Mr. Son paid a higher price than now. Anyway, if you think you and others here are in the same boat as Masa Son and Claure you need your head examined imo. They make decisions based on their positions, Son as a billionaire head of a enterprise engaged in internet commerce, networking and mobile businesses, Claure as a near billionaire who gets to play in a larger pond. What does that have in common with the average investor? Their interests might overlap or they might not be as concerned. Son is not "Mr. Sprint" he is Masa Son, head of Softbank, a profitable and nimble company. Claure is more directly involved and his time and energy is tied into Sprint, however, if he walked away he would still have about as much money as he came to Sprint with... more than he is likely able to spend in his lifetime.
Just because they own stock does not make them right. Most CEOs have some stock in their companies. Although Claure made a direct purchase, his stock picking skills are unknown and distinct from his ability to run a phone distributor. Its definitely a bullish indicator but only one of many things that show where S might head. The things that trump Claure's purchase is wrapped up in Sprint's performance.. if that falls short or is delayed to manana, S may head south despite Claure's vote of confidence.
Sprint might be set to move up based on meeting lowered expectations... however, I would be reluctant to place a heavy bet on that.
There is opportunity in stocks that have decisive trading patterns and support and resistance levels: besides using these to help judge where to place orders to buy or sell, resistance and support levels can be used to place orders to sell (or buy) options. For example, say you entered an order to buy or already hold S and see a strong resistance level as you described. You might sell covered calls at 5.50 or 6 once the stock broke to the upside and momentum/volume appeared to be tapering off and the chart showed signs of running into resistance. With time decay working for you, you might repeat the sale of covered options from 2 to six times per year on a stock that trades like Sprint, ie. with volume in the millions of shares and high level of options trading to allow getting in and out easily, and with a relatively high level of volatility (high beta). An advantage of the covered call strategy is that there is limited risk - the risk of getting locked in as the stock falls or getting called away. Of course, you can 'go naked' on the call by selling the stock while leaving the option open, or, if called away, buy back the stock. However, much of the time stocks stall under strong resistance while the price decay of the calls results in ability to buy them back at a lower price, often even though the stock price has moved higher than when you sold them. Options charts that include black-scholes can help pick timing.
A remedial lesson:
Technical stock traders use a number of factors to pick stocks that look like they might move up or down. Among these are a) Chart formations. These include 'pendant' or 'flag' formations, and 'cup and handle' similar to what can be seen in Sprint's current chart. Gaps and tight trading ranges can often show levels where resistance/support to a move up or down are likely to be strong.
Another factor is seen in trading volume that has occurred at various levels. Some charting programs and sites like stockcharts can show this. Several indicators are based on volume and momentum... the volume trading chart often helps understand the meaning of the indicators.
Sound confusing? Technical analysis (TA) is as much an art as a science. Much of the time the TA is neutral to only somewhat bullish or bearish. The goal, however, is to improve the odds of your bets. As such, what expert traders look for are the charts and indicators that are most bullish or bearish... the high odds bets.
TA traders go about this using various methodologies and timeframes. Some I know start out by using pre-screening software that scans up to thousands of shares, usually done after the market closes. I've used this type of software to pick out a list of charts based on stock formation and volume patterns. You might set the criteria to be stocks that trade at least 2 million shares per day, have a high volatility, and show a particular chart formation for example. Among the best traders also use programmed executions. Say you see Sprint shows a cup and handle and flag formation. Therefore, you set a program trade to buy if the stock break higher, say above 5.30. If that executes, you can have an automatic order entered to sell based on a trailing stop-loss algorithm.
It does look like a cup and handle and pendant formation. The range has been narrowing while volume has decreased. Volatility has decreased. Agree that this is a bullish chart formation. Accum/Dist. looks favorable. So does ADX. However, some other indicators are neutral to bearish. Longer term charts show several levels of strong overhead resistance. Sprint (S) sits under the 120 and 200 day moving averages, gap down, and high volume trading level. This makes this a pivot point.. dependent on a catalyst to decide which direction imo.
Pluses of the Google MVNO Deal:
` Sprint gets to sell service at a 60% (guess) discount. Sprint needs to generate higher revenue even if at low margin.
- Google will provide help and a common market for seamless wifi to 3G/4G call and data transfers
- Sprint will gain experience in making T-Mobile and Sprint networks work together.
- Collaboration with T-M may open up greater opportunities to work together or, if regulators change opinions, perhaps with a new administration, to allow a merger.
- Sprint needs to achieve higher margins. The Google deal will be at a steep discount. ie. lower margins.
- Sprint needs to pursue innovations, not put eggs in Google basket to innovate for them
- The objectives Google has spelled out is a small scale effort. Sprint needs big moves up in sales to improve their position.
Every bit of business can help. Innovation that this deal experiments around with coulda, woulda, shoulda maybe help more.
Sprint has shown significant improvement in network performance. However, the entire field has improved. While Sprint appears to have improved more than competitors over recent months, it is making up a deficit and continues to lag behind in the national statistics.
Analysts and operators understand from experience and studies that the most important criteria are 1. coverage, 2. Voice quality and voice and messaging reliability. 3. Bandwidth. Bandwidth is least important because users most often connect via WiFi at home and work. While mobile BB has gained in importance, the ability to connect and voice and text connectivity remain on the top of the list.
Sprint is working to address the deficits including seamless handover between wifi and 3G/LTE networks, densification including use of smallcell HetNet architecture, multiple-carrier aggregation, etc. However, all competitors are working to improve, often in more places than Sprint.
The situation is too complex and conflicted to 'trust' management to give a straight story. If Sprint is showing enough improvement in service and the impacts of various rate plans, conversion of Radio Shack stores, etc. is having a compounded positive impact, this will show up in un-fudged numbers Sprint reports.
Posting on PRKR had nothing to do about Qualcomm idiot. This began long before Q was sued by this little pisant company. It was about the patents and technology.. which I thgouht were invalid as I watched this farce proceed with jackals like yourself promoting it to fleece the pockets of suckers. Qualcomm is just the target that Parkervision went after... it does not matter who the #$%$ they went after.. the result was going to be the same in the end. (However, I had thought they would have staked out smaller companies to intimidate first).
You can try to excuse the broader picture by claiming I or others 'work for Qualcomm' .. go blow it out of your #$%$.. its a juvenile way to try to defend your position.
must get off the dime and innovate in the network-to-market to utilize what they have, 2.6GHz or sell off the company for a loss because it will go into competitive decline under a mountain of debt otherwise. The sooner the fellow idiots face up to that fact, the more chance they have of averting what almost looks like inevitable disaster.
So? Sprint cannot gain on competitors who are l3-4 times their size by having just equal networks. Furthermore, Sprint starts with a less than equal fundamental position in spectrum portfolio and network builds that dooms the company to failure if their quest is just to match VZ and T in networks. It does not equate no matter who the #$%$ heads up operations.. Masa Son or Claure be damned.. they do not walk on water to change the basic situation.
Spectrum info: Sprint fails to use their 2.6GHz spectrum innovatively which results in epic business failure and defunct valuation. This has led to a situation that is 'almost end of story' for the company. Measures to use it that run short of 'innovation in the network-to-market' are brain dead excuses. That shows up in the results Sprintsy wintsy continues to report... after all these years of failed promises by one CEO or the other.
If things aren't working, scrap the company or do something different.. isn't that business 101 MBA teaching? So do it already and stop the never ending processiion of half-measures. Sprint is one sick little puppy that never learns new tricks.
"That would be a epic move..." Not much.. that would be an incremental move. What would be epic is if Sprint and T-Mobile were to capture about 20% overall marketshare from VZ and T so that the market would be four fairly equal players. The chances of that happening are close to zero. However, it is reasonably possible for S and TM to carve out enough share to come closer in size and have the same basic market advantages. There is much that could change in the device integration, network and market innovations.
Claure said he wanted to make Sprint into a more entrepreneurial company that can innovate and react quickly to market conditions. Thus far he has shown an adroitness that is a significant change for the old dog.
Subscriber numbers are the most followed metric besides the financials. However, sub and related numbers tell only part of the story: The 'market' is comprised of several moving parts: the retail segment is the largest and is what Sprint and T-Mobile do most of their business. There is also government, enterprise, automotive, medical, and MtM/IoT, Machine-to-Machine and Internet of Things. These other markets are primarily owned by AT&T and Verizon. These segments influence becomes clear if you look at the number of subscribers held by Sprint and T-M, you see they are about half of that of VZ and T yet the larger competitors do 3-4X the amount of business. In reality, although all four are considered 'tier 1 operators', Verizon and AT&T are in a class above their rivals. That is difficult but theoretically not impossible to upset. It will not change in just months or years. However, if T-Mobile and Sprint were allowed to merge, the combined company would likely have a better chance to shift government/enterprise, auto, medical and IoT business.
In many respects, Verizon and AT&T are insulated from being overtaken by S, TM, DISH, or any combination of mobile, cable or satellite operators. That leaves the focus on the retail market... "That is where the money is".
Generally, Verizon and AT&T's positions in the industry has solidified over the past several years while Sprint and T-Mobile's positions have weakened. This is caused by fundamental factors: Industry maturity. Escalation of capex requirements that favors the largest scale competitors for acquisition of spectrum and operation of networks. Maturity of devices. Maturity and consolidation of service plans that favors migration of use to the most common denominator operators. And numerous other factors.
This is why Masa Son pled with regulators to allow Softbank to acquire T-Mobile - he posed that consolidation was required in order for the combined Sprint+TMUS to become a viable competitor. Regulators, however, are disposed to push TM and S to compete with technology, product, and market innovations. "Radical brain salad surgery" is needed for Sprint to become profitably competitive. Imo, some moves have been made but not nearly as deep rooted and extensive as necessary. Sprint will likely not deliver results that show it on a trajectory to return ROI on network and marketing capex programs that push it into the black. Thus Sprint remains in 'treading water' or decline rather than growth mode as debt continues to erode the company's long term prospects.
"Desperate times require desperate measures" .. and we are not talking about marketing mucking around only.
You are looking at among the right metrics. Higher churn for the 70% marketshare holders can translate into greater ability of Sprint (or TMUS) taking away share. However, Sprint has made recent changes in their service plans including discount promotions and contract buyouts and the impact of the RS stores and new direct sales program leave whether S would take advantage of higher churn rates among T or VZ hanging out there to be resolved in the 3rd or 4th quarter.
Nokia has among the best base station line ups.. they were the pioneer in modularization and environmentally cooled BS that is now common, and in multiple-mode integration. Lucent has developed highly integrated assemblies used in small cells and has gone into network management which can complement Nokia. The main reason for the acquisition is that as the industry has converged upon international adoption of LTE and the Chinese suppliers and market has exploded, there is need to consolidate to gain competitive scale of operations. This makes little difference to operators. Its unlikely to be opposed strongly by EU regulators.
If it doesn't generate more user satisfaction/retention, improve brand image, it will be a 'desperate move'. It it does those things, it will look like a bold move. it won't be a large additional expense and can be cut back quickly because it uses an outside contractor. Overall, this isn't going to make or break Sprint.. won't likely have much impact on sales or profit/loss in itself.
Sprint's problem goes to how equipment is deployed in the first mile of the network using 2.6GHz. It may be too late for the company to change and perk up cash flows to the extent to bolt ahead of the competition. However, now is the 'show me' period in which the results of these moves will be the proof of the pudding. Can Sprint gain real rather than marketing department hyped momentum? "We'll know it when we see it"
It must be comforting to know that you are right, in your own mind, about something. Too bad. So, you were right that a group of us conspired to defeat PRKR? That conspiracy must reach far and wide in order to prevent Parkerscamavision from achieving one iota of success. This little stock board must be read by every human on the planet .. taking what we say very seriously. So be it. Thus you were right but like the proverbial village idiot went ahead and bought, held and encouraged others to buy PRKR stock.
Claure impresses me as a down to earth CEO.. too bad Sprintsy wintsy was so pucked royal in the past.
T-Mobile is the number 3 mobile carrier in the USA now. Sprint now must show growth to try to take it back and get on the positive cash flow trend.