Keeping in mind that short interest data is reported every two weeks from accumulated data. The average of the data is about 2 weeks old at the time its last reported.
Settlement Date Short Interest Avg Daily Share Volume Days To cover
8/29/2014 110,916,976 23,096,722 4.802282
8/15/2014 100,412,481 38,828,518 2.586050
7/31/2014 84,571,795 18,318,789 4.616670
7/15/2014 74,439,938 10,074,824 7.388709
6/30/2014 74,273,439 10,642,865 6.978707
This shows that short interest went up prior to the recent move up... which was contrary to the record of short sellers in the past which is SI goes down in weeks after the stock has moved down sharply, up (only) when the stock has moved up near cyclical highs. That makes it look like short sellers got this wrong by betting that Sprint's fate has been sealed and the exit of Hesse and entry of Claure would spell more misfortune rather than hopes for a turn around.
Touting peak data rates is almost false advertising. Sprint consistently fails to live up to to the promise of peak data rates. Take a look at the mentioned RootMetrics report: looking at the coverage maps, toggle between the various parameters including "best technology found'. Then toggle between the various operators. Sprint shows solid blocking of downtown Seattle and Tacoma with 4G, however, the surrounding area shows what you might call 'corridor coverage' around the major highways and arterials. Compared to Verizon or T-mobile, Sprint lacks coverage into the suburbs where the majority of 'Seattleites" (or Tacomans) live. The reason for that is Sprint has taken over the base station locations from Clearwire and converted to 4G-Advanced. However, many people live more than short distance needed to get good coverage given the hilly terrain and heavy forestation. Sprint's deployment strategy is not yet changed from Clearwire's.. macro base stations without the small cells to fill in coverage shadows or aide in suburban area building penetration. The much touted 8X8 MIMO-AAS/beamforming LTE-Advanced technology is a help, however, there are no 8X devices and few more than 2X being used. Small cells are available using 4X, 6X, even 8X MIMO-AAS.. but Sprint has yet to use them across their 3G coverage map.
Peak levels is ignorant when the market has come to understand what that means. Peak levels mean one thing in the central metro coverage area which, as RootMetrics map shows, is solidly covered. Those areas have to be fitted with in-building signal enhancement.. which is true for all operators.. more true for using 2.5GHz than, say, Verizon's or AT&T 700MHz LTE.
"Peak data rates for dummies" Definition: Peak data rates if you live in Seattle with a window view.
Sprint has rebounded nicely since CEO Claure initiated new price plans and followed with deals on the new iPhone 6. Wall Street loves Claure's straightforward approach, cost cutting, and focus on building Sprint from the ground up.
I'm shifting my recommendation from buy to hold and take profits/sell. One way to take profits is to sell covered calls at 7 or above. OCT 7 calls will clip over 40c, NOV 7s 60c,
Sprint has shown strong upside momentum, is at the gap level and may move past the 7.20 target price mentioned in previous posts.
Short term: sell for profits. Mid term/trend trading: sell calls or sell for profits. Long term: Hold
That is forced by the spectrum Sprint has and the approach they have developed to deployments. Claure's job is to make the best of the situation. Part of that is to put a more appealing face on the effort and part of it is to actualy build more robustly than in the past. Its easy to say they will focus on city-by city build of 2.5GHz to have it be the best network in each city because that is the only way they can proceed unless they build in a different type of layered approach that Sprint has prepared for.
The approach Sprint can pursue under Claure is to build city-by-city more densely so the the service covers better and takes advantage of the fat pipes of 2.5GHz nobody else has. There is nothing new about that except that Sprint has built the foundation network or 'phase 1' and can now focus on 'densification' and refinements that take better advantage of the largely unused spectrum. Again, the reason it is done city-by-city is because cities are dense so the network can be built dense. That is gated by the cost of building the 'best network' using the higher frequency spectrum. Sprint cannot build that same type of dense network in sparser use areas such as the suburbs or rural areas until they grow into it or get low frequency spectrum. That limits where Sprint can 'be best' or, realistically, be among the top 2 competitors in several metro areas. There is nothing wrong with that because cities are where the majority of revenue comes from ... its where most people live and work. Except that some live in suburbs that might not get the best service.
Claure expressed a focus of cutting out 'nice to haves' and building the network, using 2.5GHz, to provide unlimitted service. Other where was mentioned rolling out more cities and building higher density in 2.5GHz.
Sprint has ground to make up but now looks headed in the right direction... to innovate in the network-to-market.
Claure appears ready to make the long needed changes in Sprint management to make it more accountable and entrepreneurial. Sprint management needed house cleaning. I'm sure there are good people who will be shaken out... however, the depth of change needed has to transform the company into a much more seat of the pants, ground up innovative, enabling service to the customer. Claure is right, the management needed cannot come from Softbank as a top-down, eternal push. Sprint has to be remade into a new company that makes bolder internal moves. Even in doing so, Sprint can take advantage of Softbank's skills, product innovation, etc. better by getting their own house in order.
Claure is saying all the right things including about use of Wi-Fi. "Wi-Fi" can, with finishing development work, be used more widely, including use of 'LTE Wi-Fi' as proposed by Qualcomm. That can include use of Wi-Fi that is deployed in both unlicensed and licensed spectrum. Call it Wi-Fi or smallcell - using LTE technology and multimode unlicensed-licensed spectrum, Sprint can go beyond what any other operator has the spectrum available to do.. if they act in time before 3.5GHz 'innovation zone spectrum' opens up to other operators.
The opportunity for Claure is to change Sprint from being the follower in application of technology and marketing to a company that leads. Who started low prices and contract buy-outs aggressively? T-mobile. Who started using smallcells? Verizon and AT&T. Who was first to deploy LTE? T-Mobile was first to open a network, Verizon was the major industry motivator and largest deployed network. Who was first with mobile to Wi-Fi VoIP? T-Mobile, likely quickly to be followed by Sprint.
What should come forward under Claure is Sprint first... not 'me too'. He has been that type of leader... the street fighter and, to the extent his Brightstar operation was capable, an innovator.
Sprint (S) now looks vulnerable to consolidation such taht a pullback/back-filling may be in the offing. It remains a buy to cycle up to about the 7.20ish level im coming days/weeks but may settle lower before then imo.
1. It crashed down to oversold due to collapse of T-Mobile takeover
2. Sprint instigated lower pricing, easier plans, contract buy-outs
3. The introduction of Apple, Sharp, Samsung devices with TD-LTE B41 Spark support
4. Tradeshow and media attention hit at the right time
5. Short selling had run its course and creates upward pressure to cover to take profits
6. The 'price war' has been considered a risky threat to top-line sales and margins if it didn't produce substantial gains in subscribers for the two junk yard dog combatants, T-mobile and Sprint. Sprint was most under pressure because the entry into the price war had been one-sided, with TMUS doing the cutting and winning marketshare as a result. Analysts and some investors who do the work can put their fingers in the wind by walking the trade show floors and storerooms and mall kiosks to figure out that Sprint is attracting net subscribers. T-Mobile's most recent report that they are gaining rather than tapering off in sales momentum also helps Sprint as the majority off share is likely coming from AT&T and Verizon. Thus the fears that the price war would result in only modest sales gains at the cost of ARPU and margins, resulting in losses, does not appear to be the case. Combined with S being oversold and introduction of new devices including iPhone 6 models with Spark that is offered as 'iPhone for Life', puts an upward bias on the stock.
Lesson in chart reading: A few days prior to the the big move up, S had moved back up near the gap down level on high volume. This 'accumulation' shows up in several of the technical indicators to trigger buy signals. Some of this was likely short interest covering. Then when S broke above the gap level it gained momentum as some on the sidelines to go long or cover jumped in. The pros and cons of the investment only generally have to add up to become positive.. not all factors must be viewed as having turned a corner to be made right. Kazinga! up momentum
This feature is part of the new standards.. what prevents Sprintsy wintsy from having done something like this now or having done something like this using a pre-standard technology such as WiMAX has been Sprint's total brain deadness when it comes to 'innovation in the network-to-market. The Sprint engineering department do not think like this... it is by the old school top down network methodology approach book. What Sprint is doing well is using among the most advanced macrocell technologies, such as 8X8 MIMO-beamforming technology. When it comes to taking advantage of the 'technology' that has always been available in abundance at almost zero cost, the technology of the user's brain and hands to place a smallcell where it is most useful, Sprint has been a complete text book braindead wreck.
If you don't trust a person, me or anyone else, put them on ignore and read only what you like to read.. that is the ShareZombie generation way to do things isn't it?
That's only partly true or time-skewed true: Sprint's use of LTE-Advanced technology can be made to provide reasonably good coverage where the base stations are closely placed such as can be done in cities because the user/area concentration is high. So long as an operator takes care of problem areas such as in-buildings, garages, and shadow areas not covered by available rooftop and other macrocell base station sites, the coverage can be made good in the metro environment. The problem is extending that outside the major traffic areas where the use per area goes down, thus not justifying the high density of deployment needed to achieve consistent quality signal levels. In order to compete without relying so much on being the operator with lowest prices and pay-to-switch programs, Sprint will have to either deploy massively smallcell similar to what Softbank JP, China Mobile and other operators using 2.3-2.7GHz bands have done.
The stock pumpers here on this board want to deceive investors by calling anyone who posts information like this 'bashers'.. OK, this is a bahser post because it tells it like it is and the namby-pamby stock advocates have no stomach for discussion that is open and does not tow the company propaganda line.
"Bashers" to the rescue of ShareZombies who want to suck the brains out of stock board discussions.
Wi-Fi isn't everywhere because the power level is very limited, the symbol duration is designed for short-range communications, and it shares the same spectrum with microwave ovens, florescent lights, in-home wireless phones, and other interferers in the high 2.4GHz and 5GHz bands.
However, Wi-Fi is in a lot of places, particularly in-door places where outside mobile network signals can have a difficult time reaching at good signal strength. That is a primary reason why about 60% of so called mobile network traffic goes over Wi-Fi. What is different about the recent announcements from T-Mobile and Sprint is that they are using the advanced methods found in 802.11ac and 3GPP LTE-Advanced to do seamless handover of mobile network calls between Wi-Fi and mobile. As part of this, T-Mobile is now offering an ASUS RT-AC68U that has apparently been modified to work well on T-Mo's network. The advantage of using an 802.11ac version Wi-Fi router is these achieve longer range by using 3x3 to 4x4 MIMO-beamforming. Another advantage is the mentioned .11ac ability to be used with mobile networks to provide seamless handoffs of IP connections for calls, text, and BB. And, of course, a big advantage for mobile operators is they get to offer users the ability to hand off the service to DSL or cable service so that the bandwidth is provided by the user's BB service company, freeing up capacity and coverage needs for the mobile operator.
T-Mobile is so happy to provide this capability that they are providing the $195 ASUS RT-AC68U (per Amazon) for only $100. Compared to providing an LTE femtocell or deploying smallcells outside the premises, that works out to be a bargain for the operator. "Pretty neat, huh?" ala Hesse.
Notice that the article intones this: "Led by quirky Chief Executive John Legere, the third-largest wireless operator in the U.S. has turned around years of subscriber losses through aggressive promotions in the past year and a half." .. the first time I've seen T-mobile recognized as the number 3 operator. That might be a couple months early and kidding the issue: T-Mobile had earlier pulled within a whisker of Sprint in terms of subscriber share. If some of S's counting of data subscriptions are backed out, the two have been fairly well equal in marketshare. If the reported 2.75 million customers does not prove to be similar gilding the lily with double counting of data add-ons subscriptions, that clearly puts T-Mobile and Sprint on an even footing in terms of marketshare. The heck with it.. this comes down to bragging rights... in which case T-Mobile wins because they have shown a trend in momentum that looks to overtake Sprint within a few months ... that is if the trajectory has not been altered.
Wireless service is a bit like politics.. its all local. How well T-Mobile or Sprint do revolves around how well the service does in each local market. It so happens that Sprint beats out T-Mobile according to the FCC provided statistics where I live. I don't use Sprint however for 'framily' reasons. Yet that is what I would look at if I were to change or asked for advice... its all local and the test of operators is in the national average abilities and gains vs. losses.
Sprint counted laptop data subscriptions in their subscriber count... while showing continued net loss in post-paid subscribers. Sprint is in the same boat with T-mobile: even though they compete like the junk yard dogs they are, they will only improve their net positions if they take share away from Verizon and AT&T. Otherwise it look more like a price-war 'race to the bottom' with deteriorating ARPU and margins while AT&T and Verizon continue to spend heavily to stay ahead in networks and breath of services, getting a jump on the next staging of growth from video and 'Internet of Things'.
Enjoy the war with T-mobile... and hope that the gains they are seeing do not continue to come out of Sprint's hide... and that Sprint does the same... take share away from the ~68% marketshare dominators, VZ and T. If T-Mo is indeed taking share from the top dogs, that bodes well for Sprint's campaign.
" The frequency and time domain differentiation of signals is a valid argument against Parkervision/McKoolaide's thesis of PV's alleged circuit operation: If the baseband signal is resolved both at the output of the mixer and following at the output of the TX capacitor, then there is time and frequency phase variation in the signal that will occur due to the signal path into the TX capacitor." to be clear, the way McKoolaide/Parker want to describe how QCOM's circuit works creates a big problem for them. The signal being resolved at two points in the circuit, the second magically (unexplained mechanism) within the TX capacitor while transferring carrier wave energy to the baseband, creates two out of phase copies of the signal. Although never explained or shown in theory or evidence, the combining of signals along he same path as is alleged would create frequency skew interference. Think of that as looking through optics to see overlapping double images. Its possible, with 3D glasses, to get an enhanced image using slightly altered signals in the frequency (color) domain. However, the glasses filter out one 'signal' from one ye while filtering out the other color 'signal' variation from the other eye. That trick allows the human brain to recompile the two versions into a 3D depth perception image that is clearer/better than non-3D. Wireless signal processing can make use of multiple signals that are at different time-space/phase relationships to each other, then either cancelling out unwanted interference or combining signals to achieve higher SNR, signal to noise ratio, and higher reliability. The newest methods coming into commercial use include Co-MIMO and MU-MIMO which coordinate multiple signals from multiple device directions. These methods can be proven by both theory of operation and actual measurements.. Proof instead of Fairy Dust. Companies have developed emulation software, test and measurement instruments to see how these methods work.
This attempt to spin the conversation over "mixed time domain discussion with frequency domain." is ridiculous: Parkervision did not present their case strategy based on such a differentiation between frequency domain and time domain signals. That argument falls in there with other of F.D. Sorrells' fairy dust explanations.. just put it out there with no evidence to support it. The frequency and time domain differentiation of signals is a valid argument against Parkervision/McKoolaide's thesis of PV's aledged circuit operation: If the baseband signal is resolved both at the output of the mixer and following at the output of the TX capacitor, then there is time and frequency phase variation in the signal that will occur due to the signal path into the TX capacitor. Parkervision threw their second baseband signal occurrence at Judge Dalton in probably hipes he would bite.. but he did not. Dalton correctly saw that PV's case had not anticipated a second point of baseband generation, that PV had failed to present that as a theory in the case or in pretrial Markman hearings, and, furthermore, this is not in Parker's patents or shown in any evidence in or outside of the trial proceedings.
"Step right up folks, Parker's magical snake oil elixir will cure gout, bronchitis, arthritis, cancer... everything. What's that, you say it didn't work to cure your Magellan circuit disease? That is because you did not take enough to cure it at both MX and TX.. buy another bottle of irrational explanations miracle snake-oil cure and swallow it with a glass of McKoolaide punch and call me in the morning to buy some more...until you are broke."
"Maybe a little short squeeze" whatever dude.. the stock price is up a little AFTER short sellers sold at a higher average price level.. dweebs in Yahooville! post 'shorts are hurting... yea, they are hurting from laughter as they cover for a profit given to them by less capable little dwerps who post here.
"And if they can get their speeds up everywhere, I think they can start bringing in customers as quickly as T-Mobile is currently. Especially when Sprint Spark goes live in a lot more cities." Sprint plans to cover about 100M pops with Spark by year end. That is not going to quickly cover as much of a footprint as rivals networks. It does not necessarily need to in order to hold onto marketshare in the non-Spark coverage areas with low prices, iPhone, Crystal, Samsung and other device programs while providing improved voice coverage. Sprint has the potential to gain subscribers in the major metro areas covered by Spark because that is where the mix of network technology and spectrum works to better immediate advantage due to the naturally higher density of the deployments. I've described Sprints coverage as 'lumpy gravy'.. its that but that can be made OK in the dense urban areas because a large amount of the coverage area will fit under the peaks of high signal areas rather than the lower signal coverage valleys and lack of coverage of suburban and rural areas.
The choice of Clare as the new CEO is astute on Masa Son's part because he is 'a street fighter': he had built his business from the ground up by going into the streets, per-by-person, device by device and area by area to sell based on price/value and competitive service. That can work in Sprint's current situation because the service can be expected to work well in the metro hot zone coverage areas.
You can bet that T-Mobile and other competitors will continue to fight back: the national network survey's will continue to show Sprint trailing behind all other operators imo. However, Sprint may start to show enough improvement in major metro areas to increase their rating to share or even, although less likely, gain the top spot in overall performance in coming months.
This must be the 500th time you have said a big deal will soon come forward. There does not have to be a big deal that sparks (pun) a rise in the stock: Sprint has been making step-wise moves while the stock has been forming a base at a technically oversold level. The 'catalyst' with such a setup can simply be the coming together of these steps with the announcement of the availability of the iPhones with plans that are NOT a break with locking in of subscribers by shifting to no-contract price-compete plans. What the market is probably partly reacting to is that Sprint looks likely to gain long term post-paid subscribers using the availability of the new iPhones. 'iPhone for life' means 'revenue and margin stability and not falling into price war hell-o'.
Maybe Sprint is talking with DISH even though neither side is rumored to be engaged in new talks. The logic for a merger or joint partnership has been hanging out there for years and has greater reason to come to pass soon... or will that be DISH+TMUS at the alter?
Sprint's chart has been bullish since the crash to this level. Today marks a break out above the gap-down price level. I had put a buy on S when it crashed and reiterated that several times. It remains a buy with targets as per previous posts.
You make blanket statements that, while being valid in that Sprint has undeniably lost money in the past, does not forecast what is likely going forward. The reason for Sprint to ditch iDen and the more recently adopted WiMAX network technologies and move forward with CDMA and LTE is that these are mainstream technologies. Eventually Sprint and all other major operators in the US will convert all of their networks to LTE-Advanced or a subset such as LTE over unlicensed spectrum, LTE eMBMS multicast, and MtM. CDMA, HSPA/HSPA+ and GSM will eventually be replaced even though they are basically compatible and use the same core network. Thus, even while Sprint still lacks a staunch of low frequency spectrum to have better balance that can be lower cost and provide more desirable overall coverage, they can achieve lower cost of deployments and operation of networks and should be able to achieve better customer satisfaction due to fewer call drops and other problems. Combined with cost cutting in other parts of operations, device and equipment sourcing economies, Sprint has better prospects of crossing over break even than in the past. Its not 'old Sprint'. You might say 'its not yet New Sprint' until more is done to fulfill the promise of their network conversions and use of band 41 spectrum. However, the path Sprint is on fits with the mainstream developments in chipsets, devices, network equipment and software, and with potential for breaking new ground with partnerships.
Sprint (and T-mobile for that matter) do have a feasible path forward to achieve growth without going bust. It could work out that they both lose money due to price cuts in the near term. However, that should also result in subscriber gains which the stock market usually looks at favorably so long as the end game down the road makes sense. That is where the TV/media piece must be developed over the course of he next few years to keep the two dogs in the same junk yard as VZ and T.