Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
It will be a tough task for them to explain favoring the Fraudulent Owners/Management of Straightpath and skimming some off the top vs. BK'ing Fibertower and allowing shareholders to get screwed in the process. That is a possibility but what is also possible is someone readdressing the Bankruptcy in a Court and getting another remand on the licenses thus holding up the FCC's 5G initiatives and ATT. If the Fibertower deal is worth $2B I would think the FCC would be smart enough to skim some off for themselves, settle up with those who have been wronged, and all walk away happy.
Let's call a spade a spade. The FCC effed up the Fibertower deal and were completely asleep at the switch with regards to their regulation and oversight of license holders with Straightpath. Fibertower has pointed out countless STRP locations where STRP claimed they had service and the site owner had no clue who IDT, Straightpath, or Microwave Services were. So does Fibertower pointing out that they FCC is just asleep help us the common shareholder or not ultimately in this web?
Last point is that the bondholders are also huge shareholders so they can easily structure this so shareholders get paid as well as it doesn't matter to them at the end of the day. Ties up a major loose string for the deal. During BK roughly 2X the the amount of outstanding shares traded hands and you know many dumped simply for tax purposes. Who do you think was there to scoop up the sub nickel shares as a very cheap hedge for their long term plans?
Sandpaints I always liked your idea of a 3 way chopped pot on this. $1.5B deal....$500M to shareholders....$500M to bondholders....$500M to FCC/Public Treasury. But I would prefer a deal where the bondholders say what the heck...pay the shareholders to get the deal done without any hitches...what do we care we own most of the old shared along with all the bonds.
Sandpaints, don't be so negative.
1 - The FCC needs to tee up ATT and Verizon for 5G
2 - ATT needs Fibertower far more than Verizon needs STRP but I strongly believe both will be approved with some conditions.
3 - The FCC does not want to look stupid to the masses. They look fairly stupid to us with their Fibertower decision, their StraightPath decision, and their failure to do any type of checks and balances on those who held licenses.
4 - So the FCC skimmed some cash out of the STRP deal and then they being no friend of the Fibertower group will want to skim some cash out of them as well as clearing the way for ATT.
5 - Do you realize the write up someone could do on the FCC after this shit storm if they don't tighten up all those loose strings. What happens if someone can get a judge to look at the BK case and throw things into a wild loop for ATT, 5G, and the FCC.
6 - Bottom line is 5G needs ATT and VZ to be competing and to have a completely clear runway for their plans and the FCC is the one that can make that happen. They screw it up over a a few hundred million here or there and your will have ATT and VZ screaming and politicking for new heads there.
7 - The question is did the two petitioners put forth enough information and cause for the FCC to say you know what there is something big there that could cause our 5G plans and ATT problems. I thought the reply by ATT/Fibertower to those 2 petitioners was weak and the two petitioners came back with solid left hooks to the jaw in their replies.
I would like to know more of what you think Sandpaints. Yes I think we are close to a decision as the T-Mobile and CCA appear almost desperate and are throwing some hail mary's out there to say at least they tried.
T-Mobile Ex Parte out there. Sprint better off with Cable Companies who have the cash flow to take sprint to next level. T-Mobile is worried about being left behind. So T-Mobile and CCA want to slow down ATT VZ and ultimately 5G? I don’t see this admin doing anything but throwing them a few scraps. 5G coming full throttle.
It is another CCA pleading......broken record they are.
There is a new pleading out there under the ATT/Fibertower FCC. The pleading has not been uploaded yet for download so I assume it will be there later this evening or tomorrow.
ARTICLE XII RETENTION OF JURISDICTION
The Bankruptcy Court shall have exclusive jurisdiction of all matters arising out of, or related to, the Chapter 11 Cases and the Plan pursuant to, and for the purpose of, sections 105(a)and 1142 of the Bankruptcy Code and for, among other things, the following purposes:
(g) To consider any amendments to or modifications of the Plan, or to cure any defect or omission, or to reconcile any inconsistency in any order of the Bankruptcy Court, including the Confirmation Order;
It was added support for the return of the 42 licenses after the court ruling and ultimately working towards the return of the remaining licenses. If you click through to the attachments you can find it. Some of the other documents outline STRP's malfeasance and that countless property owners had no clue that STRP was "claiming" they had equipment providing service on their property. Many had no idea who StraightPath or IDT even were. You really cannot make this stuff up. My assumption is that they may have had equipment in a van and drove from location to location and stopped for a few minutes to somehow check a box. It would be a stretch to even give them that much credit. Really outlines the difference between the two organizations. STRP/IDT a pureplay squatter on spectrum licenses and Fibertower who provided services at one point to all major and mid cell carriers in 13+ Major Metro Markets.
http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/ApplicationSearch/results.jsp?applSearchKey=applSearchKey2017107752210
Isn't it amazing that you can tell one story to the BK Court and weave a completely different contradictory tale for the Appellate Court with absolutely no circumstances changing.
Some folks are born silver spoon in hand
Lord, don't they help themselves, oh
But when the taxman comes to the door
Lord, the house looks like a rummage sale, yes
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no millionaire's son, no
It ain't me, it ain't me; I ain't no fortunate one, no
Yeah, yeah
Where did you come across that beauty?
I thought the two petitioners outlined some solid points that the FCC and ATT have to take into account. Then the Opposition Doc by ATT/Fibertower in response appeared to be extremely weak especially when you read the two follow ups the petitioners counter punched with.
Go to the pleadings section. There are currently 24 documents listed. They are all worth a read but especially the Levy/Fahy along with ATT/Fibertower Opposition to the Petition to Deny.
http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/ApplicationSearch/applAdmin.jsp;JSESSIONID_APPSEARCH=NsKnZ9JPn7Gs9FkhvmR9b9DTVPnlm4XLQhk5hkpD2whJQ0wf7V3y!-24153188!NONE?applID=10148372#attachments
The Internet Of Things Wants To Know Where Its 5G Is
https://www.forbes.com/sites/waynecrews/2017/11/02/the-internet-of-things-wants-to-know-where-its-5g-is/#159e8cc77ed7
Don't be so self deprecating. This has been 10+ years that I have followed this and at times I have not understood it fully. The sole power of the former shareholders is that they have the ability to upend the BK plan due to it's malfeasance and cause the FCC and ATT serious delay. Do yourself a favor and go over the 4 documents submitted by Levy and Fahy. They nailed this to a T and actually did the work in laying it out before the FCC and totally discrediting the Joint Opposition put forward by ATT/Fibertower.
I don't know how to respond to your haphazard post. You apparently don't understand how corporate chapter 11's work with regards to shareholders and bondholders. You also don't seem to understand the nuances and uniqueness of this case which has been discussed here for years.
The only way you would receive a near full valuation as if your shares were never terminated is that the FCC/ATT/Fibertower agree that shareholders were screwed, Fibertower says sure because as bondhodlers we also loaded up on the common as a hedge, and it gives the FCC the appearance that they righted a wrong along with them getting a decent cut of the overall deal.
I think that is what people were trying to tell you when you had expectations of $2-$3B. Old common was eliminated during the BK process and the bondholders became the new stockholders. Whether that is right or wrong it is what happened.
Were the 2 shareholder petitioners arguments enough to have influence with the FCC? There were 2 quality petitioners and they both had excellent follow up responses/replies to ATT/FTWR's joint opposition. Their arguments appeared well founded and accurate. All the rest of the shareholder petitioners were garbage.
Traditional Pay TV got butchered in the 3rd quarter. People are cutting the cord in droves.
ATT and Verizon with their wireless presence and infrastructure have to be gearing 5G towards being the over the top replacement to your current $100+ per month tv package.
They have a huge bullseye on Dish, Charter, Cox, and Comcast. Those non wireless television players do not have an answer for 5G. They don't have a wireless network and they don't have the infrastructure or know how to get a wireless network up and running. One of the reasons why I think a Sprint/Tmobile hookup is far inferior than a Comcast/Sprint hookup or Comcast/Charter/Sprint venture.
ATT was one of the top TV players getting slaughtered in 3Q losing 300-400K premium tv subscribers. They made some of it up with Direct TV now but that is swapping a margin rich $100+ per month subscriber for a break even $40-$50 per month subscriber. I don't think Verizon fared much better.
The FCC is all in on 5G. They know jobs will come with it along with wanting to be a world leader in technology and communications infrastructure. They hold up the STRP or FTWR license transfer then what will they do? Auction it off....how much time will that take? That will split up the licenses amongst squatters, speculators, and companies that will not do much with them. Here the FCC has the opportunity to hand the lion's share of 24/28/39 over to the two players who have the infrastructure, know how, subscriber bases, and cash flows to push 5G ahead many years versus letting these licenses go to auction. If they hand the licenses to ATT/VZ and they get 5G up and running all will be forgotten and it is a win for FCC, Industry, Taxpayers, and America.
The only way I see it is that the FCC and ATT cannot afford to have anything hold up the process or put forth the image that they(FCC) have been asleep at the wheel with regard to STRP. I see both being pushed through with some concessions and part of those concessions will be an ATT payment to remedy the unsecured and common. Interesting that you did not see a petition from a representative of the unsecured. Remember there is no love loss between the FCC and STRP and the Fibertower Bondholders but they have to benefit VZ and ATT so perhaps they ding the bondholders to the benefit of the common. Still believe the bondholders bought up a ton of the common in BK. Well by now you know my thoughts on this.
Can shareholders and unsecured creditors get a court to say the BK Plan was garbage and it needs to be re-addressed? Are the FCC and AT&T willing to roll that dice or cure it up with a drop in the bucket payment? My gut tells me the FCC tells ATT to have something in the acquisition plan that remedies Fibertower's misdeeds so that this goes off smoothly and the public doesn't get their 5G delayed. As you said some of the petitions clearly outlined this(Levy/Fahy).
In particular, we explain what the Commission does (after determining the transaction does not violate the Act, other statutes, or Commission rules) to assure the transaction is in the public interest. In our review, the Commission must identify any public interest harms. If there are harms, the Commission then will consider narrowly-tailored, transaction-specific conditions to remedy the harm. As the item explains, this is in line with past pronouncements by the Commission that we will use conditions “only to remedy harms that arise from the transaction (i.e., transaction-specific harms)” and that are “related to the Commission’s responsibilities under the Communications Act and related statutes,” and we “will not impose conditions to remedy pre-existing harms or harms that are unrelated to the transaction.”1 Then the Commission also will look at public interest benefits arising from the transaction.
T-Mobile nor the CCA is going to slow down the move to 5G. I have always thought it would be Comcast and/or Charter going after Sprint. Far better synergies and bundling than simply having a Sprint/Tmobile hookup.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/japans-softbank-calling-off-talks-171625629.html
Japan's SoftBank doubts merger of Sprint with T-Mobile - source
(Reuters) - SoftBank Group Corp's board of directors is having doubts about the merger it has been negotiating between its U.S. wireless subsidiary Sprint Corp and T-Mobile US Inc, due to fears of losing control of a combined entity, a source familiar with the matter told Reuters on Monday.
The doubts could derail SoftBank's plan, discussed on and off for more than six months, to reshape the U.S. wireless sector by merging the two companies into a single carrier with more than 130 million U.S. subscribers, behind Verizon Communications Inc and AT&T Inc.
It would be the second time such a deal has failed. Sprint and T-Mobile came close to announcing a merger in 2014 but called it off at the last minute due to regulatory concerns.
Sprint shares fell as much as 13 percent on Monday, but pared losses and were down 7 percent in late-afternoon trading. T-Mobile shares were down 4.5 percent.
Several SoftBank directors urged the Japanese company's Chief Executive Masayoshi Son on Friday to reconsider the merger of Sprint and T-Mobile because the terms being discussed would result in SoftBank losing control of one of its largest assets, the source told Reuters.
Sprint, T-Mobile, Deutsche Telekom and SoftBank declined to comment.
While Son has negotiated with T-Mobile's majority owner, Germany's Deutsche Telekom AG, on the basis that SoftBank and other Sprint shareholders would own around 40 percent of the combined company, he now shares the concerns of the SoftBank directors questioning the benefits of such an ownership arrangement, the source said.
As of Monday, T-Mobile was trying to keep talks alive, according to separate sources familiar with the matter.
Its parent Deutsche Telekom would like to reach an agreement with Sprint on a deal, but it insists on governance control and the right to consolidate the combined company, the sources said.
Earlier on Monday, Nikkei reported that SoftBank was expected to approach Deutsche Telekom as early as Tuesday to propose ending the merger negotiations. The Reuters source could not confirm this, and sources close to T-Mobile said they were unaware of any such decision by SoftBank.
The Wall Street Journal also reported on Monday that Sprint had called the merger talks off and would make a significant investment in its network instead.
The due diligence between T-Mobile and Sprint was almost complete and the focus had shifted to working out a business plan for the combined company as well as an integration strategy, sources had told Reuters last week.
Even so, it was not clear that U.S. regulators would clear a deal between the two carriers.
Sprint's junk bonds were among the hardest hit in Monday afternoon trading after the Nikkei reported the deal was on shaky ground, IFR reported.
Analysts have expected consolidation in the U.S. wireless industry to ease pricing pressure in the market, which could benefit AT&T and Verizon, who have lost share to their smaller rivals. Cable companies Comcast Corp and Charter Communications Inc are also entering the market with wireless service on Verizon's airwaves.
"With no merger of Sprint and T-Mobile, as well as the entrance of Comcast and Charter into wireless, we expect Verizon to have a difficult run going forward," said Philip Cusick, an analyst at JPMorgan, in a research note.
"Sprint as well could struggle to maintain positive subscriber momentum as cable enters, making its balance sheet look unsustainable."
U.S. FCC approves CenturyLink acquisition of Level 3 -source
Took exactly one year from announcement to FCC approval. Some interesting commentary in this quick release related to mergers, acquisitions, AT&T etc...expect a decision any day now on Fibertower...
WASHINGTON, Oct 30 (Reuters) - Telecommunications provider CenturyLink Inc won U.S. anti-trust approval from the U.S. Federal Communications Commission for its purchase of Level 3 Communications Inc, three people briefed on the matter said on Monday.
CenturyLink said last year it would buy Level 3 in a deal valued at about $24 billion. It is seeking to expand its reach in the business communications market and compete with rivals such as AT&T Inc and Verizon Communications Inc.
The deal, the three people said, could effectively make it easier for other large transactions to win approval.
The U.S. Justice Department approved the tie-up this month with some conditions including some divestitures. It was not immediately clear what conditions the FCC imposed, but it does include some divestitures.
The three people said the Republican majority decision could rewrite the standard by which the FCC reviews future mergers -- a shift that could make it easier for other large media and telecommunications mergers to win approval.
The FCC is currently considering whether to approve Sinclair Broadcast Group’s proposed $3.9 billion acquisition of Tribune Media Co that has drawn fire from across the political spectrum.
The FCC has traditionally employed a balancing test weighing potential public interest harms against any potential public interest benefits and applicants bear the burden of proof to win approval.
The three people briefed on the matter said the FCC approval of the Level 3 CenturyLink deal offered a more limited standard of review that would use "narrowly tailored transaction-specific conditions to remedy" harms.
FCC spokesman Neil Grace declined to comment.
Republicans on the commission have pushed to halt the practice of demanding conditions or concessions from companies seeking to merge that are not directly related to the transaction.
FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, who was in the minority during the Obama administration, last year criticized “how badly broken the current merger review process has become at the FCC — how rife it is with fact-free, dilatory, politically motivated, non-transparent decision-making." (Reporting by David Shepardson; Editing by Lisa Von Ahn and Susan Thomas)
I think CCA just jockeying for some position to have options for their clients to have access to the 28/39 spectrum. If it is in more rural parts I don’t see ATT or VZ splicing off some access for them. ATT and VZ returns on 5G will be in the urban and suburban areas.
Simon Flannery - Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC
Thanks a lot, good afternoon. John, can you talk a little bit about 5G in more detail? You've got a number of trials going on. It looks like you're basically committing to a nationwide rollout here. So how are the trial results going, and how should we think about the shape of your deployment 2018, 2019, and 2020? It looks like you're increasing your locations, the high-speed locations 20 million, 8 million of those come from fiber. The balance of 12 million is I guess a mix of some of the things you describe, but it seems like 5G is going to be a big part of that. So talk us through what we've seen so far that gives you the confidence. And then what's the shape of that and the investment over the next couple of years? Thanks.
John J. Stephens - AT&T, Inc.
So we've done a couple of test overlays – more than a couple, a large number. We used LTE-LAA and other capabilities in our network out in San Francisco and got 750-meg speeds on the tests we did out there. Even if you take 10% of that to be normal fully loaded network speeds, you'd still have 75-meg speeds. We think that's pretty tremendous. We did a testing in Austin too, one in the same base where we combined carrier aggregation, MIMO, I think we used LTE-LAA there. And when we did that, we had phenomenal speeds, even I think as good if not better than we had in San Francisco. In addition, we did a millimeter wave, 28-gig millimeter wave test there and got a point-to-point test over 1-gig speed. So all of these things are things that the network team has already done, they've already been successful with.
Based on the tests that we ran in Austin and San Francisco, we're deploying out to 20 cities right now. We hope to have them done by the end of the year, near the end of the year. These capabilities with carrier aggregation, LTE-LAA, and MIMO capabilities, and with those we are optimistic that we're going to get flow-through speeds that could cap 400 megs even by the end of the year and with that, on a fully loaded market, use a lower percentage. But those things are going on now. When you take those plans out a few years, we have a plan to hit the largest 30 cities with that capability. That 5G capability will overlap some of the, if you will, IP fiber-based services we have. So we didn't want to double count, so those numbers are overlapping, but it will be very great.
When you talk about 5G from a millimeter wave perspective, we expect to continue testing that as we have in Austin and other places. I think everyone is aware we've got a transaction waiting for approval in front of the FCC on the significant holdings of a 39-gigahertz millimeter wave spectrum. We're moving forward on that. We expect the standards to be out in 2019 and equipment to be out. Following that, that is one that we will be one of the leaders on, and it will be in addition or in connection with the cities build-out that I just described. So I hope that gives you a sense of why we're so comfortable with putting that in greater than 50 million locations. Some of them will be served with both wireless or fiber-to-the-prem or fiber-to-the-business. But we are confident that in total, counting each of the locations only once, we'll have over 50 million.
Simon Flannery - Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC
Okay. And so you have you proved out the business model on the millimeter wave yet, or is that still something you still need to work through?
John J. Stephens - AT&T, Inc.
I'll say it this way. I think we proved out the business model that businesses need speed and capacity. That's been proven out. We need to do more specifically with the 39-gigahertz build-out. But from what we've learned in our Austin trial, we're optimistic that it will work out. Now remember, we have extensive fiber throughout the country, not only in our local exchange, our traditional service areas, where we have extensive fiber, fiber into neighborhoods, fiber nodes, fiber to businesses. But even on a national footprint, we have extensive fiber because of our legacy companies. And so we have a unique benefit compared to many others as we build out a wireless IP capability. Others do not have the ability to rely on the built-in fiber holdings that we have, and I think that's a unique advantage. We will continue to modify and adjust the build plans and the product offerings as customers direct us, but we're confident we're going to be able to do this in a very profitable way.
So many questions, so few answers.
att earnings call. Nationwide 5G rollout with 39ghz as backbone.
They seem pretty confident.
Cancelled Terrestars...understood. No service and no demand and no ATT/VZ chomping at the bit to get to the spectrum.
Cancelled Fibertowers....not understood. Network built in 13 major markets. $300-$400M in capex for backhaul, developed various products progressing the industry, serviced all 4 big carriers as well as some smaller carriers. Went to FCC with plans to build save links etc...Of the licenses cancelled/terminated and some were actually being constructed.
Renewed StraightPath and opened the door for them even though they committed a huge fraud. This is where they opened the flood gates for everyone and anyone who gets their licenses cancelled. Straightpath did zero with their 28/39...nothing and then probably shipped some nuts and bolts in a box to all the locations and checked the boxes with the FCC. This is not an exaggeration. No proof of anything being done with the spectrum but and this is the huge but....28/39 good for 5G and Verizon/ATT wanted it.
So does the FCC(ATT) want the Fibertower licenses tied up in the courts starting in 2019 and lasting until 2020? I don't think ATT can afford to be that far behind Verizon. This is ATT's near bird in the hand and there aren't any birds left in the bush.
Bird in the hand and there aren’t any in the bush.
I think you already know the answer Chris.
All depends upon how clear ATT and FCC want the runway for 5G.
Do they want to risk this getting tied up in the courts?
What does the business case for 5G look like to where settling up with the unsecured and shareholders is well worth throwing $50M at the unsecured and $250M at the common?
My assumption is that ATT, VZ, and FCC all want the track as greased as possible and settling up with anyone who could stall things out relative to what 5G means for the companies(Revenue), Pai(Successful FCC), and Trump(Economy/Jobs) is a drop in the bucket to what is at stake. So settle up with the unsecured $50M?, throw at least at a minimum $250M to the common. All depends on how intertwined and powerful the FCC is in the process and whether they want to take some flesh out of those bondholders. Not something they are in the business of but you can't have people like StraightPath commiting fraud and FTWR bondholders screwing shareholders and hoodwinking the courts.
Best outcome for shareholders is we get a huge cut at the expense of the bondholders. But as I have always stated those bondholders are hedged immensely owning 75-80%+ of the common as well.
Timing of the CCA and Tmobile further arguments leads me to believe we are close to a positive decision and that those two parties may know that. CCA and Tmobile both appear to be last ditch hail mary's to get their final pleas and appearance of resistance of effort in the record. CCA...peanuts organization and Tmobile(Foreign Outfit who have been looking to cashout for years) are like a feeble old man on the train tracks with his hand up requesting the speeding 5G locomotive. CCA is small time and T-Mobile doesn't have the cash flow to to progress 5G like ATT and Verizon plan to.
VZ earnings call. Loaded with talk of 5G:
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4114751-verizon-communications-vz-q3-2017-results-earnings-call-transcript?part=single
From Verizon Earnings Call, Could take it as a general indicator:
Operator
Your next question comes from Jennifer Fritzsch of Wells Fargo. Please go ahead with your question.
Jennifer Fritzsch
Great, thank you for taking the question. Matt if I may, I just wanted to ask on fiber we have all been brought up to be believe fiber is really expensive to deploy. And yet we see you coming into the lower end of your CapEx range. I'm not asking you for guidance on 2018, but are you seeing some savings with these XO properties. Are you deploying those laterals yet, or is that going to be more kind of a 2018 event?
And then if I also just could ask on the other element of 5G spectrum. I think [indiscernible] you feel comfortable with spectrum might that not even sit in the spectrum auction. Can you talk a little bit of how you as you look at your inventory are you feeling comfortable still with what you have? thanks.
Matthew Ellis
Yes, so I'll answer the spectrum question first. We believe that we have a great portfolio of spectrum. As you look at the 4G network only approximately 50% just over 50% of our spectrum portfolio server in that network today. We have got additional spectrum assets that will serve that network in 2018 whether that the [Refarm] (Ph) and 850 and PCS or whether it would be put in the AWS-3 to work.
And additionally as you move into the 5G world, we look forward to closing the straight path transactions and the XO spectrum transaction as head into 2018. So we are comfortable with our spectrum positions. As we think about future auctions we will wait to see what is in there or make assessments at that time. but very comfortable with the portfolio we have today.
Sandpaints,
I like your thinking. There are so many nuances to the Fibertower case that it is extremely difficult to map out all the plays, angles, and outcomes.
1 - ATT (Somewhat joined at the hip with FCC)
Simply want the spectrum to become the over the top 5G Cable Killer and keep pace with Verizon. I think they know they have this in the bag.
2 - FCC (Supposed to represent the people and treasury)
Want ATT to have the assets to get 5G going. Need to avoid the perception of facilitating a fraud on the people and the agency.
In a difficult pickle and can’t block this move due to the STRP deal. STRP’s shady moves dwarf that of Fibertower.
Need to get their pound of flesh out of this transaction simply to have that announcement of a $100M…$200M win for the people and the treasury.
3 - Bankruptcy Court
These guys seemed to be the greatest facilitator of a potential swindle. To enable the valuation that they did on Wireless Spectrum Assets of near $0 simply because the assets were in question and would possibly be forfeited back to the FCC. Even though they were spending millions on legal fees in order to preserve the asset. If this were allowed to stand then what future abuses could take place. Their chances in court in 2019 to get the licenses back were far greater than the less than 1% chance they assigned through valuation. It also doesn’t help their decision that if this deal approaches $1B+ and the STRP deal was $3.1B that the court was either hoodwinked or essentially asleep at the wheel. Possibly the soon to be retired from the bench judge didn’t give a rip. Who knows why there was no clause put in that if the assets in limbo are sold or recovered that the unsecured and shareholders would not partake. Think about it. Just about any company could figure out ways to place their assets into limbo, eliminate all liabilities and shareholders, and then recapture the assets later in a courtroom. What me the average Joe sees is fraud but legals minds may simply see shrewd legal maneuvering.
Does the BK Court want their mark on this? Does the FCC want their mark on this? See Fahy and Levy Docs/Petitions as they outlined this pretty well as to why the BK case is still in flux. Whether the docs they have submitted have any clout with the FCC waits to be seen.
4 - Fibertower Bondholders
These guys end up winning no matter what. If the shareholders get screwed out of everything then these guys make $1B versus $800M(Just Examples) but either way they win. Just one way they win more and the other they win but just a little less.
5 - Fibertower Unsecured Creditors
These guys should be made whole.
6 - Fibertower Shareholders
No petition from Art Samberg's party? I would estimate that the bondholders(Incl Samberg in some form) probably own at least 75-85%(40M / 48M shares outstanding)
7 – Tmobile….well these guys are simply pulling fire alarms in the building to slow down the party. Remember a few years ago they were submitting documents for the FCC to give the licenses back.
8 – Sprint….no comment on the current situation but like Tmobile were submitting documents for the FCC to give the license back.
We are now at day 220 from March 16th, 2017. 40 Days past the 180 day shot clock. I would anticipate a decision or major update by year end but seeing this run into 2018 would not surprise me.
My gut is that it is in the bag that ATT will end up with the Licenses but the financial pie, number of pieces, size of the pieces, and who actually gets a slice is up in the air.
Just hoping that they don’t try and buy off the common with a $1 or $2 offering with some bs justification.
More T-Mobile static posted.........
ATT and Verizon are now years ahead of T-Mobile and have the cash flow to make 5G happen. T-Mobile simply wants the government to slow the train down so T-Mobile can catch up.
T-Mobile(Germany) and Sprint(Japan).....Verizon and ATT(USA) are going to get the green light with this administration.
http://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/nextlink-submits-study-supports-t-mobile-s-argument-for-32-ghz-as-a-5g-band
Just more on Tmobiles schizo actions and just trying to create speed bumps for ATT.
TMobile/Sprint hookup will take at least 18-24 months to push through all approval channels. The synergies obtained will lead to a massive loss of jobs and price stabilization in wireless by eliminating a 4th carrier. One will be a big no no in the Trump/Pai camp and the other will have consumer advocate groups screaming. Just a couple of the hurdles. I always though a far better play would have been Comcast/Charter and Sprint and that would have hung Tmobile out to dry. Comcast/Charter have the cash flow and assets to leverage and Sprint has the assets and spectrum. TMobile not so much.
Anyhow I have a hard time seeing the FCC turn down ATT with regards to Fibertower and like your idea of some 33/33/33 split to Bondholders, FCC, and Shareholders which you mentioned a while back. Also as always is looming their StraightPath decision. How do you give them a pass and shut out Fibertower. Can't give the appearance of enabling Spectrum Squatters to hit the $3B lottery while the actual operating and services company gets squashed.
Sorry I thought you knew Sprint and T-Mobile were dancing again. Sprint never filed anything opposing Fibertower & ATT and if you recall T-Mobile wrote letters of support to the Bureaus in support of Fibertower keeping their licenses when they were going to be taken away. I think Tmobile just enjoys messing with Att whenever they can. I don't see the FCC opposing the Sprint/T-Mobile merger but the department of justice is another thing. Perhaps this was all simply Tmobiles way of telling the FCC to back their own merger play knowing strp and that they will ultimately push through Att and Ftwr.
Sorry codesilver and sandpaints but I can't figure out if I am missing something or if you are reading into something that is not there. I am assuming I am missing your points.
It appears the FCC has gone way over their deadline of 180 days with no explanation as to why. I just can't see the FCC not pushing this through. Fibertower taking the FCC to court would blow open the doors on the partial treatment of Straightpath vs. Fibertower scenarios which put sided by side would be a complete head scratcher.
Will all that being said I expect a decision either this week or by early spring. A decision in 6 months or tomorrow morning would not surprise me.