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.
Did anyone ever see the SEC filing?
count me in.
Not sure why it would be too late? It's still worth it for me to pursue, count me in. I don't have 2 million shares, but I have plenty.
In the event any of us are able to band together, we should probably be prepared to have this board taken down and have a backup plan for communication.
Sorry for the confusion. That part is not on the record.
There was some speculation that they cut a deal. My point was, if that was true, all the information they provided was on the record and available to all (common shareholders of Fibertower)for the same purpose.
FCC 0007652637
Texas Northern Bankruptcy Court Case 4:12-bk-44031
Again, both pertain to Fibertower the company, and the fate of their common shareholders.
Let me start by saying I am a Fibertower shareholder (FTWR) - my purpose here is only to discuss the current status of my Fibertower common shares.
That being said, I pointed out that Fahy and Levy did a great job (on the record and in court) of outlining what has transpired with Fibertower as it relates to the treatment of their common shareholders. I also suggested that if they somehow were cut a deal (as shareholders) then there are deals to be had (for other shareholders). It is ALL on the record.
All of this is on topic, and relates to Fibertower, the company and it's shareholders.
Couldn’t agree more. Very hard to decipher the information and understand the motives - especially during the March - May timeframe.
Vuletini - anything of interest from the $400 quick analysis?
I'm sure you don't want to offer up much, but do you think it's worth others doing the same? Seems like it's every man for himself - individual lawsuits only remaining path.
I don't doubt you were able to pick up that amount at .02, they were definitely available.
I picked up a couple hundred thousand of them myself. At the time I was thinking that the John Dooley connection would lead to something. It was definitely a long shot.
I knew it was a long shot, but I was encouraged by what was transpiring until about two months ago. Given the STRP situation and the VERY obvious value of the licenses, I just didn't understand how they could execute this without throwing a bone to the shareholders.
Does anyone have a clear understanding where this currently stands? It looks like transfer was approved, the BK case was closed. What is left?
I do agree that would be an incredible coincidence.
Many of us have been suggesting that it doesn’t make sense for AT&T to take any chances. Levy noted the “blind assumption” was that the transaction would remedy the situation for the shareholders. Let’s hope so.
JL1975 - you still here holding out hope or has your opinion of the Settlement agreement changed after 4/10 hearing?
Just wondering if anyone that had a lawyer review the agreement has a different view after the bk case closed. Theoretically that case had to close in order for the Settlement agreement to move forward - and for shareholders to get paid if they were included in the transaction.
I agree completely Sonny. They both continue to proclaim all is lost, it's over. Why are they still trolling around this message board if they already have their answer?
AT&T probably paid or will pay the $1.3B. That number makes sense given the STRP deal.
The Fibertower debtors probably also own the majority of the FTWR common stock.
The debtors are greedy and probably want it all. But they hedged their bet with the common shares. So they will either get 100% or some lesser number if the common shareholders are included. Either way they are going to get the lions share of the $1.3B
AT&T would like to be 100% free and clear. Fahy and Levy mapped out in great detail the shady nature of the entire situation.
It makes sense that there could be something in it for the common. And yes, I understand the shares were extinguished years ago.
Was there any question that the old FTWR shares were extinguished years ago?
The question should be, given the well documented shady way they were extinguished, does AT&T want to treat the shareholders in a respectable manner? They don’t care where their money goes, but they do care that they get access to these licenses free and clear - quickly
I doubt that could be ascertained from the hearing transcript, unless they detailed the entire “transaction”. And if they did, why wouldn’t somebody just post it and lay this to rest once and for all.
I’m sure Codesilver would have if it was available.
This doesn't seem like a huge surprise. Did anyone think Fahy and Levy's objection was going stop the Chapter 11 case from closing?
The chapter 11 case had to close for everything to move forward. It's just a matter of whether we were screwed or not after it did.
Has ANYBODY read the 4/10 transcript? I have been assuming once someone did we would have a much better understanding. But nobody has come forward.
JL1975 - I still think your lawyer's assessment of the Settlement Agreement was correct.
The response from AT&T's investor relations is interesting. They reference only the Feb 9 press release announcing the closing of the acquisition. But that can only be a part of the final deal. Per the Settlement Agreement the BK proceeding had to be closed. That didn't happen until 4/12.
And now we have this $1B+ line item on AT&T's balance sheet. Which is about the exact right number for the portion of the licenses that were in dispute. And I'm wondering if it's now a wrestling match to see how that chunk is parsed out.
I still find it hard to believe there has been no information regarding the transcript of the 4/10 court proceeding.
Fahy and Levy both objected to the closing of that proceeding without an understanding of the details of the transaction. The hearing was to address all objections, at least that's my understanding.
The proceeding has since closed, so did they address their objections? Not a word from them since, I'd like to think they were happy with what was divulged. Either way, good or bad, I was expecting someone to get their hands on the transcript and that information finding it's way to this board.
Hopefully thanking him for the results not the effort. Time will tell
What are they waiting on? The BK proceeding was closed 4/12, what else did they need?
If it's that easy to get a copy of the transcript, it's hard to believe nobody has done it and reported on what transpired - whether it was positive or negative.
What did Fahy and Levy find out last week at the hearing? Wasn't the hearing held to address their objections? They have been vocal throughout this entire process - just wondering if we will see any additional filings from either of them.
The closing of the bankruptcy proceeding was something that needed to happen in order to execute the Settlement Agreement - correct? I believe it was Levy that stated it was a “blind assumption” that the transaction would rectify the situation with the shareholders. For all we know at this point, it has.
I’m not counting on it, but it sure doesn’t seem logical they could close it so quickly given what has transpired. Certainly Fahy and Levy were prepared to defend their objections if they were unhappy with the transaction details.
JL1975, what information does the Pacer Case Locator System allow you to see? Just what you posted, or is there a full transcript?
Very curious to see the full transcript and whether or not the Fahy and Levy objections were addressed.
JL1975 - a few weeks ago it was suggested by many that this was a done deal, based on a thorough review of the Settlement Agreement with their lawyers. As part of that scenario, didn't the bankruptcy proceeding need to be closed in order to proceed?
They just added a duplicate entry on 4/10. Maybe one for Fahy’s objection and one for Levy’s
Curious what could have possibly been granted today? Those descriptions are cryptic it could have been anything. Hoping Codesilver comes through with some information - he or she somehow seems to have access.
Anything could happen at this point, I think we can all agree on that. But I can't envision any scenario where Fahy and Levy get a private settlement based on the fact they raised objections.
Does anyone have an understanding of what we can expect to transpire at the hearing tomorrow?
Fahy and Levy objected to there being no transaction details. So if this hearing is intended to address that then you would think those would be revealed - and Fahy/Levy to be present?
And if shareholders are not included in the transaction then I am hoping Fahy and Levy are prepared to present their case to the judge.
And after all that are we relying on Code Silver to post the court docs?
I wonder if Fahy and Levy will respond to the 4/5 Reply to Objection prior to the hearing? They didn’t leave them much time, but I bet they do.
No matter how you look at it, this objection seems to indicate all the previous optimism over the Settlement Agreement was unfounded - this is/was not a done deal. Best case scenario is now a long drawn out court battle. Unless I’m misinterpreting this.
Hopefully Fahy and Levy are prepared to battle and see this through.....for all of us
Sure sounds like Fibertower is planning on leaving the original shareholders out. Which explains why the details of the transaction have been hidden
REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO APPLICATION FOR REVIEW
Competitive Carriers Association (“CCA”) hereby replies to the Opposition of AT&T filed on March 22, 2018 (“Opposition”)
https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsEntry/attachments/attachmentViewRD.jsp?applType=search&fileKey=1010925320&attachmentKey=20335330&attachmentInd=applAttach
So CCA says the licenses should be auctioned.
AT&T says no, couldn’t happen because they were tied up in litigation
CCA says only 42 licenses were tied up
AT&T says no, ALL of them. And if returned they would be controlled by Fibertower’s previous shareholders.
Am I interpreting that correctly? Because if so, how can they use that argument and not include the previous shareholders in the settlement? Seems logical the deal is with us
Yes I think there is, check out this message from JL1975. He has spelled this out multiple times. The more I review it and the court docs, the more sense this makes.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=139270738
From AT&T's 3/19 Opposition to Stay..
"The lack of irreparable harm is further underscored when it is recognized that the stay
seeks to “maintain the status quo,” which has no actual effect when the Transaction has been
closed. Moreover, even in the wildly improbable event that the Consent Order is reversed,
CCA’s members would not stand to benefit even indirectly through an increase in the FCC’s
pool of auctionable spectrum—if the Transaction were undone, the licenses would remain
FiberTower licenses, but FiberTower would be controlled by its prior shareholders, not AT&T.
That result does not increase the available spectrum for auction or remedy the hypothetical harms
CCA has postulated."
This gets confusing - hard to understand who they are referencing when they refer to "prior shareholders"
Given the size of the companies that oppose this - some of which have already put it on record with the FCC, it's hard to believe at this late stage that these articles could have any affect on the proceedings. But I agree, why even take a chance.
Any comments on the 4/10 hearing to consider the Final decree that was announced yesterday? It was my understanding there wouldn't be a hearing unless there was a written objection. So is this hearing to address Fahy and Levy?
Maybe by the moderator? Is that possible?
I’m not sure whether I want to see more of these articles or not. If JL1975 is right and we are currently lined up to be cut into the deal, maybe it’s better it happens quietly.