I've called you out numerous times on misleading trash and you always bait and divert to something else just like you are here. Let's see your thesis on the dividend being unstable? You can't use the P&L because the garbage by yourself and RH on Motley is already debunked. Misleading trash is all you post.
BTW, Did you get out of those naked calls you wrote for T? You should have made money on them but couldn't expect anymore with T's share buying plan in place.
Read the article. The big picture is anticompetitive to the tech industry. This fight is just reaching a boil with FCC comments being made. ....how does that impact a DTV antitrust for content providers? Just another leg for antitrust regulators to block DTV or mandate net neutrality.
Then we have the other picture geniuses....Stephenson gave up $4B in market value of spectrum in his failed TMUS takeover. SPECTRUM. You have a large mass move to video consumption over LTE, because of a Netflix with no minutes logged against T subscriber data plans, and you are going to see an even bigger spectrum log jam. If you don't understand the problems/issues with available spectrum issues already occurring then you shouldn't be in mobile phone investments. Mobile video will be fiber based over WiFi in the intermediate to long term. Spectrum finite issues dictate such. It isn't about monthly data minutes over LTE because spectrum log jam pushes the issue to WiFi. It is about throttling internet over IP. That will be a fight that doesn't go lightly.
The person compared to a dingo who is running the FCC might be a tell tale sign the direction it will be sent but the issue will be dragged through courts for years. The powerful telecoms don't want to be rendered dumb pipes but the innovation/startups based on the web don't want to be throttled by anticompetitive throttling either. Nasty tug of war might have the masses revolting if they get their Facebook throttled. You might see an election campaign or two have a stump for net neutrality. Europe already made their decision in April. The U.S. might end up on the other side of the line because of someone's pedigree that sits at the table. If that happens then the throw down truly begins. THEN Google will be deploying fiber as a defensive move and many others could join in. Cloud based data management companies like Microsoft would be impacted, not just Google.
Really. LOL You're going to pull the same trash out that the misleading nut from Motley Fool is using? The big boost in capital spending is greatly funded from VOD cash but the Profit/Loss gets pulled down by capex. We could say the opposite with cash getting used for capex while dividend is getting paid for with earnings but that isn't how the cash flow statement works. Ins and outs and it doesn't matter how much is sitting in cash. Capex is huge by choice because of significant cash. The bundled play is going to give VOD a leg up in many markets it was a stand alone mobile. Now account for the temporary huge boost in capex associated with 'Project Spring'. More than ample cash in place until capex is reduced but the big misleading bottom line number is being used by the FUDsters. Same way that RH with Motley Fool used the incorrect dividend amount. Dirty pool getting played. Your same old misleading trash never stops.
Classic. Been through it before. I see a similar FUD player still posting on a desolate string from six years ago bashing an equity he was FUDing back then and the equity sits at +6X the price he was bashing at back then. Your motives are not honest on this message board. Don't know what they are but it isn't honest given you don't disclose the full picture.
LOL Continue to attack the messenger instead of the message. Tells me I'm spot on. I stand by my head fake as this satellite deal is not strategic for the future of U.S. telecom. It might be a strategic head fake of which I will say has worked and I give kudos to the man but it won't make VOD bid price any cheaper. If this is not a head fake then he is indeed a fool.
As for my currency calls, they have been on target and I still expect the £ to hit 1.73 resistance soon, take a month or so pause and then run like mad when BOE leads central banks with an interest rate hike. Pretty much no resistance from 1.73 to 1.84. The carry in U.S. listed ADRs has strengthened in the past year which some list as a concern but I believe will go higher as U.K.'s economy has been reading solid numbers in unemployment drop, PMI, GDP, real estate market booming (many say overheated). The U.S. may not raise interest rates until late 2015 so carry trade should be firm to positive. If you listen to PIMCO's Gross pounding the table it will be so for much longer.
One can go to stockcharts and pull up a P&F. VOD is going through a nice backfill consolidation. Last time it went through same pattern back in 2010, once backfill was complete, VOD went on a 5 month run with a breakout. VOD ADRs target backfill $29.41. Then up we go.
How does T fix the lack of high speed internet when it only operates land lines in PARTS of 21 states? There is no "completely" fixing DTV's NATIONAL problem. 1 gbps internet and TV bundling will be advantage to incumbent copper telecom operators with the onset of G.fast. You keep proving my point. T will be losing satellite subscribers in areas it cannot convert them into U-verse TV. That goes without saying they will also lose them in areas they do operate when ISP competitors operate within those 21 state markets like Google Fiber or Grande Communications. There are others as well but my point is DTV subscribers will be lost to ISP/TV bundlers and there will be little DTV/T will be able to do to retain them. The future is fiber/fiber hybrids and T does not operate across DTV's entire market. Therefore, the internet problem for DTV cannot be 'completely" fixed.
....which is an issue with antitrust regulators as T looks to remove a competitor in it entire U-verse TV market. From four to three competitors. 2 sats, 1 cable, and incumbent land line ISP/TV provider becomes 1 sat/ISP, 1 cable, 1 sat (although by EOY DISH will also be a sat/ISP cross provider). What happened when Stephenson tried to remove the 4th major competitor from mobile phone market? He was denied and lost $6B. At least he won't be surrendering shareholder cash and spectrum if DTV attempt fails.
A new low may come indeed as we make a nice technical consolidation and back test of the breakout. Once the backfill is completed at $29 and there should be a nice run to follow. VOD is stupid cheap. VOD's emerging markets continue to get only stronger and India is a sleeping giant starting to stir from its slumber. VOD's position is becoming the envy of the EU market as it positions itself with a best of breed bundle play with fiber internet/TV/mobile. Consolidating markets separates the cream of the crop and VOD is definitely the cream after grabbing top of the line fiber positions in EU with VZ proceeds. A lot of telecoms in EU are debt laden. They will be left in the dust during consolidation as they cannot provide top quality services due to restricted capex ability. This dip is only temporary.
VOD is in the EU driver's seat because it parted with the U.S. crown jewel and utilized a good portion of the proceeds to position itself as the crown jewel across Europe. Without such you have VOD trapped as a mobile stand alone in EU and such a position will get hammered with converging communication based on fiber. With the future in fiber / VOIP stabbing mobile revenues the sale of VZW jewel was merited and much needed to establish a solid base for the future in EU. VOD is now the leading consolidator with an advantageous position much like when the VZ ball began rolling in mobile consolidation about 15 years ago. In a handful of years you will see a similar trend in the states as fiber and wifi are built out providing VOIP impact. VZ should have most of its debt from VZW purchase eliminated by the time we see meaningful impact from VOIP in the states. Wireless networks may be coast to coast coverage but things get pushed back towards regional with land based fiber ownership....except for a Comcast/Time Warner blanket of the country. With VOIP you have a bigger footprint for telephone while the incumbent copper operators are still regional. Satellite isn't going to save a national footprint for T.
P.S. Bundling creates a little haze and will make it a tougher position for EU to regulate. Stick your profits in the internet or TV fee and tack on the cell coverage for the peanuts regulators will allow. India's prior gov't was trying to tax VOD hard but it appears the new ruling party may have benefited from such a scuffle. Still believe the M-Pesa and SmartPass are massive wild cards most are underestimating. Visa and MoneyGram partnerships are very significant for scale into new markets. 2014 is a huge launch year for mobile banking.
RH has a ton of misinformation in his blogging. Hard to be certain if it is intentional misleading or ignorant but given his continual bashing with less than complete information I believe his shoddy posting is intentional.
It isn't a fire until DTV signs an NFL contract within T's parameters and antitrust regulators approve the deal. Then we have AOL act II.
If you had to pay to search....LOL AOL and Time Warner thought the same thing. Google isn't charging. This same scenario you speak of would end up in antitrust courts as well. You said it yourself. ....could destroy Google's profits AND THE TECH INDUSTRY. Tech industry has already been down that road and one should know how that turned out. You eventually get kicked in the head. Since such a move would destroy the tech industry then what's the odds such will occur? Pretty slim...
Ask the boys what happened in KC when you ignore the competitor. Google took the gold and will be hard to ever gain them back.
You boys don't seem to get it. Fiber itself isn't the huge game changer. G.fast is the game changer. Google is only the goose to spur the change. If you aren't going to offer 1 gbps speeds then someone else will. G.fast at 20% of the cost of fiber with little red tape or labor issues provides 1 gbps. DOCSIS 3.1 a/k/a Gigasphere is cables tech version of G.fast. Gigasphere however lacks the upload capabilities of G.fast. My point is people want higher speeds and Google is the goose. The increased bandwidth allows for ample room to stream video seamlessly. The spoils go to incumbent copper of which T only has old copper in Parts of 21 states.
Calling me names doesn't change the fundamental ignorance by T's CEO in buying satellite assets for $68B.
It's easier for an already positioned phone and ISP provider to tack on TV service when the line is already in place using the same pipe. Good old bundling Is the key and satellite is not needed when you have a ten wide highway not using half the lanes. As I've written for the states, the incumbent telecom who owns the old copper into the home will have the spoils with G.fast technology. The 20% cost of fiber is something you can't ignore. Carlos Slim has the majority of old copper in Mexico and is giving up very little of it in the assets roll off. There was no reason for him to relinquish his rights for Dish Mexico. None. Telvisa is the Mexico monopoly for TV which will get pressured. Slim has 18 months to build out a fiber backbone before launching IP TV. G.fast is roughly a year out from commercial launch so the time frame isn't a huge disparity.
P.S. The billionaire has already taken South Amercia by storm but is going to tack on TV now as well. ....without using satellite! The copper incumbent has the upper hand......
It also said $45 a month ago and that didn't happen either. Looks like we might be headed to ADR gap fill though.
Alfonso, Zacks is automated junk. Pay no attention. You realize what dividend yield would be? Should have stuck to my guns before soaking up powder as it appears ADRs do want to close the gap from last August. 20/20 hindsight.
Ron, Colao is turning a ship that would have been stranded in mobile. The future is in fiber and VOD has very wise management grabbing very, very well positioned assets to make VOD a well rounded provider of bundled services. Those providing fiber and fiber hybrid ISP to the market will be in the driver's seat.
Problem is they only operate in 21 states for that triple play and DTV will be losing revenues to other ISPs in the markets T cannot recapture DTV defections as G.fast is deployed. I've never said T doesn't have a good existing market position in the markets it operates within. The problem is satellite TV defections across the U.S. for which T doesn't operate land line. Been my same point all along. T can only recapture a minor portion of satellite defections and that is even a waste because DTV is a duplicated service given U-verse TV is already in place.
So cost effective that Google Fiber is offering a bundle TV package with internet service for as cheap as satellite is offering (in the U.S.) for pay TV alone. DTV doesn't seem to be so cost effective does it? The states are subsidizing Latin American subscribers. Start losing U.S. subscribers to ISPs and what do you think will need to happen with satellite rates south of the border to sustain same level of profits? DTV is a long term dilution of $68B to T shareholders.
ISP bundling with giga speed is going to wallop satellite TV. There is no need for satellite when the 747 (streaming video) is flying in the grand canyon. Stephenson reasoning for DTV was along the lines of streaming web TV being a bandwidth hog doesn't hold water when a ten lane highway is installed and you will use a lane or two for TV. Heck, even three lanes if you have three TVs running simultaneous in the home. The market is changing and Google has proven people want 1 gbps internet and will bundle TV with it. Who dominates pay TV once 1 gbps ISP is installed? It isn't satellite. Sure, satellite can provide an avenue to avoid bandwidth consumption but who needs a car pool lane when the traffic moves completely uncongested using three lanes of a 10 lane highway?
Slim looks to line up the triple play and it won't be with satellite. That should be your sign. Latin American king pin, who is the worlds second richest person, renounces rights to acquire a satellite provider at the same time declaring an intent to enter pay TV.
Nothing has been a copy and paste. I wouldn't doubt if this message gets deleted. I made the simple statement no copy and past comments are being deleted yesterday and that one was even deleted.
What is even funnier here is you did read my post on Carlos Slim's maneuvers and you have no reply to AMX's comments of a fundamental shift in telecom. Most headed in the right direction but one notable blundering fool going in the wrong direction. People want high speed ISP and will bundle TV with whoever provides it. How good does DTV look south of the border when Slim starts offering mobile, internet and pay TV bundles? Who is laughing now?