Wrong. ATT has around $25 per share in revenue. DTV has $65 per share in revenue. The CEO is creating a platform that allows ATT to sell broad band, home security services in North and South America, satellite services across two continents and television into hotel chains where the hotels cover 1 billion people in North America, Central America and South America. The future is all about delivering various products to the customer. You must think that the management of ATT are a group of idiots but they keep competing and growing the company. The future is large amounts of data and the consumer wants it and ATT will have the strength to deliver it. ATT will control the largest group of satellites across two continents from North to South. DTV's management is going to offer a lot of new blood. There is something to say about a company that generates $65 per share in revenue. By the way, South America has much greater growth potential in the services that ATT-DTV serves as South America moves from a third world area into an area with a large middle class over the next decade.
Mexico is actually attracting more automobile factories from the auto manufacturers around the world than any other country including the U.S. Mexico knows how to manufacture cars at $10 per hour labor rates. Compare that to North America and Europe where the labor rates are $30 and $40!!!!
One more thing. You said you do not see the one million luxury cars around you in the driveways. Well, there are 1 million sold every year in the U.S. I see them where I live but then the 250,000 homes in my community sell for $750,000 on up to $15 million. There are a lot of well to do people in places like Seattle, Portland, S.F., San Jose, Santa Barbara, Los Angeles, Orange County, San Diego, Palm Springs-Palm Desert, NYC, Westchester County, NY, Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago, Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, Phoenix-Scottsdale, etc., and most of the people I know in these areas drive Cadillacs, Mercedes, BMW, Infiniti, Audi, Lexus, Jaguar. Sorry, but you do not understand the well to do and sports fanatic in the U.S. and they are never going to get very complete sports programming or channel selection off of their computers.
You keep saying DTV is at risk of cord cutting in the U.S. But you keep ignoring that the buyers that spend $2,000 a year with DTV do not care about cord cutting. Do Mercedes, BMW and Lexus car buyers care that the price of those cars go up in price every five years? The answer is no, they keep buying or leasing a new model every 3-4-5 years. People with money, the top 10% of the country care about one thing. Buying what they like.
There is no evidence that the 20 million hard core DTV viewers are cord cutting. That 20 million number is holding steady and you are ignoring the hotel industry across the U.S. which is a big commercial account paying for 100-200-300-400-500 rooms to be hooked up to DTV. I do about 2-4 months of travel each year and I see DTV in more hotel rooms than any other provider. Given a choice hotel management companies want to negotiate a price with one provider that can supply every managed hotel in a region rather than making deals with a different cable company in each city or county. Hotels have to provide cable or satellite. I repeat, the 20 million DTV subscribers in the U.S. are not cutting and you can pontificate all you want but those numbers have not changed even 1% over the last 5 years. Mark my words, DTV will have 40 million subscribers in 5 years between the U.S., Central America and South America and that cash flow will make ATT a great deal of money as ATT is going to sell those 40 million not just TV, but home security systems, internet and cell phone services. ATT has been beautifully run and if you look at the last decade the total annual return on dividends and equity is around 15% per year, Not bad, especially for the segment of the country that wants dividends and some appreciation to cover inflation.
You say that AT&T will have to pay out $2 billion in dividends on the new shares and $1 billion in interest. You are correct, but DTV has $3 billion in cash flow that was used to buy shares and now will cover the dividends and debt service. In essence ATT gets the company and uses the acquired company to pay the cost of the purchase.
DTV is not seeing any significant decline in its numbers in the U.S. As much as you keep talking about the folks abandoning cable and satellite, those are the middle class that do not want the superior product. The 20 million customers DTV has in the U.S. are the top of the food chain. Those of us that have six figures of cash flow a year are not going to cut DTV to save a few peanuts. The top 10% of the country in cash flow and net worth do not have the same concerns as the other 90% of the country that has no savings.
DTV has the same buyers that buy Mercedes and BMW and Lexus. Once you understand how and why those brands sell cars that cost double the price of other manufacturers and they keep selling more and more each year in terms of sales growth for the brand then you will understand why DTV has increased its dominance each year for the last 10 years. And by the way, Central America and South America are going to be adding more and more people to its middle class each year. So if 20% of DTVs revenue comes from South America today and they double the market numbers over the next five years down there, that implies that 40% of its revenue will come from South America.
I also see ATT increasing DTVs numbers in the U.S. because the bundle will provide better options in North America without duplicate overhead. ATT thinks it is going to save $2 billion a year in duplicate expenses and other synergies. That money saved will not be required to pay the dividend on the new shares.
I say you are wrong. Storage is high and wells that have been drilled during the last six months around the world have not been completed. Price firmed but it illusory as these wells are going to be completed during the next 6-12 months and any price per barrel increase over the next 6 months is going to get knocked down when these wells come on line.
Assuming the world surplus is 2 million barrels a day, both Saudi Arabia and the U.S. need to cut production by 1 million. The U.S. and Saudi are not going to drop production that much during the next six months. Production is level and if you look at CHK they are not going to decrease any oil and gas revenue in 2015. In fact CHK is predicting growth.
Since Saudi Arabia has raised its production during the last six months from
9 million barrels a day to over 10 million barrels a day they are killing all
other producers. They can keep this up for another 6 months or 12 months
or 18 months, whatever it is going to take. What I do not like is that the
U.S. government and military have been protecting Saudi Arabia and while
that was important in the past, this policy is killing American energy jobs
and corporations. We need to make a choice and all posters that are in
U.S. energy companies need to voice their concerns to their Senators.
You need to do a little research before you post otherwise you will show your lack of knowledge on the subject. Do you realize that DTV has over $5 per share in earnings and that number has been growing
every quarter for the last five years. You also must not know that they have been adding
over 1 million new customers above the churn rate each year in Latin America for the last five years and predict the same for the next five years, and this is the fastest growing area for them even though it only makes up only 20% of the revenue. Finally, DTV does not need AT&T but if they are taken over by AT&T the synergy and ability for AT&T to enter the South American market through the back door (DTV) makes them billions each year in addition to the predicted savings AT&T is claiming at $2.5 billion or more per year. That saves $25 billion for AT&T over the first decade. Oh, there are 500 million people south of the U.S. border down to the bottom of Chile and Argentina.
There will be no control over natural gas during the rest of this year. The game changer is exports in 2016 and adding more power plants each year in North America that burn gas rather than coal. We should natural gas prices move up to $4.50 in about 12 months with a stop at $3.50 by this year-end. Throw in the effect of the decrease in rig count in North America for the rest of this year and this is all very reasonable. Production in the U.S. will be in equilibrium within 12 months. Russia, Iran, Venezuela are not going to continue to sell oil at $50-60 to their customers, The problem is Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Libya selling oil at $50 a barrel and they do not care if they take a hit. Some say that Iraq and Libya are selling at significant discounts to world prices to in order to generate revenue for the militias that control the various areas of production.
Mike, you need to ask yourself, are you smarter than Carl? The answer to that question will probably tell you which of you is going to make money on CHK over the next 6-12 months.
So do I, but Icahn only has 4% of his net worth in this one position. Yes he likes to make killings and he has held shares for a long time for him. I do not see the company agreeing to a takeover when its product inventory is selling at some of the lows of the recent five years. Smart investors sell into pricing strength. Therefore, I do not see this being taken over by any one until production in the U.S. has been placed in supply-demand equilibrium which is probably a year away. Now if war spills over into
Saudi Arabia then all bets are off.
who sells a business near lows for your product inventory during the last five years, anyone with a brain does not, lets wait 12 months for the Middle East wars to keep spreading and damaging energy infrastructure.
The president is showing great fiscal discipline and cleaning up the company. Give him another 12 months and then he asks him Chairman of the Board to take it to his friends at COP. CHK will be gone by next summer. Also, Icahn and others want $40 and by this time next summer oil will be back to $75-80, but that only if Saudi Arabia oil targets have not been hit by terrorists. Anyone think the war in the Middle East has not been spreading each month, month after month and is not going to keep growing????
Every month the Middle East deteriorates in chaos. Saudi Arabia has a war
on its borders. When are the terrorists going to strike Saudi oil infrastructure?
If the Muslim terrorists could hit NYC and Boston they can easily hit Saudi
targets. When that happens and it will any guess on the price of oil?
Pretty pricey if you ask me. Why would anyone including the new shareholders from this public offering be willing to pay 50% more for the ships than they cost the company? Even with a dividend that pays 10% it will take five years to reach breakeven on the value of the balance sheet. I realize you are buying more than the ships, you are buying a business, but the business is leasing out ships. While only 10% of the fleet might not be earning any income at the present time, that utilization can drop in the future if too many ships come out of the shipyards which appears to be an issue for 2015, 2016, etc.
The people that got in when the shares were $7 during the last year made a smart purchase. I have my doubts about those buying in at the public offering this week. I think being enticed by the yield is dangerous when it comes to shipping and ships especially when the fleet is valued by the market at 50% above the cost of the ships.
If $20 oil and $2 natural gas is coming why did the Chairman and largest shareholder buy 5 million shares last month. You must think they are idiots. But would idiots have that much net worth. Both guys are self-made by the way, no inherited money. They are wrong or you are wrong. My money says you are.
The posters on this thread have it absolutely right. Management that issues shares having an 11% coupon plus the costs to issue the debt to the financial community puts the cost at above this amount. The retail investor is going to get hosed by management, suckered in by a yield while the units crater. Management should have paid this sum for the LP rather than spend time and money to pay double the interest rate that Linn Energy is paying for money.
What are you smoking. Aubrey M.'s new company, LP, owns 250,000 acres in this formation and CHK just received about 2% of that acreage. The total investment in this formation is reflected on their website as being worth $1.2 billion. So CHK received about 2% of that in acreage. You are off by 90% on the value of the acreage. The acreage might be worth $25 million tops.
6,000 acres is not big, as wells are drilled every 40-600 acres in most formations. This is not that many drill sites and you do have to spend a bunch of money to drill and they already have hundreds of thousands of acres in this formation, so increasing the acreage by 1% in the area is nothing, a drop in the bucket.
Two Oklahoma oil and gas companies.
DVN up almost $2 today, CHK up about $.50.
Do I like it no, but it shows how unloved the
company is by Wall Street. I suspect the only
thing that will change is the eventual buy out
of the company.
actually, insiders are not allowed to purchase shares if their is a deal that is being discussed. It is illegal to trade on information not available to the public. They bought because they see the shares as being cheap. They also believe that the 10 largest oil and gas companies in the world will continue to buy up smaller companies. The 10 largest oil companies are worth $100 billion to $400 billion. A CHK bought at $25 billion in stock is will eventually happen. Shell just agreed to pay $70 billion for a company. The other 9 top dogs in the sector are not going to sit around and watch. They all want to get bigger, so look at the companies that are ranked 11-20 that are not in the top ten and you will see the merger candidates. Cheaper ones probably bite the dust first during the next 6-18 months.