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.
Yes, they have placed a large stonewall in front of their information office
seems that way, AT&T has been far to quiet for some reason
totally agree with you Superfly, they both deserve a large thank you
Just mailed a thank you note to Jermaine Levy using snail mail and his P O Box #
This may mean nothing, but from the last Fibertower 10K.... 740 MHz vs AT&T statement of 375 MHz
We own a national spectrum portfolio of 24 GHz and 39 GHz wide-area spectrum licenses, including over 740 MHz in the top 20 U.S. metropolitan areas and, in the aggregate, approximately 1.55 billion channel pops calculated as the number of channels in a given area multiplied by the population, as measured in the 2000 census, covered by these channels. We believe our spectrum portfolio represents one of the largest and most comprehensive collections of millimeter wave spectrum in the U.S. Our licenses extend over substantially all of the continental U.S., covering areas with a total population of over 300 million;
AT&T paid $207 million to acquire FiberTower and will receive a significant footprint in the 39 GHz band, with average holdings of more than 375 MHz in the top 100 markets
LEGAL ANALYSIS IN SUPPORT OF FIBERTOWER’S
REQUEST FOR RENEWAL OR, ALTERNATIVELY,
EXTENSION OR LIMITED WAIVER
https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsEntry/attachments/attachmentViewRD.jsp?applType=search&fileKey=1133288384&attachmentKey=19999164&attachmentInd=applAttach
Clearly the picture presented to the bankruptcy court, was shall we say a bit bias in favor of the debtors, since nothing changed from 2012 to 2016 when this argument was made. Secondly, why would Solus only take 207 million from AT&T given this information, and the modification of their deal with AT&T on October 25,2017, which came way after the Straight Path deal
FiberTower, nonetheless, acquired hundreds of licenses in the 24 and 39 GHz spectrum bands, investing more than $300 million over its license term to overcome the technical and logistical challenges that historically hindered widespread deployment of this spectrum.
FiberTower’s efforts laid the groundwork for commercial use of these bands at the “frontier” of usable spectrum by developing the equipment, infrastructure, and nationwide network necessary to provide backhaul services for advanced mobile broadband
I certainly agree with your comment
Verizon 8-K 5/11/2017, where is the AT&T / Fibertower 8-K
Item 7.01 – Regulation FD Disclosure
Attached as Exhibit 99.1 and incorporated by reference herein is a press release dated May 11, 2017 issued by Verizon Communications Inc. (“Verizon”).
The information provided pursuant to this Item 7.01 is being furnished and shall not be deemed to be “filed” with the Securities and Exchange Commission or incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, except to the extent set forth by specific reference in any such filing.
Item 8.01 – Other Events
On May 11, 2017, Verizon and a wholly owned acquisition subsidiary (the “Merger Sub”) entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Merger Agreement”) with Straight Path Communications Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Straight Path”). Pursuant to the Merger Agreement, upon the terms and subject to the conditions thereof, Verizon will acquire Straight Path in an all-stock transaction for $184.00 per share. The Merger Agreement further provides that, upon the terms and subject to the conditions thereof, Merger Sub will merge with and into Straight Path, with Straight Path continuing as the surviving corporation and as a wholly-owned subsidiary of Verizon (the “Merger”).
Consummation of the Merger is subject to customary regulatory approvals and closing conditions for transactions of this type, including the approval of Straight Path’s shareholders.
FiberTower Spectrum Holdings, LLC 12-44031-11
https://www.bmcgroup.com/restructuring/Debtors.aspx?ClientID=303
Just a ??? Since this was posted on the BMC Website, I would think any request of the court would have to be posted ????
1166 7/8/2015
Motion for final decree Filed by Debtor FiberTower Network Services Corp., et al Objections due by 8/3/2015. (Larson, Michelle)
One has to suspect that Pucillo & Company did not work this Fibertower scheme for just 207 million dollars
I right with you, dragging things along would seem to be a better route to take, then 207 million.
This Message from JL1975 is worth a repost
Does the FCC and AT&T want to roll the dice?
Is there enough questionable meat on this bone for the FCC and AT&T to account for the common shareholders. Did Levy and Fahy raise some eyebrows?
http://www.caddenfuller.com/Articles/Bankruptcy-Law-Understanding-Fraudulent-Conveyances.shtml
Pucillo, Solus, Sola, Subin, Broadbill, Cayman Islands. Does it get any shadier and unscrupulous?
Lets take a $300M asset, put it in perceived potential forfeiture with the FCC, tie it up with the FCC for years, claim it is only worth $1 to $2M in Bankrtupcy due to this "perceived uncertainty" and then a few years later miraculously sell it to AT&T for an undisclosed amount and settle with the FCC.
Does the FCC want to be known as an agency asleep at the wheel allowing the Straigtpath to reap billions at the expense of the taxpayers. Does the FCC want to be known as an agency who facilitates deals with offshore Cayman Island Funds at the expense of taxpayers?
You really cannot make this stuff up. FCC costs the Taxpayers Billions and enriches fraudsters.
And folks have 24 days to seek a hearing
Based on the terms of the FCC settlement most of the licenses that AT&T would end up with are still under the conditions of the bankruptcy court stay
So is it not reasonable to agree with this statement / opinion
The remaining licences in dispute " returned"under the settlement agreement which the FCC transferred over were not settled fairly by the applicants ( fibertower spectrum LLC and AT&T) at market value in any private contractual arrangement and in recognition of preserving full debtor interest per the bankruptcy estate .
I guess this heads to the bankruptcy court now for a full-on public fight as that seems the the only path forward?
Given that it was likely Fibertower that dropped a dime on Straight Path to the FCC, it would seem bit odd that Straight Path sells for 3 billion and the Fibertower boys only take 207 million
This comment was made during the Kerrisdale attack on Straight Path
https://seekingalpha.com/user/48091473/comments
207 million for 500 39GHz licenses does seem low
The transaction value of AT&T acquiring FibeTower involved two phases - one phase consisting of the initial 88 licenses, about 60 of them were 39GHz assets (RSA and EA geographic coverage zones similar to StraightPath's. 25+ were 24GHz, all in the North Eastern US.
The price for this is twice the price of Verizon's 200M acquisition of 28GHz on a MHz pop basis. The second phase is a speculative bet on the return of the rest of the FiberTower nationwide portfolio as the FCC has been ordered by the D.C. court of appeals to review and likely return the rest of the FiberTower licenses that were erroneously taken back at the last substantial service review.
See: http://bit.ly/2kVlukr
AT&T is taking the bet that their lobbying and lawyers can finish the job and come out with nationwide 24GHz and 39GHz
Don't ask me how I know the price as it's confidential.
However - I can tell you that those that continue to "insist that a short position on StraightPath is correct". Need only wait a short period of time here to eat their words.
My estimation working in the wireless markets since 1999 and particularly in mmW deployments the last 3 years with knowledge about the license revenue and mobile ambitions of the carriers is the spectrum is worth 450-650M pre-auction. Post auction proceedings by the FCC it could be higher.
The Levy / Fahy, and all the other shareholder pleadings to the FCC had the positive effect of rallying displaced shareholders, now it's time to take things to the next level & place pressure on the bankruptcy court once a filing is made for a final decree
1/13/2014 document 1044
https://www.bmcgroup.com/restructuring/Docket.aspx?ClientID=303
SEALED document regarding: Declaration of Matthew R. Flynn in Support of the Objection of the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors to the Debtors' Second Amended Joint Chapter 11 Plan per court order filed by Creditor The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors (RE: related document(s)1041 Order on motion to seal). (Warner, Michael)
Trail Blazing with an asset worth 1 to 2 million ?????
As the record reflects, FiberTower blazed the trail for service in these high-frequency bands, investing hundreds of millions of dollars in the infrastructure and technology necessary to successfully deploy this spectrum, in addition to making its spectrum available for lease.67
Accordingly, all 689 of FiberTower’s licenses should be renewed under the substantial service regulations.
ABACUS: SMALL ENOUGH TO JAIL (2018) It's on Amazon Prime
The incredible story is also discussed by journalists Jiayang Fan and Matt Taibbi who share their insights for the documentary.
“Abacus: Small Enough to Jail” focuses on the family and the injustices they faced but there is not much accountability in the James documentary just different viewpoints from all sides. Don’t expect an ending like “It’s a Wonderful Life” or one big stand up and cheer moment. Just get ready to be captivated by a story so absurd that it has to be true.
https://www.victoriaadvocate.com/blogs/staff/entries/2018/jan/10/review-abacus-small-enough-to-jail-2018-the-injustice-endured-by-the-sung-family-after-the-08-financial-crisis-is-the-basis-for-the-captivating-documentary/
Well worth watch .... If only we could get these documentary folks to look into the shenanigans @ Fibertower
someone needs to state that the Commission does not offer "relief" for screwing up your business model and warehousing spectrum, funneling it from company to company, all because ATT and FTWR arranged this many a year ago, just the latest in a plot of many to hoard this asset until value materializes . . . financial relief comes through the BK process . . . not the Commission . . .
I tend to agree with this opinion, I would add, the Commission can state that now that a settlement has been reached, to protect all classes of the original Fibertower, the FCC can only return the licenses to the last owner of record of the 39GHz licenses , the debtor estate .... After that, it's in the hands of the court to deal with the return of the assets
Once any decision of the Commission divesting Debtors of the Licenses is final and not subject to appeal, Debtors will have no interest in the Licenses and the stay provided by the 9/27 Order will automatically terminate.
Did the court overreach approving this plan, the FCC certainly did not approve the elimination of an ownership group
the Plan became effective on March 31, 2014. On the Effective Date, (i) all equity securities (including but not limited to any shares of common stock or preferred stock, or any warrants, options or other rights to purchase stock) of FiberTower Corporation were cancelled and extinguished, and no holder of such an equity security was entitled to receive or retain property under the Plan,
If AT&T were to tell the FCC they are willing to pay shareholders 250 million, what happens ???
Or, What happens ??? if AT&T goes Godfather & offers nothing
The last recognized FCC owner of the licenses that are being return is
......... The Old Fibertower
Was there a final non appealable decision won by the FCC to strip the old Fibertower of the ownership interest in the licenses that are being returned ........ the correct answer is No
Did the FCC at any time approve a transfer of the licenses that are being returned ... to the reorganized Fibertower ..... the correct answer is No
Trump administration is thinking about nationalizing 5G mobile network
The U.S. government is considering an option to build a 5G network as a way of guarding against China, news outlet Axios reported.
Reuters also reported that a senior administration official said that the government needs to work with industry to figure out the best way to build a secure 5G.
Fifth generation mobile networks aim to provide faster data speeds and more bandwidth to carry growing levels of web traffic
Sandpaints ..... Axios is a real news organization
1/18/2018
Today, we celebrate Axios’ one year anniversary as a family. I know this because when I opened up my Axios AM daily newsletter (presented by Morgan Stanley) yesterday, Jim VandeHei, the co-founder and CEO of Axios, had written in a post aggregated therein that on the occasion of the company’s first birthday, “I wanted to take a moment to reach out and thank you for being part of the Axios family.”
That's how I read it as well
In The Levy Pleading Response to The FCC is this very interesting point
regarding constructive fraud
Constructive fraud can occur,
and be proven even if there was no intention to be fraudulent. Does a 1-2 million dollar valuation for any type of spectrum covering 312 million people, or 99.8 percent of the U.S. sound even remotely legitimate?
Contrary to Reorganized Fibertower’s accusation, Reorganized Fibertower
benefiting from abuse and devaluation of assets is absolutely not the purpose of the bankruptcy code
Even more incongruous is that in 1 hand, Reorganized
FiberTower is asking The Commission to be fair in considering the return of FiberTowers highly valuable spectrum under appeal, but simultaneously in the other hand asking the Commission to totally disregard the fact that similarly, it's extremely likely that FiberTower’s plan can also be reexamined & successfully appealed in Bankruptcy court.
How can Reorganized FiberTower ask for consideration one way but demand that the same exact consideration not be applied
in another way?
38. Based upon the foregoing, the Plan is not confirmable because (a) the Plan does not reflect an accurate or supportable valuation of the
Reorganized Debtors; (b) the Plan and Litigation Trust Agreement provide complete control over the Estate D&O Claims and
Avoidance Actions to the 2016 Noteholders; and (c) the Plan includes broad releases that are prohibited in this Circuit. The Committee respectfully requests that the Court deny confirmation of the Plan.
https://docs.bmcgroup.com/fibertower/docs/txnb_4-12-bk-44027_1033.pdf
I think it's pretty well understood by all the folks that post on this board, that the Fibertower boys have no intention to provide shareholders any monetary benefit based on the confirmed reorganizational bankruptcy plan and the 1/26/2018 FCC Settlement.
That being said, there is plenty of well documented evidence to support unsecured debtors and their legal team / teams, & shareholders to seek monetary compensation now that the bulk of very valuable property has been returned.
How this all plays out still has many unanswered questions
I don't know how the rest of the board members feel, however I think the Jermaine Levy Pleadings provide all the information shareholders need to request a bankruptcy court hearing
DA-18-78A4.pdf Page 14
If I am reading this correctly, it looks like the unsecured creditors / shareholders will have 24 days to respond to closing of the bankruptcy case
CDS Market On Verge Of "Irreparable Damage" In Escalating Feud Over Hovnanian Debt
Back in November, Bloomberg first profiled a fascinating story involving Hovnaian, whose credit derivatives swaps were soaring as if New Jersey’s largest homebuilder was about to default, even as its stocks and bonds show no signs of panic.
What was behind the divergence? As Bloomberg uncovered, the catalyst was a bizarre battle raging among hedge funds, with one group saying that the other has offered Hovnanian financing in return for taking steps that would trigger payouts on those derivatives. The claim came in a letter from law firm White & Case, which said it’s been made aware of a proposal in which Hovnanian would pursue a refinancing deal with the main intention of triggering a credit event that would lead to a payout on the credit-default swaps.
At the time the, Bloomberg identified the main actors as hedge fund Solus Alternative Asset Management, which owns both Hovnanian’s bonds and sold CDS guaranteeing the company won’t miss a debt payment, while its counterparty was Blackstone’s GSO Capital partners hedge fund, an investor with which Hovnanian has explored a restructuring that would trigger a CDS payout. What makes the deal unique, is that in order to secure the funds from GSO, Hovnanian had agreed to skip a payment on some of its existing bonds, triggering a technical default and a big payday for the hedge fund, which unlike Solus, was long Hovnanian CDS
.Fast forward to today, when the FT reports that derivatives traders are "crying foul" over the Blackstone-led refinancing deal for the US housebuilder Hovnanian, saying the controversial arrangement threatens to further undermine the shrinking market for credit default swaps.
According to the FT, GSO is able to offer attractive financing terms precisely because they stand to receive a payout on its CDS contracts. Others, including Goldman and credit hedge funds Citadel and Solus Alternative Asset Management, are on the other side of the CDS trades and stand to lose money.
While Goldman and Solus had offered Hovnanian an alternative refinancing deal, GSO and Hovnanian say their deal represents the best financing that was available to the company for replacing debt coming due in 2019. “The company appropriately utilized the most attractive financing techniques available,” said a GSO spokesperson.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-01-11/cds-market-verge-irreparable-damage-escalating-feud-over-hovnanian-debt
CES is in Las Vegas this week, so news is possible
Their really is only 1 question, if they the FCC decides to return the licenses, who gets them, the strongest argument would seem to be the debtor estate, based on property rights.
Finally, if the Commission is able to find that narrowly tailored,
transaction-specific conditions are able to ameliorate any public interest
harms and the transaction is in the public interest, it
may approve the transaction as so conditioned.19
In contrast, if the Commission is unable to find that a
proposed transaction even with such conditions serves the public interest
or if the record presents a substantial and material question of fact, then
it must designate the application for hearing.20
Notably, the Commission may impose and enforce narrowly tailored,
transaction-specific conditions that address the potential harms of a
transaction.14
Specifically, the Commission has repeatedly held that it will impose
conditions “only to remedy harms that arise from the
transaction (i.e., transaction-specific harms)” and “related to the
Commission’s responsibilities under the Communications Act and related
statutes,” and it “will not impose conditions to remedy pre-existing
harms or harms that are unrelated to the transaction.”
1