LVLT - Level 3

[brker_guy]

Carl, I don't know if I should be consulting with my lawyers to be suing VZSAURUS or Epsilon to allowed my email addresses and contact information to be stolen at 5 of the banks and vendors that I do business with.  All of these 5 are big clients of Epsilon, but it was the stupid VZSARUS network that HAS the security breach that caused all of this problem...  I'd tell ya, Carl.  You don't know how mad i am over this fiasco.

 

Oh, did you see that the FOOL.BOMB came out with another LVLT valuation story comparing us to VZ and T and then slide in their only pumping job of Internap (INAP).  Yes, FOOL.BOMB, it does not pass upon us that you are pumping your little worthless POS while panning LVLT.  We are not stupid, FOOL.BOMB!

[Guest ValueCarl]

Good God , Brker_guy, look what they're attempting to mire down Falcone's Light Squared with as well. If this doesn't scare "THE SHEOPLE" into beating down Light Square's biz model, nothing else will! While referencing the hand sets, they are having consultants estimate "billions" in costs including retroactive ones to ensure the handsets are unaffected. I like the analogy offered at the end of the article. Very astute commenter there.

 

Regarding almost daily diatribes by those FOOLS, I'd like to upchuck in their faces since they can't be turned off, that's how angry they make me with Yahoo enabling them over the wire at the same time.

 

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Planned-wireless-Internet-apf-2524394956.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=5&asset=&ccode 

 

 

The problem, they say, is that sensitive satellite receivers -- designed to pick up relatively weak signals coming from space -- could be overwhelmed when LightSquared starts sending high-power signals from as many as 40,000 transmitters on the ground using the airwaves next door.

 

"The potential impact of GPS interference is so vast, it's hard to get your head around," said Jim Kirkland, vice president and general counsel of Trimble Navigation Ltd., which makes GPS systems. "Think 40,000 GPS dead spots covering millions of square miles in cities and towns throughout the U.S."

 

One of the biggest risks is to the GPS navigation systems used by about 40 percent of commercial and private planes. Backup systems that rely on ground-based radio signals are not as accurate and have coverage gaps. Some older private planes have no backup at all.

 

With GPS interference, a pilot "may go off course and not even realize it," said Chris Dancy, a spokesman for the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association.

 

LightSquared's network could also undermine the Federal Aviation Administration's multi-billion-dollar program to upgrade the nation's air-traffic control system, which is based on World War II-era radar technology.

 

The new GPS-based system is more precise and lets planes fly more direct routes. That will save airlines time, money and fuel and cut pollution. It is also key to accommodating projected increases in airline traffic by enabling planes to fly safely closer together. 

[txlaw]

I noticed that Kansas City is a major IP router node for Internet2, which happens to have partnered with LVLT to build out their 100Gpbs next gen network.  That must have played a part in GOOG's decision to go with KC.

 

Since I'm a shareholder of GOOG, I'd rather see them deploy cash into less capital intensive endeavors than communications services.  However, I do think it makes strategic sense to be a financier to companies like S/CLWR and LVLT in order to spur broadband build out.  I'd love to see GOOG drive down the interest rate on LVLT's debt.

[txlaw]

Talking about value in the telecom world, I have taken a deep look at Sprint Nextel following the announced merger between AT&T and T-Mobile. On some aspects, the story looks similar to LVLT.

 

 

I have been meaning to take a look into Sprint as well.  I just haven't had time to do so.

 

I'm not sure what you guys think, but it seems like Sprint now has no choice but to bailout Clearwire from its financial woes and possibly even merge with them.  Perhaps GOOG and others (e.g., TWC, INTC) could play the financier in such a transaction.

[brker_guy]

Carl, it gets A LOT BETTER:

 

http://www.questexenews.com/t.do?id=7497592:23403162

 

Even an Air Force General has spoken out about this issue.  We all underestimate the impact of what this jamming will have on our lives, but when it does happen, CHAOS will break out since our lives are so dependent on GPS these days.  The GPS community has spoken up on this immediate problem on the horizon.  Yet, the FCC and Congress are just sitting on their arses doing nothing.

 

Wait til when we have an unwanted accident that we could have prevented.  Then, people will wise up.

 

TxLaw, I like your thinking!  ;D  Full Disclosure: I am a shareholder of CLWR and do have a very small position in S.  Both of these companies are "workout" positions for me.  So, I hope Mr. Hesse would stop hustling for more customers and start hustling on a strategic vision for his company, assuming that T will end up owning T-Mobile.  S can not survive by itself to take on those two monopolists.

 

If Google might not want to consolidate this industry, perhaps Mr. Softee and those Nokians might like to step up to the plate since they are already in bed together... ;D :D

 

http://washingtonstatebusinesswire.com/?p=1020

[Cardboard]

Txlaw,

 

I believe that the Kansas City that you are refering to is in Missouri. The Kansas City choosen by Google is a much smaller city in Kansas.

 

Regarding Clearwire, Sprint cannot afford under its actual revolving line to buy the remaining 46% that it does not own. It would trip the covenant of no more than 4.5 times total debt to EBITDA. They actually went to great length in December to ensure that Clearwire is not considered a subsidiary for their debt calculation.

 

My guess is that with no external help that they will exploit CLWR as long as alive and eventually move away from WiMax to LTE on their own. By the way another interesting twist in this saga is that Google owns 3% of Clearwire.

 

At the end of the day, I do believe that Verizon should move to acquire Sprint. Both are on the CDMA platform and with Sprint's assets and 49.9 million subscribers it would be a formidable player. It may not get approved under anti-trust laws, but it would certainly help derail AT&T's plans to acquire T-Mobile.

 

I suggested the Google thing as an idea to revolutionize this industry, but I am not so sure that it will happen. They have the money and brains to do it, but do they have the guts? I am thinking that these guys have by now realized that search, operating systems and software is a nice business, but that it is not the best place to be if you want to create a business that will last at least half a century. Facebook was nothing 5 years ago and is now challenging Google in some areas. See what happened to Yahoo in just a decade and even Microsoft is now in need to reinvent itself.

 

In any case, I feel that something big will happen following the T-Mobile announcement. AT&T may regret this move as Pandora's box is now opened.

 

Cardboard

[Guest ValueCarl]

Oh my, Brker_guy! Does this mean that Mr. Falcone's levered company might have to implode sooner rather than later? At first I was thinking the more sanguine view was correct, i.e. the fence and pool analogy being too close together and the potential fix in the way of costs mooted. Between your article citing the Air Force Commander's concern, along with your own concerns, I am now more fearful for Mr. Falcone than I was earlier on in this conversation thread!

 

Great Microsoft/Nokia article, by the way!  ;D 

[txlaw]

I believe that the Kansas City that you are refering to is in Missouri. The Kansas City choosen by Google is a much smaller city in Kansas.

 

That's true, but I believe Kansas City, KS is a suburb of Kansas City, MO.  So the fiber will still likely link into that Internet2 node.  

 

Regarding Clearwire, Sprint cannot afford under its actual revolving line to buy the remaining 46% that it does not own. It would trip the covenant of no more than 4.5 times total debt to EBITDA. They actually went to great length in December to ensure that Clearwire is not considered a subsidiary for their debt calculation.

 

My guess is that with no external help that they will exploit CLWR as long as alive and eventually move away from WiMax to LTE on their own. By the way another interesting twist in this saga is that Google owns 3% of Clearwire.

 

At the end of the day, I do believe that Verizon should move to acquire Sprint. Both are on the CDMA platform and with Sprint's assets and 49.9 million subscribers it would be a formidable player. It may not get approved under anti-trust laws, but it would certainly help derail AT&T's plans to acquire T-Mobile.

 

Yeah, that's why I was thinking that any such transaction would require some sort of merger where the existing debt facilities are rejiggered and some debt is converted to equity.  Don't really know how any of that would work though, and I'm just throwing that out there because I haven't yet looked into Sprint.

 

The thing about Clearwire is that Sprint can't simply exploit Clearwire forever.  Clearwire has too much valuable spectrum, and they're fighting with each other for that very reason.  Clearwire makes inadequate wholesale revenues to cover its financing costs from its Sprint traffic so it was trying to compete with Sprint on the retail side.  If Clearwire finally discontinues its retail push, Sprint will have to give more of the benefits of riding on its spectrum to Clearwire, which includes GOOG, TWC, CMCSK, and INTC as investors.  Clearwire also has the option to lease spectrum to players like LightSquared, DISH, and others who want to get into the game.

 

To me, it makes more sense for Sprint and Clearwire to merge, discontinue duplicative network build out, and set a goal for transitioning from Wimax to LTE or some dual mode use over time.  Clearwire has actually been testing out LTE, in fact, and so a combined S/CLWR LTE network would probably be a very formidable competitor to T-Rex and VZ.

 

I believe that T-Rex has made a brilliant strategic move that has forced Sprint's hand.  Sprint has to act soon.  That's why Sprint stock flipped out on the news because people are worried that a combined S/CLWR will have a difficult financial burden to bare.

 

I suggested the Google thing as an idea to revolutionize this industry, but I am not so sure that it will happen. They have the money and brains to do it, but do they have the guts? I am thinking that these guys have by now realized that search, operating systems and software is a nice business, but that it is not the best place to be if you want to create a business that will last at least half a century. Facebook was nothing 5 years ago and is now challenging Google in some areas. See what happened to Yahoo in just a decade and even Microsoft is now in need to reinvent itself.

 

In any case, I feel that something big will happen following the T-Mobile announcement. AT&T may regret this move as Pandora's box is now opened.

 

Cardboard

 

I disagree here.  Search is a killer app that will never go away and that dovetails with AI over time.  There will always be a need to be able to find what you're looking for now that vast catalogs of human knowledge and data will be accessible at a low cost and almost instantaneously.  And at some point, your GOOG account (or Facebook account, for that matter) will be suggesting information/events/things to you based on your digital dossier.  It's not clear that GOOG will dominate going forward, but even if it doesn't dominate, it is likely to be one of the leaders in the space.    

 

In addition to providing the interface for finding info, GOOG is also getting into the business of being a low cost distributor (both retail and wholesale) of media and applications over the network.  Over time, that businesses will generate far more cash ROI than any communication services will.  For example, if YouTube/GoogleTV becomes a new platform for both long tail, user generated video (hosted on YouTube.com and on third party sites powered by YouTube) and more polished/professional content (read WSJ story that just came out today), the returns will be tremendous even if that only lasts for 20 years.  

 

You also have to remember that Google employs some of the best computer scientists in the world.  There are many innovative products that should be coming out of GOOG that we can't even conceive of.  

 

The point is that since GOOG is a 200 pound gorilla in a business space (Big Data) where it generates unreal ROIC while at the same time being a low cost provider of products/services, it shouldn't be blowing money on communications services, which is only a good business if you finance it correctly.  Any moves into that space should be strategic and designed to increase the scope of its high return businesses.

 

[Cardboard]

Txlaw,

 

You are right. It is a suburb of Kansas City. Could be another link between Google and LVLT as you described...

 

Regarding Google, I have no doubt that information technology will be there to stay, but my point was about them still being the dominant player in 10, 20 or 30 years from now. They may hire whoever scientist they want, but it does not prevent drop-outs such as Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg to invent something in their garage that will turn their world up side down. They are already very big in the field so to keep pushing your stock up, they need to keep coming up with very big new ideas. Simply remaining a big player in the field won't cut it. Just look at Microsoft and the stock price performance.

 

So that is why I suspect that the guys at Google may be thinking of an AOL type move or to build out more physical things. They are investing in all kinds of things including energy. The latest is a power line off the East Coast to gather the power from to be built wind farms or a utility type business. They may be doing that just to learn how to link everything to IT eventually or maybe not.

 

Cardboard

[txlaw]

Cardboard,

 

Reasonable people will disagree on a company like GOOG.

 

What I believe -- with high conviction -- is that buying Google even at current prices is like buying Microsoft 6 or 7 years after it went public.  If you held onto that MSFT stock until today, what would your total return be?  No one can deny that you would have gotten a great return from that buy and hold despite the comedown in price.  Furthermore, MSFT isn't dead yet. 

 

Bill G recognized the fundamental way that software could change human society, and he went after it and built one of the best businesses in the world that made him the richest man in the world.  I would argue that Google's ambitious goal to organize and make usable all the world's information is a recognition of the way that world is fundamentally changing due to low cost computing power, ubiquitous connectivity, and other Information Age developments.  They are capitalizing on this fundamental shift, and they're actually executing very well.

 

There's no doubt that Google is expanding into physical things.  They own data centers and dark fiber, which allows them to be a low cost platform for the delivery of applications, content, and services (like search) over the communications network.  Those data centers also take a lot of electricity to run, so it makes perfect sense for them to invest in new energy projects. 

 

Investing in offshore wind is simply a great idea for GOOG.  First, they earn a low risk return by investing in tax equity projects (NRG will agree with me there).  Second, they gain expertise in a technology that they could potentially add value to by coming up with some IT product/service that is incorporated into the technology.  Third, if electric utilities have pricing power and we believe that electricity prices will reflect commodity inflation, then it makes sense for a deep pocketed, heavy user of electricity to buy up long lasting sources of electricity that use free inputs (wind) before the commodity inflation hits, especially if such user actually earns a return on some of the capacity that they sell rather than use.  Fourth, given their stated interest in creating offshore data centers (literally) that  dissipate heat into the ocean, it also makes sense that they would also want to get experience in building wind farms to power those data centers.

 

Investing in wind is a win-win-win for Google, IMO.

 

-txlaw

 

[txlaw]

Interesting news today from Facebook.  They just announced their Open Compute Project, which is open sourcing the know-how that Facebook and partners (including INTC, HPQ, and DELL) have developed to make data centers as efficient as possible. 

 

http://opencompute.org/

 

I think this means that the operational advantages that a vertically integrated cloud computing company like GOOG has had in the past begins to narrow if not disappear.  Google is known for having built their own Google-specific, super efficient data centers which  they run their applications and platforms off of.  Facebook took that model and is now sharing their innovations so that the cost advantage of vertically integrating disappears. 

 

What does this mean for LVLT?  I think it means that because vertical integration will not be as much of a cost advantage, there will be a proliferation of IaaS providers building their hardware/services modeled off of the Open Compute and Open Stack specifications in order to compete with the likes of GOOG and AMZN.  That's great for LVLT who should aim to get all these guys as customers.

[Guest ValueCarl]

As necessary, Obama is ready to veto Marsha Blackburn along with the rest of her Republican ilk's defunding of last December's "net neutrality" compromises.

 

Obama likely to veto 'net neutrality' bill       04/08 01:00 AM

 

 

 

U.S. President Barack Obama will likely veto a bill undoing new Web-access rules because it stifles Web advances and hurts consumers, the White House says.

The administration "strongly opposes" the bill, which House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., said Thursday might be voted on Friday if lawmakers pass a budget plan for the rest of the current fiscal year.

"At this point, it is too early to tell whether the House will need to be in session this weekend," Cantor said in a statement. "In the case of lapse in appropriations, however, I fully expect the House to meet."

The bill would block a compromise Dec. 21 measure approved by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission by a 3-2 vote -- with Democratic commissioners in favor and Republican commissioners opposed -- that prevents fixed-line broadband providers such as Comcast Corp. (CMCSA:$24.85,00$0.21,000.85%) and Qwest Communications International Inc. from blocking access to Web sites and applications.

But the rules give wireless companies such as AT&T Inc. (T:$30.5800,$0.0400,0.13%) and Verizon Communications Inc. (VZ:$37.7300,$-0.0300,-0.08%) more latitude in putting limits on access to services and applications.

FCC officials said there were technological reasons for the wireless distinction and the agency would closely monitor the medium's development.

In an effort to satisfy both sides in a long debate over so-called network neutrality, the rules do not stop Internet service providers from charging more for faster access.

Republicans in Congress vowed to reverse the rules through legislation.

Net neutrality is an effort to ensure equal access to Web sites and online services.

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, a Democrat, said the rules seek "to protect basic Internet values."

The White House said the rules came from "a process that brought together parties on all sides of this issue -- from consumer groups to technology companies to broadband providers."

It said the rules reflect "a constructive effort to build a consensus around what safeguards and protections [are] reasonable and necessary to ensure that the Internet continues to attract investment and to spur innovation."

Disapproving the rules would "raise questions as to whether innovation on the Internet will be allowed to flourish, consumers will be protected from abuses and the democratic spirit of the Internet will remain intact," the White House said.

Many Internet providers, developers and venture capitalists have said they'd accept the rules, The New York Times (NYT:$9.525,0$0.0850,0.90%) reported.

The rules "give some assurances to the companies that are building Web applications -- companies like Netflix (NFLX:$234.38,00$0.42,000.18%) , Skype and Google (GOOG:$580.7481,$0.7481,0.13%) -- that they will get even treatment on broadband networks," regulatory analyst Rebecca Arbogast of the Stifel, Nicolaus & Co. financial services firm told the newspaper.

But the non-profit Media Access Project, which seeks to promote the public's interest before Congress, said the FCC rules "watered down" and "loophole-ridden."

And the non-profit Public Knowledge public-interest group said, "Instead of strong, firm rules providing clear protections, the commission created a vague and shifting landscape open to interpretation."    

[Guest ValueCarl]

More "color" on Falcone's Light Squared and other moving parts.

 

Startup 4G wireless ISP LightSquared's technical, business challenges could affect Dallas-area telecoms [The Dallas Morning News]      04/08 01:01 AM

 

 

 

April 08--A promising new high-speed wireless Internet service provider is racking up customers almost as fast as it's attracting concern that its network could cripple GPS navigation technology.

LightSquared is in the process of building a 4G mobile data network that uses both satellites and ground-based cell towers to generate a signal that will cover nearly all of the United States.

Nokia Siemens Networks, whose North American division is based in Irving, is handling the tower build-out, and LightSquared seems well on its way to taking flight.

The goal is for the ground-based network to provide the fastest coverage. In areas without cell towers, the satellite signal would provide a slower backup connection.

But LightSquared is grappling with technical and business challenges, some of which involve Dallas-area telecom companies.

The technical issue is that the powerful ground network -- because it uses wireless spectrum that was originally intended solely for low-power satellite signals -- could interfere with GPS devices that run on nearby frequencies, playing havoc with everything from military and aviation guidance systems to the iPhone map app.

There are also persistent rumors that Nokia Siemens could be on the verge of losing some or all of its $7 billion contract to erect 40,000 towers.

LightSquared acknowledges that the GPS issue has to be sorted out before the service can be launched commercially.

"There's certainly the potential for interference there if you don't handle it properly," said Jeff Carlisle, executive vice president of regulatory affairs and public policy at LightSquared.

Other experts are blunter.

"If they can't fix that, it's a showstopper," said Roger Entner, a telecom analyst and founder of Recon Analytics. "Imagine if GPS for everyone in this country stops working. They simply have to work around that spectrum where GPS is."

Concern about LightSquared's impact on GPS has also come from federal agencies, notably the Defense Department and the Department of Transportation.

The deputy secretaries of the two agencies recently sent a letter to the Federal Communications Commission noting that it is "essential to protect this ubiquitous defense, transportation and economic utility."

The FCC has taken notice.

The commission has ordered LightSquared and the GPS industry to work together on a study to determine exactly how the new network will affect global positioning system service.

The group also includes members from several wireless carriers, as well as engineers from public safety groups and the aerospace industry.

Carlisle, who is co-chair of the group, said testing has been under way for more than a month. A final report is due in June.

Technical fixes are available.

The question is who will pay for them.

GPS solutions

Dale Hatfield, former head of the office of engineering and technology at the FCC, said one option is to install filters on GPS devices so the LightSquared signal doesn't accidentally get picked up.

Another option is for LightSquared to not use a slice of its spectrum that sits closest to the GPS signals, creating a buffer zone known as a "guard band."

Or, if the interference isn't too severe, the best option might be to do nothing.

As people naturally upgrade to newer GPS devices with better filters, the issue will simply go away.

Some analysts have speculated that a fix could cost as much as $1 billion, but Hatfield said it's hard to calculate the price when testing on the severity of the interference hasn't been completed.

Hatfield and others noted that the FCC warned GPS makers years ago to do a better job of guarding against interference from signals on nearby frequencies.

"In 2003, everybody knew that this could be an issue," said Carlisle at LightSquared.

Customers

LightSquared isn't a wireless company in the usual sense.

It won't sell service directly to consumers.

Instead, the company is selling access on its network to other companies.

Those companies can then either resell their own branded service on LightSquared's network or simply use the service.

LightSquared has already signed some major customers, including electronics retailer Best Buy Co. (BBY:$29.71,00$-0.2800,-0.93%) , a deal announced by LightSquared chairman and CEO Sanjiv Ahuja at the CTIA Wireless conference in March.

Best Buy (BBY:$29.71,00$-0.2800,-0.93%) declined to comment, but it's likely the retailer will eventually offer mobile hotspot devices that rebroadcast the 4G signal as a Wi-Fi network.

Richardson-based MetroPCS Communications Inc. (PCS:$16.600000,$0.030001,0.18%) has said it might sign roaming agreements with LightSquared to supplement its small 4G network.

And there are persistent rumors that LightSquared will partner up with Sprint Nextel Corp. (S:$4.65,00$0.0300,0.65%)

Such a move would be a major blow to Nokia Siemens Networks.

Partners?

Currently, Sprint's (S:$4.65,00$0.0300,0.65%) 4G network is based on a technology called WiMax. But almost every other carrier, including LightSquared, is adopting a 4G technology called LTE.

Sprint (S:$4.65,00$0.0300,0.65%) has said that its WiMax towers could be fairly easily converted to LTE.

So should LightSquared and Sprint (S:$4.65,00$0.0300,0.65%) join forces, LightSquared's network could run over Sprint's (S:$4.65,00$0.0300,0.65%) existing towers.

Any additional network construction might be handled by Sprint's (S:$4.65,00$0.0300,0.65%) equipment suppliers, including Alcatel-Lucent (ALU:$5.730000,$0.010000,0.17%) , Ericsson and Samsung.

Those companies also have major operations in the Dallas area.

Both LightSquared and Nokia Siemens, which this week named a new head of its North American division, say that they're still partners.

"Our plan is to use Nokia Siemens to build out initially our test markets, which we plan to bring online by the end of this year, and then to roll out to the rest of the markets, so we can meet our milestones," Carlisle said.

Entner at Recon Analytics said he's heard the Sprint (S:$4.65,00$0.0300,0.65%) rumors.

But all the technical and business challenges shouldn't be enough to stop LightSquared from getting off the ground, he said.

"I think LightSquared has a good chance of success," Entner said. "They have to do everything right, and then I think they will be successful."

To see more of The Dallas Morning News, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.dallasnews.com.

Copyright © 2011, The Dallas Morning News

Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services. For more information about the content services offered by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services (MCT), visit www.mctinfoservices.com.

[brker_guy]

Carl, I just want to share with you this before boarding my plane again. Business life on the roads sucks!  I read your LightSquared posts and will have some comments on them.

 

http://paidcontent.org/article/419-how-google-tv-could-hand-netflix-the-entire-streaming-universe/#

 

I will add some color later on this along with LightSquared posts that you have been sharing...

[Guest ValueCarl]

Safe trip, and do good work, Brker_guy!

 

I see my Coinstar call with the "RED BOXES" embedded inside, is doing quite well after that shrewd opportunist, Ergen, of Dish, in one fell swoop picked up Blockbuster's bankrupt carcass the other day!

 

Sixty five PPS to Netflix? I recommend it! Bidda, bidda, bid!!!!!!!!!!!!!  ;D

 

http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3ACSTR  

[Guest ValueCarl]

Gentlemen, please don't tell that stock operating liar, Mark Cuban, about Level 3 Communications or its bandwidth network. Without a doubt, he will INSIDER TRADE it, and not go to jail where he belongs for doing so!  >:( That's someone who infuriates me more than Motley Fools!!!!!!! Sorry if you're a fan of his, BG!  imo

[txlaw]

Carl, I just want to share with you this before boarding my plane again. Business life on the roads sucks!  I read your LightSquared posts and will have some comments on them.

 

http://paidcontent.org/article/419-how-google-tv-could-hand-netflix-the-entire-streaming-universe/#

 

I will add some color later on this along with LightSquared posts that you have been sharing...

 

Mark Cuban is an idiot.  I can't believe he's a freaking billionaire. 

 

Clearly, he did not anticipate or even take into consideration the possibility of the following developments:

 

-YouTube overhauls site to offer channels

-YouTube buys Next New Networks (to fund original media)

-Live streaming integrated into YouTube platform (also remember the rumored NBA deal)

 

See http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704013604576247060940913104.html?mod=WSJ_WSJ_News_BlogsModule

See http://youtube-global.blogspot.com/2011/04/youtube-is-going-live.html

 

GoogleTV provides an interface to get OTT video, whether distributed through YouTube, Netflix, or even Hulu.  The search function, ideally, is all Google.  If the AllVid project actually goes through, then perhaps GoogleTV will also be the interface that runs on top of the proposed adapter.

 

OTTC, here we come!  I'm thinking about getting rid of my U-Verse media package.  There's no reason for me to have it except to watch sports.

[Guest ValueCarl]

There is trouble in ICON Paradise today. Rather than bail out scoundrels like En_Ron_Hubbard, along with other smart arse pseudos including Homersimpsonbush from other venues, I would prefer for the competition to run this HORSE THIEF out of town by aggressively PRICING XoHO out of the marketplace; versus paying any sucker premiums for a business NOT GROWING over previously stolen "leased fiber" from (3).      

 

XO Holdings Announces Executive Departure       04/08 12:34 PM

 

 

 

HERNDON, VA -- (MARKET WIRE) -- 04/08/11 -- On April 8, 2011, Carl J. Grivner resigned as Chief Executive Officer, President, and Director of XO Holdings, Inc. (XOHO:$0.75,00$0.02,002.74%) (the "Company") . Mr. Grivner stated, "It has been an honor and privilege for me to work at XO for eight years. My decision to leave the company to pursue other opportunities is a personal and difficult one. I wish the Company and all of its dedicated employees all the best in the future."

Carl C. Icahn, the Chairman of the Company's Board of Directors and majority shareholder, stated, "We wish Carl the best in his future endeavors and thank him for his contributions to the Company. We are fortunate to have one of the deepest management teams and one of the strongest balance sheets in the telecommunications industry with approximately $1 billion in equity and no outstanding debt."

The Company's Board of Directors is conducting an executive search to identify a new Chief Executive Officer and will consider both internal and external candidates. The Board of Directors has established an executive committee to oversee the Company's operations until a permanent chief executive is selected. The executive committee will be comprised of Daniel J. Wagner, who will continue to lead XO's Business Services unit, Ernest Ortega, who will continue to lead its Carrier Services unit, and Laura W. Thomas, the Company's Chief Financial Officer, who will oversee all corporate functions and other business units. Mr. Grivner has agreed to assist the Company during this transition period.

About XO Holdings (XOHO:$0.75,00$0.02,002.74%)

XO Holdings, Inc. (XOHO:$0.75,00$0.02,002.74%) is a leading nationwide provider of advanced broadband communications services and solutions for businesses, enterprises, government, carriers and service providers. Its customers include more than half of the Fortune 500, in addition to leading cable companies, carriers, content providers and mobile network operators. Utilizing its unique combination of high-capacity nationwide and metro networks and broadband wireless capabilities, XO offers customers a broad range of managed voice, data and IP services with proven performance, scalability and value in more than 80 metropolitan markets across the United States. For more information, visit www.xo.com.

<b>Contact:</b>

 

Laura W. ThomasXO Communications

703-547-2000  

[Guest ValueCarl]

It's funny because not long ago Jim Crowe had mentioned how his "smart engineers" would eventually figure out what to do with the very "high frequency" 700 MHz spectrum which (3) purchased along with its Telcove acquisition some years back.

 

Are Jim's engineers this smart, and when will they begin to finally UNLEASH the stored up "value" hardly indicative of their daily stupid stock price? 

 

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/DISH-Network-Gets-Blockbuster-zacks-1533424086.html?x=0&.v=1

 

(4) We believe, for the last couple of months, management is trying hard to develop DISH Network for the storage of spectrums that can be used to grow a viable pay-TV distribution network. In the previous month, DISH Network purchased bankrupt DBSB North America for $1.4 billion. This acquisition will provide DISH Network the extremely valuable spectrum of DBSD for both wireless and wireline communications. Additionally, DISH Network itself owns a slot of highly demanded 700 MHz wireless frequency. Using these slots of airwaves, the company can form a very formidable video-on-demand service over a wireless network of mobile handsets such as smartphones and tablets.

[Guest ValueCarl]

Proposal(s) Recommendations of the Board of Directors Your Vote

01 DIRECTOR

1) WALTER SCOTT, JR.

2) JAMES Q. CROWE

3) R. DOUGLAS BRADBURY

4) DOUGLAS C. EBY

5) JAMES O. ELLIS, JR.

6) RICHARD R. JAROS

7) ROBERT E. JULIAN

8) MICHAEL J. MAHONEY

9) RAHUL N. MERCHANT

10) CHARLES C. MILLER, III

11) ARUN NETRAVALI

12) JOHN T. REED

13) MICHAEL B. YANNEY

14) DR. ALBERT C. YATES

For

Withhold All Nominees

 

1) WALTER SCOTT, JR.

2) JAMES Q. CROWE

3) R. DOUGLAS BRADBURY

4) DOUGLAS C. EBY

5) JAMES O. ELLIS, JR.

6) RICHARD R. JAROS

7) ROBERT E. JULIAN

8) MICHAEL J. MAHONEY

9) RAHUL N. MERCHANT

10) CHARLES C. MILLER, III

11) ARUN NETRAVALI

12) JOHN T. REED

13) MICHAEL B. YANNEY

14) DR. ALBERT C. YATES

02 TO APPROVE THE GRANTING TO THE LEVEL 3 BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY TO AMEND OUR RESTATED CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION TO EFFECT A REVERSE STOCK SPLIT AT ONE OF FOUR RATIOS.

For

Against

03 TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENT OF THE LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, INC. STOCK PLAN TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF SHARES OF OUR COMMON STOCK, PAR VALUE $.01 PER SHARE, THAT ARE RESERVED FOR ISSUANCE UNDER THE PLAN BY 100 MILLION.

For

Against

04 TO APPROVE, ON AN ADVISORY BASIS, THE EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION PROGRAM FOR OUR NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS.

For

Against

05 TO APPROVE A PROPOSAL OF THE FREQUENCY IN WHICH OUR STOCKHOLDERS WILL CONDUCT AN ADVISORY VOTE ON THE EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION PROGRAM FOR OUR NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS.

1 Year

1 Year

06 TO AUTHORIZE THE TRANSACTION OF SUCH OTHER BUSINESS AS MAY PROPERLY COME BEFORE THE ANNUAL MEETING OR ANY ADJOURNMENTS OR POSTPONEMENTS THEREOF.

For

For

 

[Guest ValueCarl]

Rob Powell of Telecom Ramblings is reporting off his mainstream venue, that employees of (3) as well as Global Crossing are whispering that, they have dotted their i's and crossed their t's. Although you won't find but a smidgen of such mention in this wild thread where the blog master gets attacked, he must truly believe it based upon the other more anonymous venue he sometimes likes to post, and where he confirmed it in his own words.

 

I have one thing to say to my (3) management team if Powell's rumor mongering is true. You better not have overpaid!!!!!!!!!!! >:(

 

http://www.telecomramblings.com/2011/04/grivner-departs-is-this-the-endgame-for-xo-and-icahn/#comment-5987     

[gfp]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-04-11/level-3-agrees-to-acquire-global-crossing-in-deal-valued-at-1-9-billion.html

[brker_guy]

Carl, YOU ARE DA MAN!!!!  You called it, Bro!!!!!!!

[Guest ValueCarl]

That's kind of you Brker_guy. However, Rob Powell's network tentacles sniffed this out for him, and he has been hoping for this combination for a long time now. It's a good combination because of what I wrote, that being, it better be cheap. I guess we must thank our financiers too, for blessing this "DIRT CHEAP" acquisition!  ;D

 

Another important factor is supplied in red from another article as well.

 

Our management team is very smart, indeed. Now let's watch them OPERATE the BUSINESS in the form of GROWTH through SALES like they never have before in addition to all the great benefits this deal provides!  

 

Telecom Acquisitions

 

The Global Crossing purchase would be the third-largest of more than 170 acquisitions of U.S. telecommunication-services companies over the past three years, according to Bloomberg data. The acquirers paid a premium of 28 percent on average, compared with the target’s average price over 20 trading days before the deal’s announcement. Level agreed to pay a premium of about 57 percent on that basis.

 

Since April 2008, nine acquirers paid a median 5.8 times their target’s earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, compared with 3.6 times for Level 3, the data show.

 

In a separate announcement, Level 3 said it has adopted a stockholder rights plan to deter trading that would result in an ownership change. It also protects the company's ability to cite operating losses on federal tax forms.    

[DCG]

Maybe a dumb question...and I haven't had time to read much into this, but how are they spending $3 Billion in stock when their market cap is less than $3 Billion? This company seems to spend money like it's going out of style and makes no profit; outside of being of potential takeover target, I still have a hard time understanding what you guys like about this company. Seems like we're back to the days where nobody seems to think making an actual profit matters anymore in this momentum-driven market.