The UK fool is really bad. Pumping misleading lines like multi billion POUND fine when such is completely incorrect. That character has been pumping out negative VOD articles for some time now. Probably short and not disclosing or doing some dirty laundry for a friend etc. There was another one that was supposed to list some reasons but it was incoherent drivel. I've considered becoming an author just to stir the pot with the troglodyte.
Still don't care to comment on the richest man in the world, who made the bulk of his fortune in communication, walking away from satellite? Keep laughing. Your 5 figure dividend will wilt away with a DTV purchase. You can't defend the stupidity of Stephenson so you want to change the topic.
What do you think will happen to the debt ratings when DTV revenue and profits take a dump with satellite subscriber defections for IP TV? AT&T will have the payment on the new dividends created out of issuing that stock let alone payments on the $20 billion in debt it is assuming from DTV in the deal. Not exactly a cherry sweet pot they are buying. Fading competitive moat and a good chunk of debt inherited. Yet you think DTV was better prospect than VOD? Only the Sunday Ticket failure or antitrust regulators will save Stephenson from himself.
Maybe T should have been covering their pension obligations instead of share buybacks. Instead they plug the pension gap with more preferred T stock issued. Bean counter games is going to get AT&T ran over by the fiber/fiber hybrid bus.
I guess Slim is an idiot for walking away from satellite. Nobody in their right mind is going to touch the Carlos Slim actions. Slim has made the bulk of his fortune in communications sector and as the world's richest man is walking away from satellite. Meanwhile we have Stephenson, who blew $6B on a failed TMUS bid, going after satellite. I know someone working hard at being stupid and he is the head of AT&T.
If you chuckle heads have gone back that far then it blows lap dog's goofy thought that I'm using an alias completely out of the water. You fools keep attacking the messengers instead of the message. Classic.
Europe has pretty much always led the communications market but has fallen behind on 4G deployments vs. U.S. (namely VZ deploying 4G). Don't count on the mobile phones as a very safe cash flow. VOIP has been banging EU mobile revenues. What do you think will happen with cheap $10 apps like Whatsapp and the likes of Magic Jack when 1 gbps ISP comes along with WiFi? Exactly what has been happening to EU telecoms revenues. This is why Colao wisely used VZ Wireless sale cash to grab the communications toll road of the future -FIBER. Many were blind to the fact Kabel Deutschland and Ono both had top of the market fiber networks in place. The target is fiber, not the cable assets. Ono's is a very good tongue and groove fit with VOD's fiber footprint across Spain of which nobody will be able to compete with now. They also bought fiber assets with VZ proceeds in South Africa, now partnering with Portugal Telecom on joint fiber build. Looked at Italy for purchase at one time but sounds like they chose to build instead of purchase.
Now, how is DTV going to tie into AT&T outside of AT&T's fixed line markets? How is satellite assets going to tie into T's internet in those markets? Mobile spectrum? ROFLMAO. DTV revenues are going to get pounded outside of T's fixed line markets by other ISPs....as well as within as we've already seen in Kansas City and see starting to occur in Austin. BTW, T wasn't going to get VOD bought for $110B. It's going to take more than that. The window of opportunity for T to purchase the well positioned global telecom will close with EU QE and a big pop in the £/$ exchange rate pushing it back to 1.80s as the Bank of England is forced to raise the interest rate.
Lap dog. Answer me this. Is DTV a done deal? SO why would one want to short a deal that might fall through? If anything, I would think someone would consider a short on DTV but not T on the possibility the deal fails on NFL Sunday Ticket not being renewed or antitrust regulators block the deal. Then it will take a couple years for a short to play out. It took a little time for the AOL competitive moat to dry up after Time Warner crawled in bed with AOL. I'm a VOD bagholder from sub $30 although I readily admit going empty handed on some call options. Spilt milk I'm not crying over but you are the one trying to change the topic from T to VOD. I will bring the topic back to the intent of this particular message board and continue to tell you how ignorant the DTV purchase is for T.
I'll remind you Carlos Slim, currently the world's richest man, has walked away from his right to purchase Dish Mexico but has reiterated his will to obtain a TV license. The richest man in the world is going to pursue the triple play and at the same time renounced his rights to acquire controlling interest in a satellite TV provider. Where do you think he is going to pipe the video? G.fast is a technology game changer. 1 gbps over last leg copper at 20% cost of full fiber. The spoils of ISP and IP TV go to the incumbent copper providers. T has ownership in only PARTS of 21 states where they can convert satellite subscribers to U-verse TV and that will be on thinner TV margins due to a dried up moat for pay TV bundlers. Stephenson will regret dumping the old copper he has scorned. I'm sure Frontier was glad to take Connecticut wire of his hands.
New technology....wired line in PARTS of 21 states. To the copper incumbents goes the spoils with new technology. You just don't get it. They can't convert DTV customers who move to land line ISPs not using T/DTV's bundle. With 1 gbps internet you also have the moat of entry for TV bundlers drying up. With little competitive moat you end up with thinner margins. DTV revenue/profits get slashed even on those which AT&T can get converted to their fiber TV feed. DTV is in the same moat position as AOL. You just don't get it. 1 gbps ISP is the moat. Net Neutrality is key. Antitrust position for ISPs throttling competitor video feed. Net neutrality means an evaporating moat for video bundlers and content producers. The ISPs do get the bundler advantage position even though it is a thinner margin add on service. How is AT&T going to offer DTV's 38 million customers (and most importantly the half in the U.S. which is where its profit margins are) ultra high speed ISP when it has wired line in parts of 21 states? They will lose the bulk of the customers and possibly retain some outside wired markets BUT at a much thinner mark up due to the competitive moat disappearing for pay TV bundlers.
Now lets "hear" this logic.......hate when I do that kind of error but I DON"T DELETE MESSAGES.
A short position will/would take a few years to play out and that is if DTV makes it through NFL Sunday Ticket negotiations AND past antitrust regulators to put the AOL kind of folly in play. So, because Buffett won't short a stock at all means he has no credibility? Your logic is flawed. His two henchmen had it wrong about DTV competitive moat but they got bailed out by this AT&T ignorant bid. I'm sure Warren has been dumping shares for the exit door.
Carlos Slim walking away from satellite (richest man in the world who made the bulk of his fortune IN COMMUNICATIONS) but still pursuing a TV license should give you a heads up with the direction of communications. If there is any credibility among actions then it would be the richest guy in the world who made the bulk of his fortune in this very industry. Now, you can choose to ignore everything I have posted about Google Fiber and G.fast because we are just jabbering away on a message board but I don't know how you dismiss Slim's moves walking away from satellite while still wanting to enter triple play with TV license being pursued. How do you ignore that action by the richest man in the world (JUST recently passed up Gates again with the surge in AMX shares)? I'm sure you will argue his credibility is zilch some way or another.
Several analysts on Bloomberg commented DTV was a bad strategic move too. Stephenson may have been told as much but he was the same one who made comments just a few years ago people wouldn't need this much data but here we sit with people feeding video over IP and desiring better internet speeds. Maybe he was told and maybe he doesn't listen to the right people.
Really? LOL wrong again. Now lets here this logic behind your statement FiOS will be hurt badly by DTV/AT&T deal. Waiting just like I have been for your response on other strings. Keep attacking me instead of the message. I went straight to your message on this topic but you don't respond to it.
For the love of ... You just don't get it. The game changer is G.fast, not Google Fiber. G.fast gives the spoils to incumbent copper operators. Google is the big bad wolf the incumbents are trying to keep out and G.fast is the means for incumbent copper operators to build 1 gbps at 20% of the cost of full fiber (WHICH WILL RENDER DTV A MORTALLY WOUNDED VIDEO PLATFORM). You just don't seem to wrap your head around it. I've already posted Google Fiber won't likely grab a significant national share because of G.fast. Funny part is there are smaller operators already running past AT&T and Google. All the grandstanding for the Austin market and Grande Communications is stealing the show there. My point all along here is DTV is dead money and your leader is blowing $68B on the wrong technology. Mark it.
Financial trickery....recall the capex freeze making the media...or the increased share buy back....or shortfall pension being plugged with preferred company stock? Given the bean counter games being played you will likely be proven right on the call for a small beat.
VZ beat of earnings with all that debt? As long as you realize they picked up all those assets and earnings because of that debt and VZ will pay off most of the new debt within five years. Yep, good...or even a bad one. Well said. A lot of them liked AOL-Time Warner merger too.
How so will Fios be hurt? Ignorant declaration with nothing to back it up like the rest of your posts. Bashing me but not talking underlying fundamentals of DTV. DTV is a dead end. People want better internet than sorry DSL speeds of 6 mbps. They will then bundle with cheap video package. DTV is dead money when you can get 1 gbps internet and TV bundle for the same price people are paying for DTV pay TV alone. Google is the perfect example in Kansas City. The future is fiber, not satellite.
P.S. Could care less about T dividend date. You are still under some misconception that I am short AT&T shares when I am not. I came here looking for reasoning behind DTV purchase and found nothing. Stephenson's reason for buying DTV is to avoid bandwidth consumption....yet people want bandwidth for purposes beyond video. New technology is providing more than ample bandwidth for reasonable prices which are set to get even cheaper. The logic by Stephenson is the flawed avoidance instead of giving people what they want. Believe the same mantra by telecoms of they don't want or need it has already been proven wrong by Google. FiOS is rock solid. What isn't rock solid is T's dividend if it purchases DTV.
You can check my history to find I was in VOD below $30 from nearly 18 months ago. Boston showed up on the VOD board later and then left VOD I believe for T or VZ. I haven't been tracking him like you have searched my history lap dog. Go stalking him through his post history and you should find a divergence in boston's history. I have no other moniker on Yahoo but I'm pretty sure someone else does here on this board.
Fully agree with the IP based premise.....but satellite TV is dead money. When you sink $68B into dead money it will cause problems when the wheels start falling off that video TV cart. Your capex and dividend come under pressure when cash flow starts drying up. Fiber with wifi is the future. Did you read that GOOG is looking to turn old NYC pay phones into WiFi hot spots? The internet of things might use some satellite communications, LTE will be limited by finite spectrum (already having issues with overload in some select areas) so it leaves us at fiber with WiFi. At one time Stephenson pledged a move to all IP based communications but this DTV deal is a wrong turn at Albuquerque leaving the telecom market asking 'what's up doc?' AT&T will end up in the boonies instead of Hollywood because Stephenson got cross eyed at the G.fast interchange. Shareholders have to hope DTV deal falls through in order for T to remain a 'rock solid' investment for decades. T might will still be around for decades in one form or another but rock solid can easily be impacted by sweeping changes in technology. Stephenson taking the wrong turn in Albuquerque will leave the door wide open to competitors to win the spoils.
Half price sale in six years if DTV goes through and it chicken wings itself on capex. Not only will it lose revenues outside of its wired line regions, T will be losing to those who grab the 1 gbps ISP within its wired markets because they are slow to respond with proper capex deployment to grab market share. The first to market with 1 gbps will grab converging telecom spoils.
Curious Warmwithslightbreeze. Why a "6 years" window?
Nice to hear from you Boston. It was $6 billion if you use the market value for the spectrum T had to give to TMUS.
Spot on Boston. I'm not going to save T from itself but it's quite obvious my point is valid because nobody here will discuss the fundamentals of pay TV future. At first I thought this DTV deal might be a ruse to take the pressure off VOD share price on AT&T bid speculation. After watching Stephenson on video try to defend the DTV purchase as a means to avoid bandwidth consumption, I have come to conclusion it is simply an ignorant move like Time Warner getting in bed with AOL.
You might be right about VOD buying T down the road. AOL-Time Warner ended up at about a seventh of their combined market cap when all the smoke cleared after the competitive moat cratered. If we apply the same multiple after DTV implodes on G.fast vaulting the move to web base video we may end up with a combined market cap around $35B. NOTpredicting it but never say never in the market when there is a major shift in technology. In the mean time we will see VOD continue building out its fiber network and pursuing global white label status for the mobile wallet. JMHO, many are underestimating potential in virtual wallet market given the strategy includes banking the unbanked. Colao is one sharp cookie. Notice they entered an agreement with Rogers in Canada? He is getting VOD very well positioned for the future of communications with fiber instead of satellite. Same can be said for what the worlds richest man is going to do. Dumped his rights to Dish Mexico but still pursuing a TV license? Yep, richest man in the world walking away from satellite while you have Stephenson, who burned $6B to the ground, is looking to buy satellite. It will take a few years but this is AOL. Lap dog can call me all the names in the world but notice he hasn't been touching the poor fundamentals behind the huge DTV mistake.