"Gotta love VZ's "scorched earth" tactics. They are a lousy company,...."
Ahh, perhaps "sage" (a terrible misnomer) is finally wising up--but, VZ ain't the only "lousy" company.
One last try--it's not about me.
It's about spectacular corporate incompetence and indifference--and which has nothing to do with customers.
How anyone refuses to hold any company responsible for incompetence, and transfer the blame to the customers who simply point out obvious deficiencies, is waaaaaaaaaaaaaay crazy.
Benefit of the doubt---are you kidding, you don't understand that FTR is far from perfect? Are you for real? You are a longtime ftr investor with rose-tinted perceptions.
The VZ Fios technician who came out today and is now part of FTR---he wasn't given advance notification, either. Was as surprised as the customers. Had to rip the Verizon sign off his van himself since neither VZ nor FTR planned detailed logistics in advance--this is how disorganized the transition was. The one year+ lead time makes this disorganized transition all the more glaring and comedic.
My neighbors were all caught by surprise with absolutely no advance notifications--many are experiencing disruptions in service, particularly VOD and video libraries.
Operating losses in Q4FY15 (and likely in Q1FY16) reduce book value and, therefore, shareprice.
Please don't misunderstand--CRC is highly levered to commodity prices as is evident by sharp movements with each swing in oil prices.
That's the wild card--what is the trajectory of commodity price recovery? The longer it takes, the greater the erosion in book value.
As pointed out, I'm long CRC. Just don't like vague and muddy thinking where investments are concerned.
The size of the company is no guarantee about value or survival--GM when Chap 11 in 2009, as did Enron, etc.
In the oil sector, it's all about assets vs liabilities--as it has been for the past 1.5 years.
Let's not forget that CRC, like several others, made an exchange offer to its subordinated debt holders for more senior debt--and, which included a haircut. It was, technically, a default. So, let's not gloss over the immense pressures in the sector, we're not out of the woods yet--as made clear by the disappointment out of Doha over the past weekend.
"Fair market value for oil is at least 85.00."
How did you arrive at this figure?
I'm long the stock, but let's not wander off into fantasy land.
It's all simple numbers: CRC has liabilities (debt, among others) that currently exceed the value of its oil/gas assets. Asset values are based on underlying commodity prices, and which are currently very depressed--this means that the current asset values are also depressed. This is how creditors think, no different than a bank would view the value of the home securing a mortgage.
It's all about commodity prices which determines CRC's net worth (assets - liabilities)--we need higher commodity prices.
1. I haven't visited this mb in many, many months.
2. You are saying that customers should tune in to a stock investment mb for company updates?
You are grossly mistaken.
Until April 1st, I was a Verizon home/Fios customer in San Bernardino county in California, located about 40 miles from downtown Los Angeles. I assure you that this isn't a rural area.
Besides Fios, I also have Verizon Wireless service out here (4G/LTE)---ie, it most definitely is an option to cancel landline phone to go wireless.
After tonight's session from Heck, the all wireless option is very appealing. What I've read about on this MB over the years about FTR's horrible customer service and operational incompetence is no longer an abstraction, but now a horrible reality (multiple transfers, not comprehending what the customer is describing, being routed to overseas call centers where the operators are very poorly trained and hard to understand, etc.)
I know one thing as a customer (and former corporate manager)--when customers are as pizzed off to the extent that I experienced tonight in my first call ever to FTR customer/tech support, they'll constantly be thinking of jumping ship. What an amazing, eye-opening experience tonight on the phone.
Until April 1st, I was a long time Verizon customer--home and wireless, 20+ years.
Today, I came home, called Verizon for tech support on my Fios wireless router, and heard from the recording that I've been sold to FTR.
No advance notification by either party of the sale.
Ok, deep breath---and, I call the FTR number provided by the recording. Suffice it to say that, 1 hour and 3 service reps later, I'm still on the phone--listening to elevator music now while someone (presumably) is scheduling a technician's service visit to my home, like I requested 15 minutes ago.
I've visited this MB on/off for at least 5 years now as a (former) investor and, so, was well aware of FTR's horrible reputation for customer service and operational matters.
Now, I'm living the FTR hell--and, it's only a few days into this new relationship. It's really eye-opening, and providing insights from a different angle into FTR as an investment--SELL.
Enterprise is privately held--where did you find its financials?
No quite accurate.
1. When you sell, your capital gains/loss is based on difference between selling price and adjusted cost basis of your purchase(s). See below.
2. The distributions that you receive during your holding period--the part that's classified as a qualified dividend is taxable (15% for most, 20% for high tax bracket folks), and the part that's classified as non-dividend (a return of capital) is not taxable. The non-taxable portion reduces your cost basis. You find this info on your annual 1099.
From CPLP's website, the per share breakdown for FY15 = $0.942 distribution = $.25018 qualified dividend + $0.69182 non-dividend (non-taxable, but reduces your cost basis)
You're a wise man.
When you argue with/reply to an idiot, you only feed his flame. These pathetic folks crave attention--any type, including abuse.
Don't dignify them with a response--ignore them, and they'll shrivel up from neglect.
"Hyundai Group put up 22.56 percent of the brokerage’s shares............... to rescue its affiliate Hyundai Merchant Marine, which is seriously short of liquidity."
Liquidity vs solvency problems are quite different---with the implications for creditors/lease parties such as CPLP are certainly important. Contracts are much more difficult to break when the debtor has sufficient assets, even if illiquid, to pay--the creditor must first make efforts to liquidate assets to generate liquidity before creditors must make concessions.
The Korean economy is highly exported dependent, and HMM is the second largest Korean shipping firm and, therefore, strategically important in the national interest.
So, I don't believe HMM will easily walk away from its obligations as there would be serious consequences going forward in terms of its relationship with, access to vessels and terms from vessel owners. The Korean government, via KDB, is known to have a major interest in the resolution of HMM's financial problems. Given HMM's strategic importance, might the Korean government/KDB provide a "bailout" with repayment terms such as what we had in the US with banks, General Motors, etc? (e.g., stock/warrant issuance, etc. to the government). Afterall, whether HMM's problem is liquidity or solvency, that shipping demand remains is an important fact.