LVLT - Level 3

[Guest ValueCarl]

Hey Mr. Chu, the Feds have news for you, and it's no longer an Ancient Tiawanese Secret!  :-X

 

 

Chu was charged with one count of conspiracy to commit securities fraud and one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and fraud in connection with securities. The charges carry up to 30 years in prison.

Authorities said Chu, during one conversation with a cooperator from the Galleon probe, described a method of electronic communication that he believed could not be detected by law enforcement.

According to authorities, Chu referred to the method, saying:

"There's no, no, no, no copy," Chu said, according to authorities. "If you, it's better than personal e–mail. ... There's no copy save in the server. Even personal e–mail, there is a copy. ... So, ... just talk. Do, don't, don't put it down in writing. Dangerous."

 

http://topnews360.tmcnet.com/topics/associated-press/articles/2010/11/27/121194-first-arrest-made-new-insider-trading-crackdown.htm

 

 

[Guest ValueCarl]

The Reverend Al Sharpton, President Obama and Jay Rockefeller are not "friends of the free internet," especially free speech, it appears. How can Americans have "some faith" in their government in addition to their future, knowing that "false flag waving" mongrels like "Rockefellers'" continue attempting to wrest control of their internet, even opposing necessary securities law legislation in the wake of the 2008-2009 market implosion, as he did in the case of (3) and other CLEC's, moving forward? 

 

 

Specifically, Sharpton suggested that the FCC should establish "guidelines" or "standards" to regulate speech.

 

"You've got to remember that those stations that Rush Limbaugh is on and others are regulated by FCC, granted by FCC; they go back to them to get waivers," Sharpton said on his own radio show on Nov. 19th

 

"They go back to them to get consolidation," Sharpton continued. "They have the right to set standards. That does not impair your right to speak what you believe, but it does say that you are not going to do that to offend groups of Americans based on their race, their gender, their sexual status - none of that."

 

Sharpton's broadside followed a similar attack last week by Sen. Jay Rockefeller. The West Virginia Democrat went after both right-leaning Fox News and left-leaning MSNBC.

 

Said Rockefeller during a Senate hearing: "There's a little bug inside of me which wants to get the FCC to say to Fox and to MSNBC, 'Out. Off. End. Goodbye.' It would be a big favor to political discourse; to our ability to do our work here in Congress; and to the American people, to be able to talk with each other and have some faith in their government and, more importantly, in their future."

 

And earlier this year President Obama himself lamented what he described as the sad state of political discourse hampered by iPods and cable TV shows.

 

"And with iPods and iPads; and Xboxes and PlayStations - none of which I know how to work - information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation," Obama said during a commencement address at Hampton University in Virginia. "So all of this is not only putting pressure on you; it's putting new pressure on our country and on our democracy."

 

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/sharpton-fcc-limbaugh-fox/2010/11/24/id/378094?s=al&promo_code=B2FD-1

 

[Guest ValueCarl]

With Comcast seemingly abandoning their "fast speed internet connection" business in favor of their traditional, dumb em down, t.v. bundles from the jungles of content hell, is it not time for a sleeping giant in the technology space armed with interactive software to awaken?

 

Microsoft is also exploring the possibility of creating content silos and selling more individual channels directly such as an HBO or Showtime. It already has Walt Disney Co's (NYSE:DIS - News) ESPN on the XBox Live online service for example.

 

These people said a service may not arrive for another 12 months, but early discussions have been productive.

 

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Microsoft-in-talks-for-new-TV-rb-1155559107.html;_ylt=AhOUB_6neKLIQfUREQsj4N67YWsA;_ylu=X3oDMTE2djhrNDBjBHBvcwMxMARzZWMDdG9wU3RvcmllcwRzbGsDbWljcm9zb2Z0aW50?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=7&asset=&ccode=

 

It was not clear how widespread the failure was. A technician who answered Comcast's customer service line told NBC News that there were significant Internet outages in Connecticut, Maryland, Virginia, Massachusetts, New York and New Hampshire.

Douglas said the "focus" of the outages was in the Boston and Washington D.C. areas.

Television and telephone service from Comcast was unaffected.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40410491/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/

[brker_guy]

Carl, I hope you had a very nice and relaxing Thanksgiving weekend!!!  I got a chance to leave town and visit relatives that I haven't seen in a long time.  Didn't do anything other than eat, sleep and watch footballs. Lots of footballs! :-)  I am thankful that my relatives didn't have Comcast.  They have Cox, another of (3)'s customer. :-)

 

I did get a chance to listen and re-listen to Sunit's presentations from the week before, but I didn't catch this comment that you referred to:

 

Don't forget to pick up on Sunit's "plus $19B" on top of $25B comment I thought I heard him say via the INTERNET PIPE at the public library where I listened in.

 

Do you remember which one he talked about?  I did notice that Sunit mentioned about the "banks" getting their own dedicated lines. 

 

MOFO=Men Of Foul Odor

 

Now that is FUNNY!!! :D  I have to borrow that one. 

 

Television and telephone service from Comcast was unaffected.

 

It's time for Comcast to move their transport services onto (3)'s network and stop messing around around with their own network with dark fiber that they bought from (3) in the tech bubble days.

 

As for Mr. Fil Zucchi, his comments alone are very telling of a guy who Charlie Munger likes to make fun of.  To paraphrase Charlie, all of the brain cells and talents have gone onto Wall St. rather than into engineering...  This dude has never spent one day in the industry to even understand what he wrote,

 

In my humble opinion, worrying about competition from Level 3 Communications (LVLT) or Limelight Networks (LLNW) is complete nonsense. What these companies might be able to take from Akami is the lowest of low margin business. If I had to worry about the loss of one customer for the type of service that Level 3 will offer to Netflix (NFLX) I would not be involved in this thing. I've said this before and I'm going to say it again: Akamai has long stopped being a dumb reseller of bandwidth. It is a software company; much like BMC Software (BMC) lets operators control their networks, Akami allows content owners to distribute their information over the networks in a fail-safe manner. That is very different from what Level 3 does, which is simply to provide a slightly more efficient network of pipes on which the content actually travels.

 

That statement there alone tells me he doesn't know what AKAM really is or even grasp the simple concept of the 7 layers of OSI, and how the "service" business model is winning out in the software industry.  Pure idiotic!!!!

 

I sure hope he is shorting (3) and LLNW because I do want to see him gag on these words one day...

[Guest ValueCarl]

Hi Brker_guy, I had a very nice, relaxing, family packed Thanksgiving like you did, although not being big football fans here, we substituted much delicious food, conversation, and reading during our times together. Did a little shopping at Best Buy too, and continue getting excited about the internet trends tied to demographics that are happening in "real time." 

 

With respect to Sunit's comment, it's at or near the three minute marker during the first conference spearheaded by "The Barking Dog," or to use your Freudian slip earlier, "The Bad Banking Dog," Lady.  ;D

 

Ckza is doing his best to edjamucate all the MIT brainiacs as well as their extensions inside that dark world we often reference here, before "two birds in the bush" thinking skills tied to valuing metrics, costs new investors who are allocating their hard earned capital, in the form of their shirts and pants as this "SHIFT" continues taking hold!

 

This is not a time to entertain "two birds in the bush" theory when pondering the price of money going forward, as opposed to the (3) bird in the hand, as VVDN trends continue accelerating at such RAPID SPEEDS!

 

Speed (3), speed, grease lightening speed!!!

 

Always, imo, of course.  ;D

 

 

[brker_guy]

I usually don't watch footballs until the bowl games or playoffs, but considering that we were guests at my relatives' house, it would be rude to just lock myself in a room and read or be online to learn. :-)

 

I will have to pay attention that CC again tonight with Ms. "Banking Dog" and see what you mean. 

 

I have been thinking about what you said about MSFT or even CSCO scooping (3) up.  You know, you are not that much far off with your idea.  After watching my nephews and nieces getting on their Xbox Kinetics this past weekend, I am beginning to see the day when Mr. Softee might have to open his wallet to buy up a fiber company to be just like GOOG.  The days of "interactive gaming" and "online gaming" are officially here!  He (Mr. Softee) really has no choice.  PC sales are down, and the iPad are gaining momentum(Seems like almost all of my friends who I talk to want an iPad this Christmas)

 

http://online.barrons.com/article/SB50001424052970204374404575630811207157780.html

 

http://www.appleinsider.com/print/10/11/27/apple_ipad_widely_expected_to_lead_tablet_disruption_of_pcs_in_2011.html

 

So, Mr. Softee needs to change his business model if he wants to survive.  Considering that Bill and Walter are on the same board at BRK, the idea of this is not very farfetched. :-)

 

From now on we should borrow this line, "Speed Kills". :-)

 

 

[brker_guy]

Carl, more good news for us on that MSFT's TV Platform:

 

http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-20023984-261.html

[Guest ValueCarl]

I am waiting for the speed at which Apple, Amazon, Google, the Hollywood Studios as well as any entity concerned with delivering quality videos over the net, moves to (3)'s VVDN. Are these players going to fall asleep forgetting about "following the leader"? You want to deliver videos fast, adopt the strategies of the fastest player in the market!

 

I'm waiting for the banks as well as online retailers, both to whom I have made personal recommendations, to finally ADOPT live video chats so I may see who I am doing business with!

 

We are visual creatures, and seeing is believing! 

 

Great news, Brker_guy, especially if Billy Ballmer takes on a "leadership role" in this space!  ;D   

 

"Speed Kills," so let's get on with it!  ;)   

[brker_guy]

Wow, I just got this from (3):

 

 

Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast’s Actions

 

 

 

 

BROOMFIELD, Colo. --(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Level 3 Communications, Inc. (NASDAQ: LVLT) today issued the following statement, which can be attributed to Thomas Stortz , Chief Legal Officer of Level 3:

 

"On November 19, 2010 , Comcast informed Level 3 that, for the first time, it will demand a recurring fee from Level 3 to transmit Internet online movies and other content to Comcast's customers who request such content. By taking this action, Comcast is effectively putting up a toll booth at the borders of its broadband Internet access network, enabling it to unilaterally decide how much to charge for content which competes with its own cable TV and Xfinity delivered content. This action by Comcast threatens the open Internet and is a clear abuse of the dominant control that Comcast exerts in broadband access markets as the nation's largest cable provider.

 

"On November 22 , after being informed by Comcast that its demand for payment was ‘take it or leave it,' Level 3 agreed to the terms, under protest, in order to ensure customers did not experience any disruptions.

 

"Level 3 operates one of several broadband backbone networks, which are part of the Internet and which independent providers of online content use to transmit movies, sports, games and other entertainment to consumers. When a Comcast customer requests such content, for example an online movie or game, Level 3 transmits the content to Comcast for delivery to consumers.

 

"Level 3 believes Comcast's current position violates the spirit and letter of the FCC's proposed Internet Policy principles and other regulations and statutes, as well as Comcast's previous public statements about favoring an open Internet.

 

"While the network neutrality debate in Washington has focused on what actions a broadband access provider might take to filter, prioritize or manage content requested by its subscribers, Comcast's decision goes well beyond this. With this action, Comcast is preventing competing content from ever being delivered to Comcast's subscribers at all, unless Comcast's unilaterally-determined toll is paid — even though Comcast's subscribers requested the content. With this action, Comcast demonstrates the risk of a ‘closed' Internet, where a retail broadband Internet access provider decides whether and how their subscribers interact with content.

 

"It is our hope that Comcast's senior management, for whom we have great respect, will closely consider their position on this issue and adopt an approach that will better serve Comcast and Comcast's customers.

 

"While Comcast's position is regrettable, Level 3 remains open and willing to work through these issues with Comcast . However, Level 3 does not seek any ‘special deals' or arrangements not generally available to other Internet backbone companies.

 

"Given Comcast's currently stated position, we are approaching regulators and policy makers and asking them to take quick action to ensure that a fair, open and innovative Internet does not become a closed network controlled by a few institutions with dominant market power that have the means, motive and opportunity to economically discriminate between favored and disfavored content."

 

About Level 3 Communications

 

Level 3 Communications, Inc. (NASDAQ: LVLT) is a leading international provider of fiber-based communications services. Enterprise, content, wholesale and government customers rely on Level 3 to deliver services with an industry-leading combination of scalability and value over an end-to-end fiber network. Level 3 offers a portfolio of metro and long-haul services, including transport, data, Internet, content delivery and voice. For more information, visit www.Level3.com.

 

© Level 3 Communications , LLC. All Rights Reserved. Level 3, Vyvx, "From Creation to Consumption," Level 3 Communications and the Level 3 Communications Logo are either registered service marks or service marks of Level 3 Communications , LLC and/or one of its Affiliates in the United States and/or other countries. Level 3 services are provided by wholly owned subsidiaries of Level 3 Communications, Inc. Any other service names, product names, company names or logos included herein are the trademarks or service marks of their respective owners.

 

Forward-Looking Statement

 

Some of the statements made in this press release are forward looking in nature. These statements are based on management's current expectations or beliefs. These forward looking statements are not a guarantee of performance and are subject to a number of uncertainties and other factors, many of which are outside Level 3's control, which could cause actual events to differ materially from those expressed or implied by the statements. The most important factors that could prevent Level 3 from achieving its stated goals include, but are not limited to, the current uncertainty in the global financial markets and the global economy; disruptions in the financial markets that could affect Level 3's ability to obtain additional financing; as well as the company's ability to: increase and maintain the volume of traffic on the network; successfully integrate acquisitions; develop effective business support systems; defend intellectual property and proprietary rights; manage system and network failures or disruptions; develop new services that meet customer demands and generate acceptable margins; adapt to rapid technological changes that lead to further competition; attract and retain qualified management and other personnel; and meet all of the terms and conditions of debt obligations. Additional information concerning these and other important factors can be found within Level 3's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission . Statements in this press release should be evaluated in light of these important factors. Level 3 is under no obligation to, and expressly disclaims any such obligation to, update or alter its forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise.

 

 

 

 

 

Level 3 Communications

Media:

Josh Howell , 720-888-3912

E-mail

or

Investors:

Valerie Finberg , 720-888-2518

 

 

Source: Level 3 Communications

 

[brker_guy]

Carl, I don't know if you saw this, but now I understand why Comcast is being evil like this.  Check this out:

 

 

http://www.cedmagazine.com/Blog.aspx?id=171890

 

 

Doug Sylvester, chief strategy office of Avail-TVN, noted that cable lost somewhere in the neighborhood of 700,000 subscribers last quarter, but about 600,000 of them went to DBS or IPTV. That's just people switching providers.

 

Streaming, on the other hand, is a different model. Netflix does have to share revenue, and it is still getting content that is older, if not stale. That's going to make it harder for Netflix if it tries to transition to a streaming model.

 

Sylvester believes that Netflix is a legitimate threat here and now, however, simply by dint of how many subscribers it has and how much use they get out of the service. He revealed that a top-five cable provider told him that on any given night in primetime, 30 percent to 40 percent of that operator's bandwidth is devoted to streaming Netflix content to its subscribers.

 

[Guest ValueCarl]

I have been on it with you, Brker_guy. Dovetails perfectly with last night's east coast internet shut down which was experienced by Comcast subs.

 

Although (3)'s letter is poignant towards the issues, understanding the regulators are captured by these monopolists inside the last mile as a result of the powerful politicians like Rockefeller and Obama wanting to control the messages-yes, in that order!-identified in an earlier article by Sharpton against "free speech" that I provided, I am less hopeful for the "speed of regulatory change" in addressing this. 

 

Quite frankly, Comcast's position is outrageous!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >:( My recommendation to the general public at large, would be to DROP their CABLE T.V. packages immediately in retaliation over this blatant act against "FREEDOM."     

[Guest ValueCarl]

One other thing relating to your early football obsession, Brker_guy. I have always been a supporter of the idea that,  (3) needs to facilitate an "end-run" bypassing these SOB's completely.

 

Whether that comes via Wimax on top of Walmart rooftops across the nation inside the last mile via a Clearwire, or whomever, doesn't matter.

 

What matters is that it comes quickly, like a thief in the night!

 

In order to live by my words, I am cutting my "cable t.v. cord" this month! If the people of America do not see this as an assault against their very being, they will deserve everything these criminal manipulators feed them from top on down!   

 

"Speed Kills!"

 

 

 

[Guest ValueCarl]

Modem maker, Zoom, weighs in on this anti-competitive maneuver by Roberts Family mongrels running Comcast. imo

 

Level 3, Zoom Telephonics Air Comcast Concerns       11/29 02:35 PM

 

 

 

DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

Two companies aired concerns over recent actions by Comcast Corp. (CMCSA:$20.21,00$-0.01,00-0.05%) , with one of the companies lodging a formal complaint regarding the cable-TV giant with the Federal Communications Commission.

A Comcast (CMCSA:$20.21,00$-0.01,00-0.05%) spokesman wasn't immediately available to comment on either complaint.

Modem producer Zoom Telephonics Inc. (ZMTP:$0.30,00$-0.04,00-11.76%) said it has filed a complaint against Comcast (CMCSA:$20.21,00$-0.01,00-0.05%) with the FCC, charging that the company's equipment certification program restricts subscribers' rights to attach cable modems to Comcast's (CMCSA:$20.21,00$-0.01,00-0.05%) network.

Zoom also noted that the complaint alleges that "in addition to harming the competitive retail market for cable modems, Comcast's (CMCSA:$20.21,00$-0.01,00-0.05%) recently expanded retail modem-testing regime and unilateral refusal to even test certain devices also violate Comcast's (CMCSA:$20.21,00$-0.01,00-0.05%) own public commitment to abide by the Commission's Open Internet principles."

Earlier this year, Comcast (CMCSA:$20.21,00$-0.01,00-0.05%) enacted new rules regarding tests cable modems must pass before being attached to Comcast's (CMCSA:$20.21,00$-0.01,00-0.05%) network. Zoom calls the company's practices "anticompetitive."

Separately, Level 3 Communications Inc. (LVLT:$1.00,00$0.02,002.04%) said Comcast (CMCSA:$20.21,00$-0.01,00-0.05%) was putting up an effective "toll booth at the borders of its broadband Internet-access network" by charging a fee "for content which competes with its own cable TV and Xfinity- delivered content." Comcast (CMCSA:$20.21,00$-0.01,00-0.05%) had informed the company Nov. 19 that it planned to demand a recurring fee to transmit Internet movies and other content to Comcast (CMCSA:$20.21,00$-0.01,00-0.05%) customers.

Level 3 said it thinks Comcast's (CMCSA:$20.21,00$-0.01,00-0.05%) stance "violates the spirit and letter of the FCC's proporsed Internet Policy principles and other regulations and statutes."

-By Nathan Becker, Dow Jones Newswires; 212-416-2855; nathan.becker@ dowjones.com;

Click here to go to Dow Jones NewsPlus, a web front page of today's most important business and market news, analysis and commentary: http:// www.djnewsplus.com/nae/al?rnd=hoi4UAhGpybSABbnGFFGDA%3D%3D. You can use this link on the day this article is published and the following day.

 

 (END) Dow Jones Newswires

 11-29-101735ET

 Copyright © 2010 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.

[brker_guy]

Carl, I have been occupied by this whole scenario in the last hour, and here are my thoughts.  I have Cox service at home, and I sometimes like to cut that cable cord as you do.  However, we would being doing (3) a big disservice if we do that because these guys are still (3)'s customers.  By cutting these guys off, we are cutting (3) off from those internet traffic.  Last thing we want are white mice running on them. :-)

 

What we need is the massive effort from someone like GOOG for the last mile to kill off these greedy monopolists:

 

http://www.google.com/appserve/fiberrfi/

 

It's because Comcast is losing customers at alarming rate; that's why they are doing this. Now you know why they had to go out and overpay for Universal NBC.  They thought that if they can control content, they will make that famous Sumner Redstone landmark comment comes true, "Content is KING!"

 

From what you posted this morning about Comcast outtage this morning, here is what I think.  If LVLT retaliates, it will set a domino effect through the entire industry. Just remember that Comcast still needs LVLT to transport its video and phone services.

 

This industry is going to change very fast and very dramatically. The first warning shot has been fired by Comcast. However, Comcast must realizes that they can't stop this. The days of streaming IPTV are already here. Comcast can't stop that speeding bullet train called IPTV.  Version 2.0 of GoogleTV will destroy what this Comcast Toll Road is going to be.  They are just delaying the inevitables.  It's very stupid of them to do this...

 

I think this is great news for (3) now that I think of it.  This is like David vs. Goliath.  Once the press gets a hold of what Comcast is doing, it will portray them as an evil empire.  Mr. Murdoch, Mr. Redstone, and Time Warner won't be liking too much of what the Roberts family is doing with this chess move.  Dumb dumb dumb!!!!!!

[Guest ValueCarl]

Brker_guy, I have been thinking similarly during this time period, and focusing on the magnificent position that (3)'s long haul transport represents! They're the end to end provider across the nation with facilities that represent one "local phone call" away from 93 percent of the US population!   

 

I guess my older experience with Gemstar, TV GUIDE, witnessing Murdoch and Malone do a reverse take over while along with Ergen and the courts trivialized Yuen's patent arsenal into vapor ware; left me believing that Malone's "Content is King" blabber was his original quote versus having pirated it away from Sumner Redstone!  ;D

 

Anyway, this situation is even more of a tangled "WEB" while thinking about Berkshire board members extending to a newly appointed Comcast director! What would Warren do or say in the middle of all of this?

 

Powell's got an interesting thread going here, by the way, including proposing his own question, which you might want to respond to.

 

http://www.telecomramblings.com/2010/11/comcast-declares-war-on-internet-video/#more-9050     

[brker_guy]

It was actually Sumner Redstone who said that statement.  In the go-go days of the tech bubbles, he had a lot of his clones who used to work at my previous ventures, running around preaching that gospel to the carriers at the time, and those idiotic carriers bought into that idea.  Go figure!

 

Sumner even said this, "If content is king, copyright is its castle". 

 

I am on the Powell thread, my friend.  I even responded to it.  ;D

[opihiman2]

The Comcast news is a big mess for LVLT.  I was wondering what effect net neutrality would have on LVLT, and I hope this isn't a sign of things to come.  If net neutrality is killed, buh bye LVLT.  Bandwidth will be effectively killed.

 

As for the last mile providers.  I'm hoping 4G and WiMax is the end all solution--although I'm not so sure if 4G providers will institute bandwidth caps like they do for 3G and overseas.

 

This is also the reason people on here should be afraid of investing heavily in companies like NetFlix and OnLive that are heavily dependent on bandwidth.  In places like Canada, NZ, Australia, and Europe, bandwidth caps at 15GB/month are common.

[brker_guy]

Sorry, opihiman2, but this is NOT a net neutrality issue.  It's more like a peering issue.  I happen to agree with Rob Powell who wrote this good little piece tonight.  You might like to read it and give it some thoughts.

 

http://www.telecomramblings.com/2010/11/comcast-its-just-peering-not-net-neutrality/

 

In places like Canada, NZ, Australia, and Europe, bandwidth caps at 15GB/month are common.

 

Now where are these countries rank in term of Internet BW consumption compared to countries like Japan, Korea, or Finland?

 

http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/Images/commentarynews/broadbandspeedchart.jpg

 

When it comes to video, you are dealing with a totally different type of "beast", and Comcast realizes how much of this is hitting close to their home base.  That's why they opened fire first before all of their customers would use them as just a "dumb pipe" provider and load up their network with video traffic which they can't support or take away eyeballs away from their own networks.  Remember, Comcast just closed their NBC Universal purchase, and they need as many eyeballs on those NBC assets as much as possible.

 

"Invert; always invert!"  Quote by Charlie T. Munger

[Guest Bronco]

Does anyone feel this company will need to recap?

 

Aren't there better opportunities out there...I posted about DECK and CY recently which have done great. 

 

I would much rather own Apple than this POS. 

[Guest ValueCarl]

Brker_guy, excluding the end run, or 3rd rail solution because "speed kills," while understanding the ironic, archaic, regulatory scheme in place for exchanging traffic-rules that have (3) carrying voluminous bits for free, way too long now-what is your idea tied to "cost to deliver" as well as "cost to receive" which would remedy this situation fairly?

 

Bronco, your board host would be best to talk about "restructuring" this security, because other than in 06, and other than dipping his toes in the water unsuccessfully as I recall, he's a BOMBASTIC BEAR on this name! From my perspective, it remains a perpetual restructuring story in the form of "share counts" that keep inuring to (3)'s friends at Fairfax.  

 

As a matter of fact, he made claims that "critical mass" was the problem, ironically, less than a week before the Netflix deal was announced.  :o    

[Guest longinvestor]

The spat between Comcast and Netflix is nothing but Act II of Verizon vs Vonage a few years ago. The world is careening towards "it's all bits stupid" and no one is going to stop that. Slow down maybe but not stop it. And no matter whether Crowe has run (3) well or not, he had it exactly right at inception when he said the IP transport will be driven entirely be economics, not technology. 

 

Now when / whether investors will see a return on investment is arguable but the worldview of (3) is spot on. True to my name, I'm willing to wait longer even though I'm under water. It is one or the other, denial or deep value!

 

 

 

 

[Cardboard]

"Does anyone feel this company will need to recap?"

 

I think it is a matter of timing. If they can't increase their revenues over the next 12-18 months, then yes a recap could become necessary. However, they are so close to the break-even line that a small increase in revenues (say 10%) would likely lead to a total change in investors' attitude and bring a major uplift to their debt and stock price. This would open the door to much better financing solutions.

 

Honestly, I was about to give up just before the Netflix deal was announced. I had not been in this thing for years, so after a few quarters of disappointment, I was seriously questioning the value of this network and management's intent and abilities. The deal is important, but I think that what is more important is the demonstration that they own the only viable solution to deliver bandwidth. If one of the biggest user has given up on other solutions, then other players will look at that and conclude that what is good for Netflix is likely good for them too.  

 

The story is somewhat similar to the cell towers operators who were near bankrupt under a perceived large amount of debt after the Internet bubble pop, then recovered amazingly well as demand picked up. In this case it is even better because if utilization goes up, it will be much harder to add capacity. If things truly improve with their revenues, this pile of debt and convertibles might not look so big after all.

 

Cardboard

[Guest ValueCarl]

Are you still shorting Netflix, too, because between (3) smothering you in paper losses, on top of that, I'm concerned for your sustainability.  ;)

 

<Now when / whether investors will see a return on investment is arguable but the worldview of (3) is spot on. True to my name, I'm willing to wait longer even though I'm under water.>  

[Guest ValueCarl]

I am glad our Assistant Chief Legal Officer, Mr. John Ryan, sees it as I do. When Mr. Stortz departs on January 1st, we are in good hands with this guy!  ;D

 

“It is regrettable that Comcast has sought to portray this simply as a commercial disagreement or a peering dispute. They miss the point and are attempting to distract from the fundamental issue. What is at stake is the following:

 

”The fundamental issue is not whether Comcast sends more traffic to Level 3 or whether Level 3 sends more traffic to Comcast. Both Level 3 and Comcast are responding to the requests of Comcast’s subscribers, who want to be free to see and use the full suite of content and applications that are available on the Internet today and in the future. Level 3 wants to assure that freedom is preserved.

 

http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20101130006861/en/Level-3-Communications-Issues-Response-Comcast-Statement 

[brker_guy]

Carl, it's good to have rational and patient posters like Cardboard and LongInvestor contribute to our little thread now.  This is good!  :D  For awhile, I thought I was the only lone wolf in the room with you, Carl. :-)

 

Ok, looks like the FCC is going to look into this eh?

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704679204575646840288688392.html

 

Finally, someone is earning his/her paychecks at the FCC. (One can only hope!) 

 

I reluctantly agree with LongInvestor on this as being another VG vs. VZ Act II.  However, I hope that the outcome is different than VG vs. VZ Act I.  These guys at the last miles have to realize that to realize that they can only hope to contain the flood gate once it's opened.  They can't stop it.  Unlike voice and data, once that video stream start transmitting, it's like shooting water from a firing hose at full speed. 

 

Like you, LongInvestor,  I always thought that the only catalyst that would get LVLT going is a video partnership with the likes of Hulu or Netflix to get LVLT going.  We already got a deal with YouTube to fill up the pipe already, but that still isn't enough.  For awhile, I was in self-denial and felt like a defeated.  Good thing, I didn't give up.  Now, we just need a lot more of Hulu or even a Facebook to get on our (3) fiber, and we should be good.

 

You know, if I was a LVLT lawyer(which I hate to be at this point), I would point out to the fact is that Hulu generates a HUGE AMOUNT of video traffic on the internet.  So, why doesn't Comcast go after the likes of LLNW who are distributing those NFLX movies and Hulu videos like they are doing to (3)?  I agree with Rob Powell.  This is all about getting eyeballs away from NFLX and onto the Comcast contents.  Sick!!

 

what is your idea tied to "cost to deliver" as well as "cost to receive" which would remedy this situation fairly?

 

Carl, I don't have a good pricing model for this.  Dan Rayburn might have some good insight for something like this.  However, here is a metric to use.  Remember a few years ago when LVLT published the peering pricing for the VOIP calls with Qwest, I believe?  You can take that pricing and put a factor of 3-5x on it bc video has a lot more bits to transmit.

 

I think it's time for Mr. Softee to use up his cash and think out of the box and get into the last mile business to undercut all of these monopolists.  Please, Mr. Balmer!  Use up your CA$H and do something revolutionary like Apple did!  Don't be a me too!