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.
The previous SELL recommendation that was confirmed was made on 12.15.2005 (8) days ago, when the stock price was 3.9000. Since then GTE has fallen -30.51%
http://www.americanbulls.com/StockPage.asp?CompanyTicker=GTE&MarketTicker=AMEX&TYP=S
tcr 3-5x market cap because why ?
$80MM should be market cap since that Might just be yearly end revenue. Cost of that revenues will be only ~5% the most less then revs. What's exciting about it ? 5% i can make on making selling lemonade on the road stand. Like i said see ya at $2.00 or less. Better sell before your gains disapear. No strat launch anytime soon so no risk of being left out.
Marry Christmas to all members from Grinch LOL
Anyone aware or can point me to some analyst research paper. Any brokerage or firm covering them yet ? I would be interested in their analysis. Thanks in advance.
Hippie I know you remember my post about confirmed sell. Yes you are right. It will be ugly. See ya at $2.00. Like i said market cap for this company should be at $80MM not $300MM. Just my opinion.
Hey tcr7309 try to focus on GTE and management not on me. I appreciate your concerns but Stratallite delay and lack of revenues from other business units have nothing to do with me but with management lack of execution of business plans. It's sad that people like you and others do not hold management accountable for this. I'm sure investors in Enron did not either. You all will pay big time for those mistakes one day on one stock. I hope it won't be GTE but then again it might teach a lesson not to mouth off to people that are trying to bring some light to this dark situation. It's very simple if management knew that deployment would take years they should have not mislead investors to attract their capital and say that it's going to take a year. Those type of statements if they involve money are called fraud. If they expected longer time they should have said strat deploy would be in year 2010 not in 2005/6. SIMPLE ISN'T IT or are you going to try to justify that too?
I don't think so. See ya at $2.00 range by Q1, 2006 if no strat test by end of 2005. Same story as last year. If you do accumilate more pain to come if you do so. Sell and take profits for Christmas. Come back at $1.00 to rebuy unless you truly believe strat deploy by end of 2005 then load up like crazy. My opinion.
Hits $1.2x I will jump in again and it's going there IF no strat test by end of the year and/or Q1, 2006 as described by CEO and former President. I only see opportunity if there is such opportunity. With no strat contracts, no magic money revs, no wi-max contracts or revs this isn't any opportunity for any growth. Hype yes but no growth. When I see something materialize or when GTE market cap will adjust TO $80MM which MIGHT! be GTE yearly revs then I will jump in on speculation and hype of you people here but GTE has nothing YET that is poised for growth. I see it. You people dream and are blind to that fact. Sorry we don't see the same on the subject but that's the beauty of message board. Exchange of ideas.
Ooo...by the way. $80million in revs with $75million in cost of those revs is NOT impressive at all.
lowtrade Wow !! I'm impressed !! I always will give you my high salutes Sir because you are the only person on this board that posts unbiased and posts truthfully and objectivly.
What about Magic Money promises ?
Another failed business plan and broken promise. Wake up people.
GTE is selling you pipe dream and all you money is going down the toilet.
GTEL Signs Stored Value Card Agreement With Leading Indian Company for $9 Billion Remittance Market
Business Wire, Sept 9, 2004
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2004_Sept_9/ai_n6187074
GTEL Targets $7.6 Billion Filipino Remittance Market; Bankard and GTEL Sign Agreement to Issue Stored Value Cards for Remittances in the Philippines
Business Wire, Sept 7, 2004
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2004_Sept_7/ai_n6183423
CEO ANNOUCED TIMELINES IN B&W + DD.
CEO 4 times publicaly annouced not realized time lines of 2005.
Stratellite which is high-altitute airship stationed in stratoshpere has not been build, tested or deployed yet.
Military low altitude drogon is not stratellite people. After reading this please tell me if this company has ANY INTEGRITY and why should any investor trust them after so many failure and broken business time lines.
BROKEN CEO DEADLINE #1
1. "We have scheduled the launch date for the Stratellite prototype for March 25, 2005" http://www.globetel.net/about/letter011005.html
BROKEN CEO DEADLINE #2
2. "Finally, the article concluded by reporting that GlobeTel Communications Corp., through its wholly-owned subsidiary Sanswire Networks LLC, stated it is on target for a first quarter 2005 launch of its Stratellite" http://www.globetel.net/about/letter011105.html
BROKEN CEO DEADLINE #3
3. "Once at Edwards, we would then work with the Air Force to determine a window for launch that would most likely be in the last two weeks of April." (2005)http://www.globetel.net/about/letter.html
13 MORE DAYS TIL BREAKING DEADLINE #4
4. "Thus, as currently planned, we expect to put our new high-tech Sanswire Two vehicle through its most demanding operational paces, at altitude, before the end of this year."
http://investor.globetel.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=67726&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=738514&highligh...
Former President of Globetel. Leigh Colman.
1. "A new and improved Sanswire One will make its first high altitude flight in August or September, 2005. A full commercial airship deployment is planned for 2006. http://www.wirelessiq.info/content/qa/20.html
2. "According to GlobeTel president Leigh Coleman, the governments of Peru and Colombia have already placed orders, along with unnamed US companies. The US Army and Air Force are interested. The production goal is some 300 airships a year by 2007." http://www.telecomasia.net/telecomasia/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=165793
WHOW REALLY 300 STRATS BY 2007. BUILD FREAKING ONE THEN 300.
Yet another fluf PR. When will GTE focus on main objective and at least show or test strat ? Where is magic money revs ? Where is VoIP revs ? Where is Wi-MAX revs ? Where is military contracts ? Man...PIpe dream people. That's all this is.
All of you millinairs in waiting are just gonna keep on waiting and loose your shirts cause this is going no where.
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/051222/20051222005274.html?.v=1
Sir Weirdo stop posting lies !!!
Jerry D Chase came on board in July 2004 and wasn't involved with Terayon in 2001. Posting some other Jerry Chase from some ganja site is pure spam and I will be deleting every post without explanation since my first post was to get familiar with TOS. Anyone that is short or not invested in this stock will regret this very soon.
Terayon Announces Appointment of Jerry D. Chase as CEO
Santa Clara, California - July 26 2004
http://www.terayon.com/tools/news/view.html?phase=show&id=1090867404&tool_id=7&cat_id=H....
and stoop acting like you don't know anything especially $1.00 listing requirement on nasdaq. Don't WORRY ! cause I will never get there IMO.
LOL. Yeah that's why no insider is selling a share and Officer of Board & SVP of Worldwide Sales Matthew Aden recently acquired $1,585,000 worth of stock options @ $3.17. Total 500,000 options. They aren't exerciable until at least that price.
http://www.secform4.com/insider/showhistory.php?cik=tern
showmebill I've explained but I guess you already knew that and just wanted to spam the board. Here is my opinion on the subject.
showmebill: "The company said its audit committee has decided to conduct an independent inquiry into the matter with the assistance of independent legal counsel."
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=8726772
Thanks Cab. Much appricate it. I'm aware of it and it's been covered in my previous post. Good day to you.
If it's predictable and you think it's going down why don't you short it shorty ? Your Christmas present would be Christmas under the bridge. Let me know how it works out for you. We will revisit your post later on.
tcr7309
it's all about the strat. without it gte is just another small telecom/e-commerce company trying to garner market share outside the u.s., do you think the big boys like meyers, dumas, etc would have come on board if it was not for the strat. potential, not in your life, think infrastructure and where the strat
EXACLY...except there is NO Stratellite build yet nor tested.
Based on current revs market cap should be in 100MM at most since revs for the year might be 48MM so double the revs projections should be good market cap. Not current 300MM. That's overpriced. Yes if strat is build and tested then 500MM is in order.
granted huff has done a great job increasing revs,
Yeah but if cost of revenue is 3-4% from revs itself and operating losses are in 30-50% range unless margins change company will go belly up. Look at cost of revenues and operating expenses figures and margins.
SireWeirdo I want people ackowledge the facts even if they are not good and to stop spreading lies like stating that we have flown airship that was outlined by CEO in business plan. We have not flown a Stratellite yet nor one has been built yet when you look at the Globetel definition of strat. That dragon ship is low altitute non-rigid airship. Stratellite is high altitude ridgid airship. DETAILS ARE MOST IMPORTANT in all PR yet most focus on sound bites. That is bothering me as intelligent human being and as investor and i do enjoy postings and exchanging of opinions but I can't do that cause my posts get deleted. That is what message boards are for after all. As for Huff all i want from him is to keep timelines. If strat won't fly til 2010 i expect him to disclose that not mislead people 4 times into thinking this year this year.
Billion $ in red IMO.
....from building 300 strats and no money flow from other units.
You are the only person that gets my points and understands my position and outlook of the company but unless strats gets shown to the public it's still a dream.
Sir Weirdo. It's very simple to calculate % growth once one knows estimates of earnings per share. Yahoo posted that analyst estimate this year 2005 TERN will do $0.01 per share which means they became profitable but next year TERN is estimated to earn $0.19 per share and as high as $0.35. That is 1900 to 3500% growth for that year by doing the math. For forward years it's virtually impossible to get that growth so therefore those figures will be smaller. Anything over 15% growth is good. 40% is great and judging by what IPTV sector growth of 12,985% this company will do very well in next 5 yrs unless it gets bought. Also notice that Senate approved the bill that by 2009 there will not be ANY analog TV broadcasts being made so only digital broadcast will be in play.
As you will see all sites post pretty consistent earnings estimates of between AVR of $0.15-0.19 to highs of $0.35 (3500%) growth.
Yahoo http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ae?s=TERNE
MSN http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/invsub/analyst/earnest.asp?Symbol=TERNE
Reuters
http://today.reuters.com/stocks/estimates.aspx?ticker=terne
Also if you notice company has history of beating analyst earnings estimates so we might see higher end estimates.
http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/invsub/analyst/earnest.asp?Page=EarningsSurprise&Symbol=TER...
I would suggest if you are interested that you read everything that is in the Info box which will explain a lot of your questions.
jfburk. All i want from this poster is to answer my post how did this company acomplished so much were in fact i presented in black and white from ceo quotes and globetel website that nothing that i posted in there was acomplished. I don't bash. I presented you guys with facts yet everyone refuses to acknoledge those facts. WHY IS THAT ? How can anyone disagree that those are facts when those are quotes from the CEO and website. How much more concrete does the evidence needs to be ? That is a concrete as it is going to get. Help me understand how can everone discount that. You know what they say. It's better to be warned then to be sorry. Remember ENRON. ?
What's misleading about quotes from CEO or Globetel website ?
YOU ANSWER ME ! gatherinfo request to be banned.
TO ALL: CEO ANNOUCED TIMELINES IN B&W + DD.
CEO 4 times publicaly annouced not realized time lines of 2005.
Stratellite which is high-altitute airship stationed in stratoshpere has not been build, tested or deployed yet.
Military low altitude drogon is not stratellite people. After reading this please tell me if this company has ANY INTEGRITY and why should any investor trust them after so many failure and broken business time lines.
BROKEN CEO DEADLINE #1
1. "We have scheduled the launch date for the Stratellite prototype for March 25, 2005" http://www.globetel.net/about/letter011005.html
BROKEN CEO DEADLINE #2
2. "Finally, the article concluded by reporting that GlobeTel Communications Corp., through its wholly-owned subsidiary Sanswire Networks LLC, stated it is on target for a first quarter 2005 launch of its Stratellite" http://www.globetel.net/about/letter011105.html
BROKEN CEO DEADLINE #3
3. "Once at Edwards, we would then work with the Air Force to determine a window for launch that would most likely be in the last two weeks of April." (2005)http://www.globetel.net/about/letter.html
13 MORE DAYS TIL BREAKING DEADLINE #4
4. "Thus, as currently planned, we expect to put our new high-tech Sanswire Two vehicle through its most demanding operational paces, at altitude, before the end of this year."
http://investor.globetel.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=67726&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=738514&highligh....
Former President of Globetel. Leigh Colman.
1. "A new and improved Sanswire One will make its first high altitude flight in August or September, 2005. A full commercial airship deployment is planned for 2006. http://www.wirelessiq.info/content/qa/20.html
2. "According to GlobeTel president Leigh Coleman, the governments of Peru and Colombia have already placed orders, along with unnamed US companies. The US Army and Air Force are interested. The production goal is some 300 airships a year by 2007." http://www.telecomasia.net/telecomasia/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=165793
WHOW REALLY 300 STRATS BY 2007. BUILD FREAKING ONE THEN 300.
Has any of this been acomplished:
Milestone 1: The Expansion of our Stored-Value Program; and
Milestone 2: Sanswire's Launch of the Stratellite.
Expansion of our Stored-Value Program:
We have invested heavily in developing the infrastructure, business and partnering agreements, products, services and support over this past year to effectuate these initiatives. We have described these products and services and their progress in various press releases.
We will expand our Stored Value programs in Mexico, the Philippines and India, the three largest money remittance markets in the world.
We will begin expansion by adding calling card functionality to millions of debit cards in Mexico in the first half of 2005 and will repeat the process in India and the Philippines.
We will also expand our prepaid calling services into new markets in the second half of 2005.
A full telephony product line will be introduced in the first quarter of 2005 and launched in key markets by June 2005.
Our goal is to have 6 million Stored-Value cards and over 1 million MasterCard money remittance customers worldwide by 2006.
We project that these products and services will provide such revenues and margins that the Company will show profitability by the end of the second quarter of 2005.
http://www.globetel.net/about/letter011005.html
High Altitude Airships competition
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/blimps_lta_craft/
New York Post article on Globetel everyone wish they would have never read it. http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/nypost/875974001.html?did=875974001&FMT=ABS&FMTS=FT&date=Aug....
How's 2000% growth estimate. Still lagging for you ?
Growth Est TERNE Industry Sector S&P 500
Current Qtr. 100.0% N/A N/A 12.2%
Next Qtr. 133.3% N/A N/A 11.7%
This Year 95.5% N/A N/A 13.2%
Next Year 2000.0% N/A N/A 13.0%
Past 5 Years (per annum) N/A N/A N/A N/A
Next 5 Years (per annum) 15.0% N/A N/A 10.40%
Price/Earnings (avg. for comparison categories) N/A N/A N/A 16.56
PEG Ratio (avg. for comparison categories) N/A N/A N/A 1.59
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ae?s=TERNE
Rocky why you ask questions to which you and I know the answer to. If delisted we will trade on OTCBB IMO but IMO this is not going to happen for the reasons i described in my prevous post. Let me quote the CEO as he said it best.
"We are committed to accurate and transparent financial reporting and are taking this matter very seriously," said Jerry Chase, CEO of Terayon, in a prepared statement. "I want to emphasize that our cash position and market leadership remain strong and are not affected by the accounting issues under review. We remain focused on executing on our strategies and continuing to expand our product innovations to strengthen the overall position of the company." http://biz.yahoo.com/bizj/051107/1188154.html?.v=1
I can take those word to the bank not like some other CEO.
serious military kite as I call it is not a stratellite. Stratellite is a high altitude airship so no we have not "flown one" yet nor has one been build yet. I can build flying kites and claim them as sucess as well. Bottom line is Stratellite or high altitutde stratosheric ship has not been build yet nor tested nor flown nor shown however it has been publically annouced by managment 3 times already that we would have one. Year end will be broken promise #3. Lack on integrity is the only thing that comes to my mind.
showmebill. Some facts for you.
You said: "...but if you look at how far we've come since he's been with the company, it's pretty amazing."
Let me state some facts for you. FACTS !!!
This is how far this company has come in a close to a year.
1. No commercial stratellite prototype build, not even tested.
Stratallite is stratosheric airship in STRATOSPHERE not military dragon fly kite in low altitude.
2. No major partnership or contact for big money.
3. Nil or no revenues from all bussines units besides carrier traffic.
4. No profitability
5. Increased and fruther operating losses.
6. Replacment of Chairman and other major executives.
7. Replacment of Chief engeneer.
BUT MAJOR QUESTION IS HOW DID ALL THOSE GREAT ACCOMPLISHMENTS THAT YOU SPEAK OF HAVE INCREASED YOUR SHAREHOLDER VALUE BASED ON ASSETS AND FINANCIAL STATMENTS ? It decreased your value due to widened operating losses. This stock is full of hot air right now kind of like the blimp cause i can't call that anything else but that since it's not stratellite until at least being assembled yet alone tested or commercialized.
serious fly what ? A dragon kite at low altitude ?
Do you know what stratellite is ? It's high altitude airship stationed in stratoshere at appr. 65,000 feet.
WAS ANYTHING TESTED SOMEWHERE NEAR THAT ALTITUDE ?
Wasn't Globetel plan to test Stratellite in high altitude ?
Dude i can fly a kite and claim many things.
Am i the only one that sees technicals instead of generalized statments ? Focus on details not on what was flown. Kite, blimp, dragon airship is NOT a stratellite.
Avr. volume if you ask me
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/hp?s=TERNE
Decrease was due to decrease of sales of HAS and CMTS products. TERN's focus is no longer on modems and home networking equipment since this is highly competitive field with low margins. Kind of like GTES carrier traffic. HINT !!!
What TERN is focusing on is digital video processing systems like Cherrypicker routers that are 40% margin business with little competition. As you see in info box this is going to be 12000% growth sector. TERN next year growth is forcasted at 1,066.67% so don't tell me about laggging revenues cause ramping down bad business and getting focused on good business is what they are doing. Kind of opposite of GTE. You Dig ?
http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/invsub/analyst/earnest.asp?Page=EarningsEstimates&Symbol=TE...
What DO YOU mean by lagging? Define what lagging means to you !
What do you disagree with in that Q ? I'm listening unlike like you on your board.
Will do bors. I will wait til Q4 and also till end of the year for strat 2 test launch and Q1, 2006 for commercial launch. I've been waiting a year already on strat launch and other past PRs with no update whatsover on magic money either from India and Philipines. If you want me to take a guess i will guess that majority of revs will still come from carrier traffic with bigger losses then Q3 form Q4. Since no revs are comming from other units this will fruther drive company financially in the red. IMO.
Another question. Where is the money or contract from that millitary contract that is suppose to materialize after military test of prototype. Are we going to wait another year for that ? By then losses from operations might be so high that possibly bankcrupcy might take place. Just something to think about while you people WAIT AND WAIT WITH NO UPDATES FROM COMPANY. Integrity comes to mind. I will post later quotes from CEO and other executives on Strat launch then you can't say that i'm full of it. IT WILL BE IN BLACK AND WHITE.
I already posted in my opinion what is going on here:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=8726772
Ironicly same timeframe which is year end of 2005 or Q1 of 2006 but with one differance that 10Q will be filled by year end IMO where you still will be waiting for launch. That's the diffrence in managment dude which you seem to totally disregard.
I will post later on quotes regarding end of the year and 2006 Q1 launch. Also NO ONE YET has answered my question on WHAT MONETARY HAS MATERIALIZED out of all those business units besides loosing money carrier traffic ? Instead you people keep attacking me because i raise legitimate question and concern that does not fit with your agenda.
Serious1 that's not what was annouced in shareholder's letter. We were suppose to have commercial vehicle test not military by end of the year. Also if you remember from previous updates Strat 3 commerical vehicle suppose to be up and running in Q1 of 2006.
You guys keep spinning the news the way you want to hear them not the way it is was presented to you. Facts are facts.
itsjustme & livelongandprofit.
itsjustme you missed my point. My point is not how much money they are shooting to make but what has materialized out of those business plans that I pointed to from a year ago. Not one stinking update since then out of those PRs on those business plans. Isn't that disturbing to you people ?
Business plans keep shifting from commercial strat to military strat to magic money to carrier traffic to Wi-Max in different cities. Where is the focus??? You know the saying if you focus on too many different things you will not accomplish ONE!!! Globetel management is chasing its own tail IMO while nothing monetary materializes out of those business plans.
I ASK WHAT MONETARY HAS MATERIALIZE SINCE LAST YEAR besides lossing money carrier traffic ?
Let's be honest here. All of you are here for Strat. Let's focus on development of that HUFF. 14 days Sir til you break your publicly announced time frame for the 3rd time. How many times more ? How many times more before you Sir lose credibility ?
Nothing yet monetary has materialized out of Stratellite, Wi-Max, Magic Money and Super-Hubs. Only 3-4% GROSS MARGIN carrier traffic. Whoww BIG DEAL. I can re-route carrier traffic in my basment out of my house. ONE YEAR. COMPLETLY NO MONEY FLOW out of those busines units. What's the deal i ask ?
And that is my problem livelongandprofit. Please help me resolve this problem or better yet please let Huff know that this is a concern of many investors. One voice won't change a thing. Many will. I'm listening and am open to suggestions and i'm not being sarcastic either. I'm not trying to bring any drama here just some clarity from different point of view.
14 MORE BUSINESS DAYS PER HUFF FOR STRAT 2 TEST LAUNCH. Somehow i have a feeling we won't see it or hear about it either. And yeah it takes time then you know what. Managment should have said strat would be ready in 2008 not in 6 months as they claimed a year ago. That's misleading to say it very midly if you know what i mean !!!
SO 14 MORE DAYS TIL STRAT LAUNCH !!?
Business days. Huff are you going to disappoint shareholders for 3rd time ? What are we chopped liver ? Not sure if all of you still remember this or did all of you get distracted by rest of the PR but i'm still holding Huff to his word: "...Thus, as currently planned, we expect to put our new high-tech Sanswire Two vehicle through its most demanding operational paces, at altitude, before the end of this year." - Tim Huff, CEO of Globetel.
I also want to see it not just read about it. How do I even know it exists if i can't see it. Last time i checked people should hold managment accountable to their publically annouced time frames. If Huff misses this time that would be his 3rd time. How many time is he going to pull a sheet over our eyes ? No bashing, just asking you people a question how many times is he going to cry wolf and how many times can we get fooled.
What happened with $50MM that GTE allegedly got from Columbia ? I didn't see any of this money on 10Q !
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2005_July_14/ai_n14788320
How about $9 Billion in India
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2004_Sept_9/ai_n6187074
or $7.6 Billion in Philippines
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2004_Sept_7/ai_n6183423
Those articles that Globetel released more then a year ago. Hmmm...where is a the update on that. COMPLETE SILENCE AND NO UPDATES. Am i the only person that follows up on past publically annouced business plans.
DO YOU PEOPLE SEE A PATTERN HERE OR NOT ?
SHOW ME THE STRAT AND SHOW ME THE MONEY !!!
Building a Switched Broadcast Network by TERAYON
http://www.ct-magazine.com/archives/ct/1105/1105_buildingaswitched.htm
Building a Switched Broadcast Network
Thursday , December 01, 2005 17:00 ET
Nov 15, 2005 (Communications Technology/Access Intelligence via COMTEX) -- Switched broadcast is on its way. But what's the best approach? By Michael Adams and Majid Chelehmal, Terayon Communication Systems
Switched broadcast technology has been hitting the news as the next great bandwidth savior for the cable industry. As other service providers attempt to lure subscribers away with claims of a broader array of options and programs, cable operators must respond with equivalent or improved offerings. With the rapid move from analog to digital and broadcast to narrowcast, cable operators know that bandwidth efficiency is critical.
Switched broadcast is specifically designed to allow cable operators to offer a broader range of programs within existing hybrid fiber/coax (HFC) channel capacity. Consequently, many cable operators are actively investigating switched broadcast technology to remain on par with or ahead of their competitors. They realize that customer retention is at least as important as obtaining new subscribers.
Surfing the switched broadcast way
Switched broadcast technology is based on the principle that out of the (typically) 1,000 subscribers in a service group, not all available programs will be watched simultaneously. Depending on the programming mix, studies indicate that between 30 percent and 75 percent of the available programs are viewed at one time in a service group of 1,000 homes passed. Therefore, if we only transmit the currently viewed programs, we'll save between 25 percent and 70 percent of the bandwidth and capacity over conventional broadcast. This compares with statistical multiplexing with a capacity savings of about 30 percent that is relatively independent of programming mix.
As you might suspect, there is some commonality between switched broadcast and video on demand (VOD) because both require interactivity. Like switched broadcast, VOD allows a subscriber to demand a particular program and have it seamlessly delivered to his home. However, VOD is unicast (it is sent only to the requesting subscriber), while switched broadcast is multicast (a single copy of the program is available to many subscribers at once). Although additional processing is required to ensure programs are unwatched before removing them from the switched broadcast pool, the capacity savings makes it an attractive solution.
Switched broadcast thus provides a partial answer to the question of advanced digital service availability. Because of the feverish pace at which technology is advancing, the question has become not if, but when, cable operators need additional capacity.
Switched broadcast is still a very young technology with more than one possible implementation model. How cable operators implement switched broadcast is closely tied to when they implement it; and today's technology must be closely weighed against tomorrow's needs for providing a full range of services on demand.
Three models
There are three primary switched broadcast deployment models. They vary in cost and complexity, availability, bandwidth and capacity efficiency, flexibility, and ease of migration. Each model has its advantages and disadvantages, but when selecting an approach, you should carefully weigh each of the criteria on the basis of both your current and projected needs.
MPEG local switch
As shown in Figure 1, broadcast switching is accomplished at the distribution hub or headend. Each distribution hub will have a dedicated switched broadcast session resource manager (SRM) and dedicated quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM) resources to handle channel selection requests from subscribers served by that hub. The edge QAM devices must support a session control interface to be controlled by the session manager in response to channel selection requests.
The early trials of switched broadcast have used this model to verify and prove the statistical advantages and gains of switched broadcast. Switched broadcast channels are multicast via the Internet protocol (IP) transport protocol to the distribution hub level and then broadcast within the service group via MPEG to the set-top.
The session manager intelligently analyzes subscriber surfing behavior and determines which programs are watched by which service groups on the network. It creates a finite broadcast "pool" of channels that are watched or likely to be watched. These channels are then broadcast to the service group until new channels are added per user request.
Through a remote control and the set-top box, the user sends a request for a program to the session manager. If the requested program is already part of the switched broadcast program pool for that service group, the session manager identifies the QAM channel and provides tuning information to the set- top. If the program is not part of the pool, the session manager requests that the program be added and then provides tuning information to the set-top. The entire interaction is transparent to the user. (Note: CableCARD enabled devices cannot signal for switched broadcast channels.)
MPEG central switch
In the MPEG central switch model (see Figure 2), video is still delivered via MPEG to the set-top, but we can take advantage of the existing VOD architecture at the central headend. We add extensions to the signaling control plane to allow the set-tops to request channels. The switched broadcast signaling requests can be accommodated using the same digital storage media command and control (DSM-CC) protocol as VOD. The VOD SRM can then be extended to support the multicast session management and allow the edge QAM devices to be shared statistically between VOD and switched broadcast sessions.
While the central switch model leverages the existing VOD architecture, it also unicasts multiple copies of each switched broadcast channel to the distribution hub.
IPTV
The software and the hardware necessary for Internet protocol TV (IPTV) are still in their infancy. While H.264 (MPEG-4 Part 10 Advanced Video Coding) and Windows Media 9/VC1 compete for the codec, DOCSIS 3.0 specifications have yet to be finalized by CableLabs. DOCSIS 3.0 promises downstream data rates of 200 Mbps per channel and 100 Mbps per channel upstream.
IPTV uses a two-way signaling model in which an IPTV set-top communicates with a PacketCable Multimedia (PCMM) session manager or application manager. (See Figure 3.) The architecture fundamentally supports switching of any content unique to every set-top. That is, every IPTV-enabled set-top could conceivably request any content that can be delivered via the IP network, including unicast VOD and voice or multicast switched broadcast and high speed data. Unlike the first two models, the IPTV model supports IP delivery all the way to the set-top box.
While the MPEG-based models require a specialized session manager, IPTV uses a shared session manager for all applications based on PCMM. It uses a shared set of QAM resources for all applications based on DOCSIS 3.0, and switched broadcast channels are multicast to the distribution hub level and then multicast within the service group.
Content aggregation is required to allow channels to be sourced to the IP network in the appropriate format. If channels are not available in H.264 format, then conversion to H.264 can be done by the content aggregator. The IPTV set-top will support direct termination of H.264 video encapsulated in a user datagram protocol (UDP) packet stream.
The application manager also interacts with the policy server to request quality of service (QoS) resources. The DOCSIS cable modem termination system (CMTS)/scheduler manages access to the DOCSIS environment and enforces the QoS on the access network using DOCSIS service flows. The recordkeeping server collects the event messages for accounting purposes.
Weighing the options
We evaluated the three models based according to (see Table 1):
* Cost/complexity of implementation
* Availability or time to market
* Data capacity and throughput efficiency
* Flexibility
* Ease of migration
When comparing the three models, cable operators must consider both the short and long-term implications of the chosen method. For example, some predict that by 2008, there may be more than 20 million subscribers worldwide to IPTV services.
Future demands for flexibility and capacity could be fulfilled by IPTV. However, the technologies required to implement IPTV are not yet readily available, while the two MPEG models are closer to realization. Thus, each of the evaluation criteria needs careful consideration.
Cost and complexity
The MPEG local switch model may be the simplest short-term implementation, but it is a dedicated solution for the switched broadcast service. Switched broadcast session managers must be deployed in each hub and managed by a central manager. The MPEG central switch model requires less initial cost, but is more complex because session and QAM management is shared and combined with VOD management. Moreover, the sub-second response time required for channel change requests is significantly faster than currently deployed VOD systems. IPTV requires potentially the highest long-term investment as DOCSIS 3.0 is deployed and new IPTV set-tops are deployed. Since it creates an all-IP network based on PCMM, session management is the most standards-based of the three models.
Time to market/availability
The two MPEG switch models can be deployed in the near term, especially as existing VOD devices are enhanced to provide switched broadcast capability. Because of its dependence on DOCSIS 3.0 and IP set-top deployment, cable operators will have a longer wait to implement IPTV.
Data capacity and throughput efficiency
Data capacity and throughput efficiency consists of both transport and HFC efficiency. Existing transport systems can provide many tens of gigabits per second of capacity at a reasonable cost. HFC capacity gains are much more costly to attain and are therefore of greater importance.
The MPEG local switch model uses the transport efficiently through the use of multicast, but suffers in HFC efficiency because of the limited compression of MPEG-2. Extensions to allow multiple services to share the HFC bandwidth are possible by implementing a global session resource manager.
The MPEG central switch model, using unicast to the hub, has a less efficient use of the transport capacity. HFC efficiency is the same as the local switch model, but capacity is naturally shared with VOD, reducing the probability of blocking.
Finally, the IPTV model is approximately twice as efficient as the MPEG local switch model in both transport and HFC bandwidth utilization because of the advanced coding of H.264 and the statistical multiplexing of all services through the DOCSIS 3.0 IP pipe.
Flexibility
The MPEG local switch model is the least flexible because of limited resource sharing, and the IPTV model is the most flexible because any service can be carried end-to-end transparently across the network. The MPEG central switch model allows the flexibility to integrate switched broadcast and VOD to offer a network personal video recorder (NPVR) service.
Ease of migration
Cable operators need to account for such factors as the overall migration path and length of the migration. The dedicated resources of the MPEG local model make it an easy transition. Although a software upgrade is required to implement the MPEG central model, once done the cable operator is simply using existing components. The migration to IPTV may prove to be the most challenging, but laying this foundation will help cable operators stay ahead of satellite and telco providers in three to five years.
Summary
Although there are three distinct deployment models for switched broadcast, the future belongs to the technology that can provide all forms of interactive content seamlessly and on a large scale. Consumers will insist on integrated voice, video, gaming and high-speed data, and for the foreseeable future, IPTV provides the most effective answer. IPTV bridges the video and IP network boundary while hiding the system's complexity from the user.
In the meantime, cable operators can reap significant bandwidth and capacity savings through the efficient deployment of either or both the local and central switch models. While nobody can predict the future, we can fairly accurately decode future trends, and in the authors' opinions, it all points in the direction of IPTV.
Michael Adams is vice president, Video Architecture and Technology, and Majid Chelehmal is digital video architect, both for Terayon Communication Systems. Reach them at michael.adams@terayon.com and majid.chelehmal@terayon.com.
Communications Technology, Vol. 22, No. 11
It seems this news negativly effected stock price. Is that because of dilution effect on shares ? Any thoughts on that ?