Liberty Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 I have found the comparisons between Charter and Comcast useful in thinking about what Charter's financials could look like a few years down the line. Here's an update on that topic from someone with a similar viewpoint: http://yetanothervalueblog.com/2019/02/chtr-earnings-were-nice-but-its-still-way-too-cheap.html I don't understand the market selling off CHTR since the spike...maybe short-termism has taken hold for now? I would think sideways movement would be more likely, unless the spike is being used for another purpose...perhaps they stopped buy backs in anticipation that price declines will help get better shareholder value? Movements this short-term are almost all noise and no signal. CMCSA is also down, so probably just moving together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwy000 Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 T-Mobile is certainly making a lot of claims about what it will offer to compete with in home broadband post-merger with Sprint. I'm not sure how they can promise to be cheaper than the cable companies when they don't know what pricing will be in 2-3 years. Certainly if you're trying to pay for a merger as well as a massive infrastructure build out for 5G it seems silly to get into a price war with incumbents who already have the infrastructure as well as the customer relationship. I suspect this is a lot of promises to get the merger approved and then what happens beyond that is the old bait-and-switch. https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/t-mobile-pledges-to-change-cableopoly-home-broadband-service Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vince Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 T-Mobile is certainly making a lot of claims about what it will offer to compete with in home broadband post-merger with Sprint. I'm not sure how they can promise to be cheaper than the cable companies when they don't know what pricing will be in 2-3 years. Certainly if you're trying to pay for a merger as well as a massive infrastructure build out for 5G it seems silly to get into a price war with incumbents who already have the infrastructure as well as the customer relationship. I suspect this is a lot of promises to get the merger approved and then what happens beyond that is the old bait-and-switch. https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/t-mobile-pledges-to-change-cableopoly-home-broadband-service I think cable fans will truly enjoy this article from fierce wireless .....Wireless Marek’s Take: Will fixed 5G be a broadband savior for wireless operators? Dont know how to provide a link. What I dont understand is why would the ceo's of AT&T and Verizon boast so loudly and confidently about their fixed 5G when they know damn well that it is not a competitive option. according to the article their tone and actions clearly show that the realities of 5G are proving to be more complicated than originally thought Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DooDiligence Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 T-Mobile is certainly making a lot of claims about what it will offer to compete with in home broadband post-merger with Sprint. I'm not sure how they can promise to be cheaper than the cable companies when they don't know what pricing will be in 2-3 years. Certainly if you're trying to pay for a merger as well as a massive infrastructure build out for 5G it seems silly to get into a price war with incumbents who already have the infrastructure as well as the customer relationship. I suspect this is a lot of promises to get the merger approved and then what happens beyond that is the old bait-and-switch. https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/t-mobile-pledges-to-change-cableopoly-home-broadband-service I think cable fans will truly enjoy this article from fierce wireless .....Wireless Marek’s Take: Will fixed 5G be a broadband savior for wireless operators? Dont know how to provide a link. What I dont understand is why would the ceo's of AT&T and Verizon boast so loudly and confidently about their fixed 5G when they know damn well that it is not a competitive option. according to the article their tone and actions clearly show that the realities of 5G are proving to be more complicated than originally thought Isn't the hype mainly directed at potential customers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WayWardCloud Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 T-Mobile is certainly making a lot of claims about what it will offer to compete with in home broadband post-merger with Sprint. I'm not sure how they can promise to be cheaper than the cable companies when they don't know what pricing will be in 2-3 years. Certainly if you're trying to pay for a merger as well as a massive infrastructure build out for 5G it seems silly to get into a price war with incumbents who already have the infrastructure as well as the customer relationship. I suspect this is a lot of promises to get the merger approved and then what happens beyond that is the old bait-and-switch. https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/t-mobile-pledges-to-change-cableopoly-home-broadband-service I think cable fans will truly enjoy this article from fierce wireless .....Wireless Marek’s Take: Will fixed 5G be a broadband savior for wireless operators? Dont know how to provide a link. What I dont understand is why would the ceo's of AT&T and Verizon boast so loudly and confidently about their fixed 5G when they know damn well that it is not a competitive option. according to the article their tone and actions clearly show that the realities of 5G are proving to be more complicated than originally thought Isn't the hype mainly directed at potential customers? Maybe I'm wrong but I don't see customers caring at all about 5G around me. There's no available 5G, no compatible handsets and no apps that require faster speed yet... So maybe in 1-3 years people will start caring but then why are telcos so vocal about it now? I can't speak for Vince but it seems to me that the hype comes from a desire to please the regulator in the case of Sprint and T-Mobile. For Verizon and ATT I believe they're mostly trying to keep Charter and Comcast's stocks down (fear of home 5G) so that they can get better terms when the inevitable fixe-mobile convergence merger talks start again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG2008 Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 T-Mobile is certainly making a lot of claims about what it will offer to compete with in home broadband post-merger with Sprint. I'm not sure how they can promise to be cheaper than the cable companies when they don't know what pricing will be in 2-3 years. Certainly if you're trying to pay for a merger as well as a massive infrastructure build out for 5G it seems silly to get into a price war with incumbents who already have the infrastructure as well as the customer relationship. I suspect this is a lot of promises to get the merger approved and then what happens beyond that is the old bait-and-switch. https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/t-mobile-pledges-to-change-cableopoly-home-broadband-service I think cable fans will truly enjoy this article from fierce wireless .....Wireless Marek’s Take: Will fixed 5G be a broadband savior for wireless operators? Dont know how to provide a link. What I dont understand is why would the ceo's of AT&T and Verizon boast so loudly and confidently about their fixed 5G when they know damn well that it is not a competitive option. according to the article their tone and actions clearly show that the realities of 5G are proving to be more complicated than originally thought Isn't the hype mainly directed at potential customers? Maybe I'm wrong but I don't see customers caring at all about 5G around me. There's no available 5G, no compatible handsets and no apps that require faster speed yet... So maybe in 1-3 years people will start caring but then why are telcos so vocal about it now? I can't speak for Vince but it seems to me that the hype comes from a desire to please the regulator in the case of Sprint and T-Mobile. For Verizon and ATT I believe they're mostly trying to keep Charter and Comcast's stocks down (fear of home 5G) so that they can get better terms when the inevitable fixe-mobile convergence merger talks start again. Using a fear tactic to keep CHTR and CMCSA stock down works if the target company is not buying back stock. But if they are aggressively buying back stock, the intrinsic value actually increases much more over the course of 2-5 years that when it is time to buy them, they are more expensive. I guess on an EV basis, they would not be expensive. It's just that on a per share basis, each remaining shareholder will get more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DooDiligence Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 T-Mobile is certainly making a lot of claims about what it will offer to compete with in home broadband post-merger with Sprint. I'm not sure how they can promise to be cheaper than the cable companies when they don't know what pricing will be in 2-3 years. Certainly if you're trying to pay for a merger as well as a massive infrastructure build out for 5G it seems silly to get into a price war with incumbents who already have the infrastructure as well as the customer relationship. I suspect this is a lot of promises to get the merger approved and then what happens beyond that is the old bait-and-switch. https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/t-mobile-pledges-to-change-cableopoly-home-broadband-service I think cable fans will truly enjoy this article from fierce wireless .....Wireless Marek’s Take: Will fixed 5G be a broadband savior for wireless operators? Dont know how to provide a link. What I dont understand is why would the ceo's of AT&T and Verizon boast so loudly and confidently about their fixed 5G when they know damn well that it is not a competitive option. according to the article their tone and actions clearly show that the realities of 5G are proving to be more complicated than originally thought Isn't the hype mainly directed at potential customers? Maybe I'm wrong but I don't see customers caring at all about 5G around me. There's no available 5G, no compatible handsets and no apps that require faster speed yet... So maybe in 1-3 years people will start caring but then why are telcos so vocal about it now? I can't speak for Vince but it seems to me that the hype comes from a desire to please the regulator in the case of Sprint and T-Mobile. For Verizon and ATT I believe they're mostly trying to keep Charter and Comcast's stocks down (fear of home 5G) so that they can get better terms when the inevitable fixe-mobile convergence merger talks start again. Yeah, the jokes on the consumer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DooDiligence Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 T-Mobile is certainly making a lot of claims about what it will offer to compete with in home broadband post-merger with Sprint. I'm not sure how they can promise to be cheaper than the cable companies when they don't know what pricing will be in 2-3 years. Certainly if you're trying to pay for a merger as well as a massive infrastructure build out for 5G it seems silly to get into a price war with incumbents who already have the infrastructure as well as the customer relationship. I suspect this is a lot of promises to get the merger approved and then what happens beyond that is the old bait-and-switch. https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/t-mobile-pledges-to-change-cableopoly-home-broadband-service I think cable fans will truly enjoy this article from fierce wireless .....Wireless Marek’s Take: Will fixed 5G be a broadband savior for wireless operators? Dont know how to provide a link. What I dont understand is why would the ceo's of AT&T and Verizon boast so loudly and confidently about their fixed 5G when they know damn well that it is not a competitive option. according to the article their tone and actions clearly show that the realities of 5G are proving to be more complicated than originally thought Isn't the hype mainly directed at potential customers? Maybe I'm wrong but I don't see customers caring at all about 5G around me. There's no available 5G, no compatible handsets and no apps that require faster speed yet... So maybe in 1-3 years people will start caring but then why are telcos so vocal about it now? I can't speak for Vince but it seems to me that the hype comes from a desire to please the regulator in the case of Sprint and T-Mobile. For Verizon and ATT I believe they're mostly trying to keep Charter and Comcast's stocks down (fear of home 5G) so that they can get better terms when the inevitable fixe-mobile convergence merger talks start again. Using a fear tactic to keep CHTR and CMCSA stock down works if the target company is not buying back stock. But if they are aggressively buying back stock, the intrinsic value actually increases much more over the course of 2-5 years that when it is time to buy them, they are more expensive. I guess on an EV basis, they would not be expensive. It's just that on a per share basis, each remaining shareholder will get more. Nice of them to help out ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cameronfen Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 T-Mobile is certainly making a lot of claims about what it will offer to compete with in home broadband post-merger with Sprint. I'm not sure how they can promise to be cheaper than the cable companies when they don't know what pricing will be in 2-3 years. Certainly if you're trying to pay for a merger as well as a massive infrastructure build out for 5G it seems silly to get into a price war with incumbents who already have the infrastructure as well as the customer relationship. I suspect this is a lot of promises to get the merger approved and then what happens beyond that is the old bait-and-switch. https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/t-mobile-pledges-to-change-cableopoly-home-broadband-service I think cable fans will truly enjoy this article from fierce wireless .....Wireless Marek’s Take: Will fixed 5G be a broadband savior for wireless operators? Dont know how to provide a link. What I dont understand is why would the ceo's of AT&T and Verizon boast so loudly and confidently about their fixed 5G when they know damn well that it is not a competitive option. according to the article their tone and actions clearly show that the realities of 5G are proving to be more complicated than originally thought Isn't the hype mainly directed at potential customers? Maybe I'm wrong but I don't see customers caring at all about 5G around me. There's no available 5G, no compatible handsets and no apps that require faster speed yet... So maybe in 1-3 years people will start caring but then why are telcos so vocal about it now? I can't speak for Vince but it seems to me that the hype comes from a desire to please the regulator in the case of Sprint and T-Mobile. For Verizon and ATT I believe they're mostly trying to keep Charter and Comcast's stocks down (fear of home 5G) so that they can get better terms when the inevitable fixe-mobile convergence merger talks start again. It's funny how in the threads about L brands and Molson Coors thread people talk about how those brands will never be the same because the market has irrevorocably fragmented. I think the analogy extends here as a possibility. 5G broadband doesnt have to be better than fixed line, it just has to be different (ie. cheaper but worse) to cut into cable's moat. Certainly it is likely that T-Mobile is exaggerating their capabilities with 5g to get a merger passed, but there might be some truth to their claims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scorpioncapital Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 I am worried everything in the world is being fragmented and disintermediated. There are very few truly great businesses, perhaps Google? and who knows how long that lasts. If it has no hard assets, it has to have soft assets, and with the danger of wage inflation those soft assets could be just as bad as hard assets. In fact, a hard asset business might paradoxically turn out to be better once again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vince Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 T-Mobile is certainly making a lot of claims about what it will offer to compete with in home broadband post-merger with Sprint. I'm not sure how they can promise to be cheaper than the cable companies when they don't know what pricing will be in 2-3 years. Certainly if you're trying to pay for a merger as well as a massive infrastructure build out for 5G it seems silly to get into a price war with incumbents who already have the infrastructure as well as the customer relationship. I suspect this is a lot of promises to get the merger approved and then what happens beyond that is the old bait-and-switch. https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/t-mobile-pledges-to-change-cableopoly-home-broadband-service I think cable fans will truly enjoy this article from fierce wireless .....Wireless Marek’s Take: Will fixed 5G be a broadband savior for wireless operators? Dont know how to provide a link. What I dont understand is why would the ceo's of AT&T and Verizon boast so loudly and confidently about their fixed 5G when they know damn well that it is not a competitive option. according to the article their tone and actions clearly show that the realities of 5G are proving to be more complicated than originally thought Isn't the hype mainly directed at potential customers? I don't see how that justify's their actions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vince Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 T-Mobile is certainly making a lot of claims about what it will offer to compete with in home broadband post-merger with Sprint. I'm not sure how they can promise to be cheaper than the cable companies when they don't know what pricing will be in 2-3 years. Certainly if you're trying to pay for a merger as well as a massive infrastructure build out for 5G it seems silly to get into a price war with incumbents who already have the infrastructure as well as the customer relationship. I suspect this is a lot of promises to get the merger approved and then what happens beyond that is the old bait-and-switch. https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/t-mobile-pledges-to-change-cableopoly-home-broadband-service I think cable fans will truly enjoy this article from fierce wireless .....Wireless Marek’s Take: Will fixed 5G be a broadband savior for wireless operators? Dont know how to provide a link. What I dont understand is why would the ceo's of AT&T and Verizon boast so loudly and confidently about their fixed 5G when they know damn well that it is not a competitive option. according to the article their tone and actions clearly show that the realities of 5G are proving to be more complicated than originally thought Isn't the hype mainly directed at potential customers? Maybe I'm wrong but I don't see customers caring at all about 5G around me. There's no available 5G, no compatible handsets and no apps that require faster speed yet... So maybe in 1-3 years people will start caring but then why are telcos so vocal about it now? I can't speak for Vince but it seems to me that the hype comes from a desire to please the regulator in the case of Sprint and T-Mobile. For Verizon and ATT I believe they're mostly trying to keep Charter and Comcast's stocks down (fear of home 5G) so that they can get better terms when the inevitable fixe-mobile convergence merger talks start again. It's funny how in the threads about L brands and Molson Coors thread people talk about how those brands will never be the same because the market has irrevorocably fragmented. I think the analogy extends here as a possibility. 5G broadband doesnt have to be better than fixed line, it just has to be different (ie. cheaper but worse) to cut into cable's moat. Certainly it is likely that T-Mobile is exaggerating their capabilities with 5g to get a merger passed, but there might be some truth to their claims. I respectfully disagree in this specific case. 5G, to gain any significant share, will most definitely have to provide more overall perceived value, better and cheaper. The problem is, it's neither. No matter how many people complain about cable, it has proven to be a sticky product. And that was when the product (and service in the case of some operators) offered tremendously less value than a consumer can get now. Charter's standard bundle (and even their HSD by itself) is going to be incredibly hard to disrupt assuming no revolutionary change to cable network infrastructure economics. Not only do they have a cost advantage, a big one I might add, (how do competitors offer a cheaper product, sustainably, when they are at a cost disadvantage?) they have a HUGE time advantage as it will take many years to develop any competing technology. In the meantime cable is growing very nicely and I wouldnt be surprised if it accelerated, as an industry. I believe strongly that you will see Charter achieve low double digit ebitda growth, (adjusted for mobile costs) at least for a few quarters starting within the next 15 months at the latest. And it looks like they can grow ebitda, between 5-8 percent for a long time thereafter. This is going to be extremely bullish for the stock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cameronfen Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 ^Just look at Europe. ADSL is a strictly inferior product than cable. But even if it costs just the same to build out, because telcos can offer it as a byproduct of fixed line buildout and it became culturally accepted, it damages the entire economics of cable in Europe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRM Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 I think the biggest factor for the majority of customers is price. The goal is to get rid of either the cable/dsl bill or the wireless carrier bill. This is the battle which is going to be waged over the next 10 years. Reliability is also very important and somewhat customer service. Performance in terms of which product is fastest won't matter to the majority of people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DooDiligence Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 T-Mobile is certainly making a lot of claims about what it will offer to compete with in home broadband post-merger with Sprint. I'm not sure how they can promise to be cheaper than the cable companies when they don't know what pricing will be in 2-3 years. Certainly if you're trying to pay for a merger as well as a massive infrastructure build out for 5G it seems silly to get into a price war with incumbents who already have the infrastructure as well as the customer relationship. I suspect this is a lot of promises to get the merger approved and then what happens beyond that is the old bait-and-switch. https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/t-mobile-pledges-to-change-cableopoly-home-broadband-service I think cable fans will truly enjoy this article from fierce wireless .....Wireless Marek’s Take: Will fixed 5G be a broadband savior for wireless operators? Dont know how to provide a link. What I dont understand is why would the ceo's of AT&T and Verizon boast so loudly and confidently about their fixed 5G when they know damn well that it is not a competitive option. according to the article their tone and actions clearly show that the realities of 5G are proving to be more complicated than originally thought Isn't the hype mainly directed at potential customers? I don't see how that justify's their actions Not justifying, just saying that I think they're selling air to mobile prospects as well as regulators. People need to be told they're getting something, even if they're really not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DooDiligence Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 I think the biggest factor for the majority of customers is price. The goal is to get rid of either the cable/dsl bill or the wireless carrier bill. This is the battle which is going to be waged over the next 10 years. Reliability is also very important and somewhat customer service. Performance in terms of which product is fastest won't matter to the majority of people. Until bundling becomes popular again. Then the goal is to entice people to buy multiple services again. Don't want to kill one goose when you'll be needing him to fertilize the other goose so you can make more geese. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/business/dealbook/bundling-online-services.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maybe4less Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 ^Just look at Europe. ADSL is a strictly inferior product than cable. But even if it costs just the same to build out, because telcos can offer it as a byproduct of fixed line buildout and it became culturally accepted, it damages the entire economics of cable in Europe. And yet DSL continues to lose share in the US. Cable's economics are not as good in Europe, but I don't think it's because of DSL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maybe4less Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 T-Mobile is certainly making a lot of claims about what it will offer to compete with in home broadband post-merger with Sprint. I'm not sure how they can promise to be cheaper than the cable companies when they don't know what pricing will be in 2-3 years. Certainly if you're trying to pay for a merger as well as a massive infrastructure build out for 5G it seems silly to get into a price war with incumbents who already have the infrastructure as well as the customer relationship. I suspect this is a lot of promises to get the merger approved and then what happens beyond that is the old bait-and-switch. https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/t-mobile-pledges-to-change-cableopoly-home-broadband-service I think cable fans will truly enjoy this article from fierce wireless .....Wireless Marek’s Take: Will fixed 5G be a broadband savior for wireless operators? Dont know how to provide a link. What I dont understand is why would the ceo's of AT&T and Verizon boast so loudly and confidently about their fixed 5G when they know damn well that it is not a competitive option. according to the article their tone and actions clearly show that the realities of 5G are proving to be more complicated than originally thought Isn't the hype mainly directed at potential customers? Maybe I'm wrong but I don't see customers caring at all about 5G around me. There's no available 5G, no compatible handsets and no apps that require faster speed yet... So maybe in 1-3 years people will start caring but then why are telcos so vocal about it now? I can't speak for Vince but it seems to me that the hype comes from a desire to please the regulator in the case of Sprint and T-Mobile. For Verizon and ATT I believe they're mostly trying to keep Charter and Comcast's stocks down (fear of home 5G) so that they can get better terms when the inevitable fixe-mobile convergence merger talks start again. It's funny how in the threads about L brands and Molson Coors thread people talk about how those brands will never be the same because the market has irrevorocably fragmented. I think the analogy extends here as a possibility. 5G broadband doesnt have to be better than fixed line, it just has to be different (ie. cheaper but worse) to cut into cable's moat. Certainly it is likely that T-Mobile is exaggerating their capabilities with 5g to get a merger passed, but there might be some truth to their claims. 5G broadband is certainly going to be different, but how is it going to be cheaper? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwy000 Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 One of the places it will really matter is the ability to offer quadruple play. The cablecos will never have a viable or competitive mobile play except by renting infrastructure from the wireless players (as Charter and Comcast are doing today). As John Malone is the first to tell you, if you are running your product on the competitors network you will always be at a disadvantage. As long as 5G is competitive (doesnt have to be better, just competitive) and they can bundle mobile wireless with at home broadband it is a level of competition that isnt there today. If you look at Europe everyone is going quadruple play and if you dont have it you are going to get surpassed. 5G is probably more hype than reality right now. But they will ultimately get it right - it's just a matter of time. I think if TMobile/Sprint falls thru, watch for one of them to be acquired by a cableco (or partnership of cablecos). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cameronfen Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 5G broadband is certainly going to be different, but how is it going to be cheaper? It's cheaper in the same way I assume dsl is cheaper, costs about the same to put in if you are digging underground cables, but dsl is for phone service and I can offer internet over the same pipes for no (or very little) additional cost so you can price it almost anywhere. Sure dsl is inferior so is 5g but if you can price it at any price or bundle it in a quad play, it doesnt have to be a category killer just a good enough product to make people think about switching. Then cable loses its pricing power. Maybe in 20 years when all the cable and telecoms have merged they will get it back, but who knows. Not saying this is a definite outcome, but a possibility most people in the thread have discounted more than they should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vince Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 One of the places it will really matter is the ability to offer quadruple play. The cablecos will never have a viable or competitive mobile play except by renting infrastructure from the wireless players (as Charter and Comcast are doing today). As John Malone is the first to tell you, if you are running your product on the competitors network you will always be at a disadvantage. As long as 5G is competitive (doesnt have to be better, just competitive) and they can bundle mobile wireless with at home broadband it is a level of competition that isnt there today. If you look at Europe everyone is going quadruple play and if you dont have it you are going to get surpassed. 5G is probably more hype than reality right now. But they will ultimately get it right - it's just a matter of time. I think if TMobile/Sprint falls thru, watch for one of them to be acquired by a cableco (or partnership of cablecos). I completely agree the quad bundle (or probably just the triple with mobile replacing land lines) will become much more popular. I also agree that at some point, maybe 5 years out, mobile infrastructure that cable is using is not sufficient. However, cable is already signing up quite a few mobile customers, they already have a viable quad bundle. By the time there is a viable competitive option (if ever....and remember, cable claims they even have an advantage in a 5G world because of their backhaul) cable will have millions of mobile customers already (Comcast already has over 1 million mobile connections). The fact that telecoms have to share their infrastructure, whereas cable does not, almost guarantees that cable is in a much better position to deliver better overall value. Do you really think that Verizon can offer 1 gig of HSD, ( I realize that Charter doesn't give you those speeds yet but they could for very little incremental cost and would if they felt they had to) and 2 unlimited mobile plans (In Charter's bundle one of the mobile phones really only gets 2 gigs but it's close enough when you consider wifi) for 135 bucks? It is possible that Verizon's 5G and superior mobile position will be a better combination but there is zero chance it will be cheaper than cable's and like I said earlier, cable has a huge time advantage. This story will be over, at least in my case, by that time that happens, and I wouldn't bet that it will ever happen. I don't want to sound overconfident, part of me gets nervous sometimes but when I think about it rationally I continue to arrive at the same conclusion based on all the knowable facts at this point in time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vince Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 5G broadband is certainly going to be different, but how is it going to be cheaper? It's cheaper in the same way I assume dsl is cheaper, costs about the same to put in if you are digging underground cables, but dsl is for phone service and I can offer internet over the same pipes for no (or very little) additional cost so you can price it almost anywhere. Sure dsl is inferior so is 5g but if you can price it at any price or bundle it in a quad play, it doesnt have to be a category killer just a good enough product to make people think about switching. Then cable loses its pricing power. Maybe in 20 years when all the cable and telecoms have merged they will get it back, but who knows. Not saying this is a definite outcome, but a possibility most people in the thread have discounted more than they should. I'm not absolutely certain on this but from all the information I have seen 5G may be more expensive than even fiber to the house. Much of the cost is in the equipment that is needed. Where did you find information to conclude that 5G cost is similar to DSL? I think you may be underestimating the speeds that people desire and will absolutely need at some point. For whatever reason, people are signing up for higher speed tiers than what is needed. Cabo advertises a slower speed at 35 dollars but when the customer calls they cant resist 100 mbps for an extra 15-20 bucks. Cabo also claims that their arpu's continue to grow without price increases....customers are choosing higher tiers, at every level for extra money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scorpioncapital Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 Everything I read makes me want to position size accordingly broadband delivery. Of course there is always time. Berkshire textile mills didn't fail at once, nor Sears. There is usually time to change ship. And if you're in a Malone controlled vehicle you hope they are even smarter to know what to do with the capital. Maybe they get into 5g if they really see it as a threat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DooDiligence Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 True or False? Charter is becoming a 5G wireless provider & can offer better bundles than Verizon. --- Rutledge said this was what he wanted to do back in 2010 as COO of Cablevision. https://gigaom.com/2010/03/01/419-cablevision-sees-alternative-path-to-entering-the-wireless-market/ https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/charter-looks-beyond-mvno-model-as-it-prepares-to-launch-wireless-next-year He has also stated multiple times that he wants to (and apparently now can) offload as much traffic as possible to their own system instead of using Verizons network & that initially using the MVNO agreement was for testing purposes. --- https://newtmobile.com/content/uploads/2018/09/Competition-in-Wireless-Telecommunications-Michelle-Connolly.pdf Abridged version: --- https://www.bbcmag.com/rural-broadband/5g-is-not-the-answer-for-rural-broadband --- The NY lawsuit mansplained? With a few interesting data points. https://stopthecap.com/2017/02/16/charter-ceo-admits-may-sharing-internet-connection-499-neighbors/ --- I'm pretty confident in CHTR & CMCSA's ability to take a lot of business from legacy MNO's. If it doesn't happen then it means Rutledge has wayyy overstated what CHTR is actually doing in wireless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cameronfen Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 5G broadband is certainly going to be different, but how is it going to be cheaper? It's cheaper in the same way I assume dsl is cheaper, costs about the same to put in if you are digging underground cables, but dsl is for phone service and I can offer internet over the same pipes for no (or very little) additional cost so you can price it almost anywhere. Sure dsl is inferior so is 5g but if you can price it at any price or bundle it in a quad play, it doesnt have to be a category killer just a good enough product to make people think about switching. Then cable loses its pricing power. Maybe in 20 years when all the cable and telecoms have merged they will get it back, but who knows. Not saying this is a definite outcome, but a possibility most people in the thread have discounted more than they should. I'm not absolutely certain on this but from all the information I have seen 5G may be more expensive than even fiber to the house. Much of the cost is in the equipment that is needed. Where did you find information to conclude that 5G cost is similar to DSL? I think you may be underestimating the speeds that people desire and will absolutely need at some point. For whatever reason, people are signing up for higher speed tiers than what is needed. Cabo advertises a slower speed at 35 dollars but when the customer calls they cant resist 100 mbps for an extra 15-20 bucks. Cabo also claims that their arpu's continue to grow without price increases....customers are choosing higher tiers, at every level for extra money. When I talk about DSL I'm using it as an analogy, with the analogy being since telcos already have infrastructure delivering your phone system, if that covers costs they can basically charge low rates for internet service. This metaphor doesnt hold now really but you still have the effects of this as dsl providers dont really sell much fixed line phone service anymore, but the legacy assets are still there and dont cost much to maintain so you call sell dsl for cheap even now. In the same way, even if 5g costs the same as fiber (I think it costs less), because you can use the same pipes for phone service and internet, your phone bill covers capex and you can charge whatever for 5g broadband. Cable companies have to use there pipes for cable but have to rent telecom assets as an MVNO for phone service, putting them at a cost disadvantage. That or they rent 5g assets for both phone and broadband basically making their capital useless. That being said, the vast majority of costs for cable is last mile connection. 5g broadband uses small cells so they dont have that cost. Here is a panel from Forbes discussing this (it was posted upthread as well): https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/washingtonbytes/2017/09/22/the-dawn-of-5g-will-wireless-kill-the-broadband-star/amp/ About halfway, Bennett mentions that fiber to the home costs about $700-1000 per home while 5g costs $100-200. This might be low idk as another article (https://www.investors.com/news/technology/verizon-5g-broadband-pricing-cable/) says CAC is $650 per house although this might have only broadband 5g buyers in the denominator and not all homes connected. Even so, 5g broadband is certainly competitive with cable and Verizon is offering its services below what cable operators are charging in places it has rolled out 5g broadband (same investors.com article). Additionally, the upgrade cycle is more favorable for 5g. 6g will likely involve different spectrum or a better compression algorithm. This is a software updated and involves basically changing code on the small cells, which to simplify, is just a push of a button. In order for cable to upgrade speeds you need to lay more fiber. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now