US companies but not so much for Europeans (i.e. France ALU).
What the US should be worrying about is that China has also been preparing for the past few years to replace the USD with Yuan as the global reserve currency through currency swap with trading countries. There are currently 28 countries participating in this including Australia and UK and the numbers are growing. China has also been transacting oil with Yuan with Russia, Iran, and Venezuela rather than through Petrodollar which directly undermines the USD as the global reserve currency. This means China has been planning to have her economy not tied to the current global reserve currency (vis-a-vis the US economy). The current low oil price is certainly helping China's economic transition smoother.
China has also recognized that fiscal and financial sector reforms are needed to address any financial stability risks. This involves the effective managing of rapid credit growth that includes their shadow banking system.
So, I wouldn't bet against China that easily.
Yes, but the fact remains China still holds $1.3T of US debt (Treasuries) and $3.8T in reserve currencies which means they could inflict substantial damages to the US economy and to US Dollar through massive dumping of US Treasuries in the open market. Can you imagine what that will do to the value of US Dollar and to US interest rates?
You do realize that ALU.PA closed at EUR 3.00 today, right? That's equivalent to US $3.65 so how will ALU follow soon? No really, I'm just curious.
The only reason Nokia had gained a large contract in the US during 2014 was because Sprint replaced ERIC with NOK as a supplier for their TDD LTE deployments (ALU, NOK, and Samsung).
However, the 2015 will be especially bad year for all US carriers due to margins getting squeezed and lackluster earnings from their cutthroat pricing war. Therefore, capital spending will be reduced significantly in 2015 for all (T, VZ, TMUS, and S) since carriers will also be expected to build up their cash reserves for the upcoming 600 MHz auction (late 2015-2016) that could reach the upward of $70B.
This is especially bad for Sprint because they are already hemorrhaging badly and that is why Sprint was downgraded by Oppenheimer last week. So, a one-trick-pony like NOK with nothing to fall back to will not fair well in 2015-2016.
That is not entirely accurate. China has stated that foreign suppliers can participate equally with domestic provided that foreign-made products allow government inspection on their software coding for security transparency. I don't blame the Chinese because this is the result of NSA tampering with electronic equipment.
You people should learn how to read what analysts are saying. Just today, Citi Group has downgraded VZ because they are concerned about T and VZ have now less cash flow for dividends and "CAPITAL SPENDING" after paying down $10B each in the auction that have raised $35B by the FCC. This means, less money will be spent by T and VZ for the next few years.
"No, that is not what is happening here. Rich people can buy faster service. ISPs charge more for faster download speeds."
That is a ridiculous statement. You are missing the understanding of what net neutrality is all about. It is about end-to-end paid premium service on QoS. Even someone has the highest speed package does not guarantee that subscriber will get consistent bandwidth throughout transit other than allowing the subscriber to burst up to the speed of its contractual package.
Basically, subscribing to high speed package widens the pipe for that particular subscriber entering the Internet but there is no guarantee of timely delivery of payload because who is to say that somewhere along the worldwide interconnected networks different providers such as AT&T, VZ, DT, or Vodafone or even between countries that you will not be throttled due to high traffic? End-to-end QoS allows carriers to pass on the subscriber's QoS requirements to others and they will all get a portion of the premium fee. There is nothing wrong with that.
Why shouldn't people that have money get better service than people that don't?
This socialist government in WH wants to treat the free market like its healthcare that everyone is treated equally but this is not the healthcare. So, what's the advantage of having money when you cannot spend on premium service? This socialist government is trying to erase the advantage of the haves over the have nots. This can lead to a dangerous precedent.
You have it all wrong. Carriers expand coverage and build larger Internet pipes with the extra revenues from selling their QoS. This is like the airline booking where regular class is always oversold but 1st class is always reserved.
There is a difference of importance between kids watching videos over the internet versus applications such as realtime medical procedure that's being conducted over the Internet from remote part of the world. What this means is that carriers will now have to sell bandwidth based on 100% usage at all time. Bandwidth will become very expensive for everyone whether they are used or not.
Today, broadband is still relatively cheap because the pricing is based on "bursting" activities, not on sustained. The carriers will now have to raise prices for everyone in order to accommodate guaranteed sustained bandwidth (QoS) for companies that conduct businesses over the Internet because now the overall capacity of the pipe will be measured one-to-oneby the aggregated bandwidth sold.
This would ultimately decrease the overall usages of Internet from the public due to quantum leap in pricing. In the end, the whole telecom industry will suffer including equipment suppliers such as ALU. You can never trust a socialist government in a free market.
It is utterly stupid for government to impose net neutrality. The Internet is already congested as it is especially during the peak hours (9-5) so any companies that use VPN (private sessions) over the Internet may now be out of luck due to erratic response time.
Companies that conduct businesses over the Internet that have been purchasing premium QoS package (VIP pipes) to assure timely unimpeded delivery will now have to compete with teenager downloading massive videos during peak business hours.
There will be no more incentive for carriers to build larger pipes for Internet traffic. Instead, carriers will shrink their current Internet pipes to allocate more dedicated private accesses for companies that need QoS services but will be done through a private MPLS that runs parallel to the Internet.
You have no idea of what you are talking about. Softbank is legally prohibited to sell any of its Alibaba shares for 1 whole year starting from the date of the IPO, meaning SB can only sell after October 2015 should they choose to and I doubt they will.
Alibaba is a very high margin business and BABA is expanding rapidly into global markets with a market capitalization of greater than Walmart or Amazon. Mr. Son views Alibaba as a gold mine towards SB's future prosperity and not as a working capital.
In 2013, Nokia only had negligible business with Sprint under Hesse. The CEO of Nokia, Rajeev Suri, then made a pitch to Mr.Son (Softbank) since they already have a long prior business relationship in Japan.
[ When long-time Japanese customer SoftBank Corp. bought Sprint in July for $21.6 billion, Suri used that relationship to give Nokia a chance at the upcoming fourth-generation network upgrade.
As part of Sprint’s plan to spend $8 billion this year and next on capital expenses like network upgrades, Sprint selected Alcatel-Lucent (ALU), Samsung Electronics Co. and NSN to supply and manage the buildout. NSN displaced Ericsson, the bigger maker of mobile-network equipment, as one of Sprint’s vendor partners for the fourth-generation network upgrade.]
It would seem Nokia was successful in stealing businesses away from ALU.