Sprint's Q1 Earnings Report (May 5th, 2015)

[lou99/maximus1987]

Correct me if I m wrong,why the critics say that Sprint without a very dense band 41 network is in big trouble aND it wI'll take 7 years. I understand they need to dense the network,but every week we see new rootmetrics.Com reports about tied for 1st or or two.

 

The network is improving at a fast pace compared with a year ago,but the mangetrolls are in denial.

I've never seen 7 years from a tech website. Anyone can say 7 years in a comment section; without proof it's meaningless.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[S4GRU]

Correct me if I m wrong,why the critics say that Sprint without a very dense band 41 network is in big trouble aND it wI'll take 7 years. I understand they need to dense the network,but every week we see new rootmetrics.Com reports about tied for 1st or or two.

 

The network is improving at a fast pace compared with a year ago,but the mangetrolls are in denial.

They need a dense B41 network to be able to keep competing, or dare I say, become #1. If Sprint starts slowing down, they will start dropping like a lead balloon back to last place and will stay there for years.

 

Using Moto X² on Tapatalk

[S4GRU]

I've never seen 7 years from a tech website. Anyone can say 7 years in a comment section; without proof it's meaningless.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Excellent point.

 

Using Moto X² on Tapatalk

[irev210]

Because as an short-term investment, Craig's mostly right. The math isn't working out to investors favor, there's a lot of risk that's unaccounted for. There's a 80% chance that Sprint's stock price won't rise in a huge way in the near future, and a 99.999% chance that they won't post dividends for at least half a decade.  

 

An investors opinion on a business isn't a signal as to how good/bad the business itself is. It represents how good/bad the current investment opportunity with that business is, in comparison to every other opportunity on the market today.

 

If you want a low risk chance of profit on your particular investment in the next 1 to 12 quarters, Sprint is one of the worst places to put your investment money. 

 

That doesn't mean Sprint as a *business* is bad. Sprint could be making all the right moves, Sprint could be doing *literally everything* right to fix their business (in customer service, in network quality, in promotions, in marketing, everything). They could do everything right, be an awesome business, but still be a bad investment -- these two aren't actually directly related in any way.

 

 

I've seen no evidence that Craig is actually anti-Sprint in general. In fact, most of his recent articles start out by saying something like "Sprint's making the right business moves, with promotions / pricing / network improvements / whatever". He then launches into the financials -- the fact that if you give Sprint a dollar today, your not getting two dollars back. Or even one dollar back, anytime soon. And that's where he gets really negative. Frankly, from that particular perspective, I don't think he's wrong there.

 

 

- - -

 

Getting mad at Craig because he's writing advice to a certain class of investors, and not to telecom fans, seems counterintuitive. His advice seems pretty accurate for his target audience. It's just that, if your reading S4GRU, your probably not his audience -- your not looking at the financials from the perspective his audience typically is.

 

Again, we are going back to opinion - you definitely seem to think that Sprint stock won't increase over the next year but that's only your opinion.  According to Kevin Smithen at Macquarie, Sprint is a big buying opportunity.  He has a $7.25 12 month price target for Sprint vs. Craig Moffett who has a $2.00 12 month price target.

 

Anyway, it just gets back to my original point that at the end of the day, it's just an opinion.

 

There is  no such thing as an objective analyst.

 

On s4gru - people have a very different opinion on Sprint and its competitors than perhaps many other people around.  Craigs opinion doesn't align with AJ or many others here.

 

That's fine - but let's take it for what it is - a meaningless metric.

 

We need to keep things in context here.

[lou99/maximus1987]

In fiscal Q4, Sprint burned through $914 million of its starting $3.5 billion cash-and-marketable securities total," said MoffettNathanson analyst Craig Moffett. "At this rate, Sprint will run out of money around the 2016 (radio spectrum) incentive auction."

 

"At the end of fiscal 2014, gross debt equaled $33.8 billion, with cash, short-term investments of $4.2 billion," he said in a report.

 

 

Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/technology/050615-751251-sprint-cash-burn-worry-network-upgrade-strategic-need.htm#ixzz3ZNRFrLFk

Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jamisonshaw125]

In fiscal Q4, Sprint burned through $914 million of its starting $3.5 billion cash-and-marketable securities total," said MoffettNathanson analyst Craig Moffett. "At this rate, Sprint will run out of money around the 2016 (radio spectrum) incentive auction."

 

"At the end of fiscal 2014, gross debt equaled $33.8 billion, with cash, short-term investments of $4.2 billion," he said in a report.

 

 

Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/technology/050615-751251-sprint-cash-burn-worry-network-upgrade-strategic-need.htm#ixzz3ZNRFrLFk

Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No they won't. 

[Mr.Nuke]

In fiscal Q4, Sprint burned through $914 million of its starting $3.5 billion cash-and-marketable securities total," said MoffettNathanson analyst Craig Moffett.

What is the point of posting this when there is already a discussion of Sprint's quarterly earnings (or lack thereof) and Moffett's analysis in another thread? I think I know the answer to the question (rhymes with polling), but I'll sit back and wait.

Edited May 6, 2015 by lilotimz
posts moved to said thread

[lou99/maximus1987]

What is the point of posting this when there is already a discussion of Sprint's quarterly earnings (or lack thereof) and Moffett's analysis in another thread? I think I know the answer to the question (rhymes with polling), but I'll sit back and wait.

Goes beyond just their earnings.

How they obtain additional $ will affect many things about Sprint and other 3.

[S4GRU]

Aren't we already talking about Moffet's speculation? Sprint can still do a lot more refinancing, debt offerings, Softbank capitalization. Or, or just maybe, Sprint will reverse its finances over the next six quarters. Cash flow improving.

 

Sprint burning the cash is needed. Especially the capex portion. If they were spending less, Moffet would be bitching about them not spending enough on capex and marketing. I see through his bullish!t. That's why most analysts have a different take. And if you look at Moffet's takes on Sprint in the past, he's been pretty off with his dire gloom and doom projections.

 

Using Moto X² on Tapatalk

[lou99/maximus1987]

Aren't we already talking about Moffet's speculation? Sprint can still do a lot more refinancing, debt offerings, Softbank capitalization. Or, or just maybe, Sprint will reverse its finances over the next six quarters. Cash flow improving.

 

Sprint burning the cash is needed. Especially the capex portion. If they were spending less, Moffet would be bitching about them not spending enough on capex and marketing. I see through his bullish!t. That's why most analysts have a different take. And if you look at Moffet's takes on Sprint in the past, he's been pretty off with his dire gloom and doom projections.

 

Using Moto X² on Tapatalk

I knew this would happen if I included Moffet's name in that quote! lol

 

It's worth speculating HOW Sprint will obtain more $ because, for example, if it sells 2.5 then, as known, it has to decide to whom to sell it as that will enable their competition.

 

Who's the least dangerous to sell to?

[S4GRU]

I knew this would happen if I included Moffet's name in that quote! lol

 

It's worth speculating HOW Sprint will obtain more $ because, for example, if it sells 2.5 then, as known, it has to decide to whom to sell it as that will enable their competition.

 

Who's the least dangerous to sell to?

I speculated already in my post. I don't expect Sprint to sell any 2.5. For many reasons that I have discussed in the past.

 

One, they will want something in the ballpark of what AWS3 sold for (which would make Joan Lappin's head separate from her body).

 

Two, they can only sell EBS and keep BRS. They don't have BRS in every market, so in markets with no BRS they have to keep EBS. And Sprint will likely want to keep EBS and BRS in some critical markets. So Sprint would only be selling EBS in half the country. And EBS is only leases. Not very desirable for a Band that no other US Provider currently uses.

 

I think this whole B41 sale discussion from Sprint is to see what kind of interest and value the spectrum is worth. And/or possibly to show the FCC in the future that no one wants this spectrum when running up against the screen in the future because of merger or purchase.

 

Using Moto X² on Tapatalk

[EvanA]

Gee what a surprise. From the man himself

 

Claure said he was not concerned about Sprint's finances and might access the bond or equity markets, or look to sell some of its excess 2.5 GHz spectrum.

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/sprints-claure-weve-got-enough-money-attract-customers-and-improve-our-netw/2015-05-05

[S4GRU]

Gee what a surprise. From the man himself

 

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/sprints-claure-weve-got-enough-money-attract-customers-and-improve-our-netw/2015-05-05

Reading the quotes from Moffet at the bottom of the article makes it clear to me he is a shill for the Duopoly. Because Sprint lowering pricing is hurting Sprint's ARPU, but it is also hurting AT&T and VZW. He is the big anti Sprint Cheerleader.

 

I also don't much care for views that are almost entirely just Moffet's described as 'some analysts.' Basically only Moffet is sticking his neck out there this way and only Moffet gets quoted on this kind of stuff. Should be referred to as "one vocal analyst who often is critical of Sprint."

 

Using Moto X² on Tapatalk

[utiz4321]

What I don't get is that these analysts seem to have missed is the 5 billion doesn't include the next gen network build.

[lou99/maximus1987]

What I don't get is that these analysts seem to have missed is the 5 billion doesn't include the next gen network build.

Which means that it won't start until FY2016

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lilotimz]

What I don't get is that these analysts seem to have missed is the 5 billion doesn't include the next gen network build.

 

That is for the next gen network build...

 

Network Vision is tainted. It's been associated with false promises, missed goals, massive delays, and losses of millions of subscribers. 

 

NGN is now Marcelos personal project and the new branding of NV and he will be the one to blame if it goes bad and he will be the one that everyone will applaud when it goes well. He now directs how and where he wants the network equipment to be deployed but the underlying foundation already exists. 

 

Legere didn't one man deploy tmobiles modernization project. The foundation for tmobiles rise has been there all along and they just needed someone to be the face of it while the engineers worked in the background. 

[lou99/maximus1987]

That is for the next gen network build...

 

Network Vision is tainted. It's been associated with false promises, missed goals, massive delays, and losses of millions of subscribers.

 

NGN is now Marcelos personal project and the new branding of NV and he will be the one to blame if it goes bad and he will be the one that everyone will applaud when it goes well. He now directs how and where he wants the network equipment to be deployed but the underlying foundation already exists.

 

Legere didn't one man deploy tmobiles modernization project. The foundation for tmobiles rise has been there all along and they just needed someone to be the face of it while the engineers worked in the background.

Does ngn include project ocean et al?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kineticman]

[S4GRU]

Does ngn include project ocean et al?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No. Ocean has been funded for some time. Mostly last year and this year.

 

Using Moto X² on Tapatalk

[lou99/maximus1987]

No. Ocean has been funded for some time. Mostly last year and this year.

 

Using Moto X² on Tapatalk

So even though they're gonna spend money for ocean this year, they're accounting for it in last years CAPEX?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ascertion]

Now that I think of it, this is really Q1 results, not necessarily Q2.  Oops.

[lou99/maximus1987]

Now that I think of it, this is really Q1 results, not necessarily Q2. Oops.

It's q4 of fy2014

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[utiz4321]

That is for the next gen network build...

 

Network Vision is tainted. It's been associated with false promises, missed goals, massive delays, and losses of millions of subscribers.

 

NGN is now Marcelos personal project and the new branding of NV and he will be the one to blame if it goes bad and he will be the one that everyone will applaud when it goes well. He now directs how and where he wants the network equipment to be deployed but the underlying foundation already exists.

 

Legere didn't one man deploy tmobiles modernization project. The foundation for tmobiles rise has been there all along and they just needed someone to be the face of it while the engineers worked in the background.

Marcelo said that it did not include NGN in the Q&A.

[utiz4321]

Which means that it won't start until FY2016

I don't think so. They seemed to imply it was pretty close to a go and not a year away. If they hadn't costed it out before now they are not going to add it to their current capex numbers. Next quarter their capex will be revised upwards, I'll bet.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[S4GRU]

So even though they're gonna spend money for ocean this year, they're accounting for it in last years CAPEX?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You're joking, right? You do know that there are costs to develop a site all along the way starting at inception?

 

Development costs, design costs, permitting costs, equipment costs, labor costs. Many bills are paid long before the site is live for commercial traffic. Equipment started arriving at many sites last year.

 

By the time a site is accepted and live, most of the sites expenses have been paid, or at least billed for. And you build a cash flow analysis for a project in the beginning and plan your cash flow accordingly. They knew they were spending a portion of capex on Ocean last year and this year for a long time.

 

Using Moto X² on Tapatalk