Strategies & Market Trends | Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates


Previous 10 | Next 10 
To: Mike Buckley who wrote (35270)11/25/2000 4:48:46 PM
From: Tony Strickland   of 54800
 
Greetings Merlin,

You are the number cruncher, one of the best I've ever read, and I think your analysis about the future of QCOM over the long term is right on. For a moment tho, take off the G&K hat, and think about these ideas;

Globalstar is/was the brainchild of Dr. Jacobs and group. Only a couple of years ago folks like Quentin Hardy were writing articles like Jacobs Patter, calling Dr. Jacobs an outright crook and CDMA would never work. ERICY swore that CDMA would never work and they would rather lose a customer than supply CDMA. Today ERICY plans to sell alot of future CDMA infrastructure and some version of CDMA will be be in all 3G systems.

The largest stockholder of QCOM, other than insiders in mid 1998 was Private Capital Management. The spokesperson who many of us learned from was Greg Powers. Most of what he said proved to be right on (he didn't think they would sell the handset div). I think they made some good money on that investment <G>.
PMC has added over 5 million shares of GSTRF and Greg briefly wrote about it; siliconinvestor.com

I've learned so much from this thread and the good folks, but had I not listened to and believed in Dr. Jacobs dreams, I wouldn't need the G&K thread nearly as much as I do today. Dumb luck? Maybe. Until Dr. Jacobs gives up on GSTRF, I will continue to think there hope.

JMHO,

Tony

PS Greg has several other posts in and around mid August on the GSTRF thread.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: Mike Buckley who wrote (35262)11/25/2000 8:07:35 PM
From: StockHawk   of 54800
 
In a worst-case scenario, if Globalstar liquidated tomorrow Qualcomm would have to write off that $618 million.

I recall making some negative comments about Globalstar when it was being discussed here late last year. And although I was interested in reading the comments that Mr. Powers began posting on the Globalstar thread a few months ago, I have never considered Globalstar to be a worthwhile investment. However, I am not convinced that they are going to go down in flames during 2001.

I believe Loral will fight quite hard to keep Globalstar alive. A few tidbit from Lorals 10Q filed 11/14/00:

In May 2000, Globalstar finalized $531.1 million of vendor financing
arrangements (including $31.1 million of capitalized interest as of May 2000)
with Qualcomm that replaced the previous $100 million vendor financing
agreement. The vendor financing bears interest at 6%, matures on August 15, 2003
and requires repayment pro rata with the term loans under Globalstar's $500
million credit facility
discussed above.


Globalstar's $500 million credit facility is guaranteed by Loral SatCom
Ltd. and Loral Satellite, Inc., wholly owned subsidiaries of Loral. The
guarantee is secured by the pledge of certain assets of Loral and its
subsidiaries, including the stock of the guarantors and the Telstar 6 and
Telstar 7 satellites. Based on third party valuations, management believes that
the fair value of Telstar 6 and Telstar 7 is in excess of this $500 million
credit agreement.


from Globalstar's 10Q filed 11/14/00:

Globalstar's $500 million credit facility contains various financial
condition covenants, one which would require, among other things, that
Globalstar have revenues of $100 million for the 12 month period ended March 31,
2001. Globalstar's revenues for the six months ended September 30, 2000, the
first six months of this period, were $1.9 million. Given the level of revenues
in the first six months of this period, Globalstar anticipates that the growth
in revenues during the subsequent six month period will not be sufficient to
meet its $100 million revenue covenant. If Globalstar cannot satisfy this
covenant, obtain waivers or amendments from a majority of the bank lenders, or
fulfill the $500 million obligation in a form satisfactory to all bank lenders,
Globalstar will be in default under its debt facilities (including vendor
financing) and Globalstar's lenders and bondholders would have the right to
accelerate payment of their loans to Globalstar. Loral SatCom Ltd. and Loral
Satellite Inc., directly and indirectly wholly owned subsidiaries of Loral, have
jointly and severally guaranteed Globalstar's obligation under this credit
agreement. Loral has advised Globalstar that it is currently in negotiations
with the banks to restructure the guarantee arrangements.


from Globalstar's 8K, filed 11/20/00:

On November 17, 2000, Globalstar, L.P. ("Globalstar") entered into an
Assignment, Amendment and Release Agreement with the lenders ("Lenders") under
its $500 million credit facility, Loral Space & Communications Ltd. ("Loral"),
Loral Satellite, Inc. ("Loral Satellite") and certain other subsidiaries of
Loral, pursuant to which Globalstar consented to the assignment by the Lenders
to Loral Satellite of all of the loans outstanding under its $500 million credit
facility.



StockHawk

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Tony Strickland who wrote (35271)11/25/2000 9:19:00 PM
From: Mike Buckley   of 54800
 
Tony,

Your appearances here are far too infrequent. Nice to see your name appearing in brilliant blue. :)

Thanks much for passing on that link to Greg Powers's post. His writing always brings rationality and common sense to the equation. It helps us see the FUD, the ignorance, and the media's insatiable desire to make more of a story than exists for what they truly are.


I agree with you that there is always hope for Globalstar. The real question is whether or not the cash will be provided to kindle the flame of hope.

Greg offers compelling reasons supporting his thinking that the partners will provide the cash. But he has access to senior management that very, very few of us have. That puts most of us in the position of having to rely on the due diligence of someone like Greg. If I'm going to rely on anyone's due diligence, I'll take his over most everyone else's, but as you know that goes against my grain. :)

If I were contemplating an investment in Globalstar other than the indirect one I've made through my investment in Qualcomm, I'd be interested in seeing the model Greg uses to support his thinking that the potential market for Globalstar's product justifies the company's huge capital outlays. (Actually, I'd be interested anyhow because that sort of number crunching fascinates me and is a wonderful skill we should keep in practice.)

StockHawk offers portions of SEC filings that are a testament to Loral's continued interest though I don't think investors should infer that Loral will inevitably continue funding the company as long as it is needed. I came to that thought when I read those documents in my initial research on the Globalstar issue. Reviewing them in his post didn't change my mind about that.

Specifically in response to some of Greg's post:

I find the analytical handwringing over, and micro-analysis of, the last six months subscriber data to be inane in the extreme.

I realize that you asked me to take my G&K hat off, but that might be an unfair request. :) In that light, I agree with Greg. For the two of us on the thread :) who live and die by the sword of Gorilla Gaming, recognizing that Globalstar's product hasn't crossed the chasm is a rather ho-hum observation; it adds peace to our lives because it means we don't feel the need to delve into the product adoption ad nauseum.

I find it amusing that the acquisition of 13,000 customers in just over four months of true commercial service is somehow deemed a dismal failure.

If indeed it is percieved as a dismal failure I couldn't agree more. To determine at this early stage that it is a failure or a success is in my mind a myopic view of customer adoption.

And to add just a little bit of levity to this otherwise serious discussion, consider Greg's comment that many people pay a premium to use their cellphone for calls that could just as easily be deferred until within reach of a “free” wireline phone. Well, ummm, I haven't figured out why they bother doing that but I'm glad they do. :)

--Mike Buckley

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: tinkershaw who wrote (35231)11/25/2000 10:05:19 PM
From: rushnomore   of 54800
 
AVNX has split that same beam of light into 1000 different wave lengths.

Tinker, can you supply a reference for that claim. I could not find any information like that in a quick check of AVNX web site.
TIA.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: Uncle Frank who started this subject11/26/2000 7:25:40 AM
From: Brian K Crawford   of 54800
 
I hope everyone has enjoyed Thanksgiving, celebrated with
family, and gotten their minds off of their y2k portfolio
results for a while.

The following numbers helped me gain some perspective on
where we are in this market cycle.

This data was lifted from a report by Robert Loest, fund
manager at IPS Millennium Fund. I updated the last
entry for new lows made since the original was put together.

NASDAQ:

Peak - Trough Percent decline Length
=============== =============== =========
Jan 73 - Oct 74 -59.9% 21 Months
Sep 78 - Nov 78 -20.3 2
Jun 83 - Jul 84 -31.5 13
Aug 87 - Oct 87 -35.8 2
Jul 90 - Oct 90 -34.5 3
Jul 98 - Oct 98 -29.5 3
Mar 00 - ??? ?? -45.5 ?

We may see further lows in this cycle, but it sure seems to
me that this is a pretty good time to be Gorilla hunting.

Brian

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: BDR who wrote (35215)11/26/2000 10:16:03 AM
From: BDR   of 54800
 
More on optical routers taken from J Fieb's post over here:

Message 14880358

Mirror, Mirror...

But mirrors don't know anything about the data inside the stream of light. And even if they did, they move too slowly to switch those packets. Mirrors are built using a mechanical technology known as MEMS, which can only rotate the beam of light once every thousandth of a second or so. At speeds of 10 billion bits per second and higher, which is now the standard for big telecom networks, packets of data arrive at a router every 40 billionths of a second — far too fast for MEMS, in other words.

One of the most intriguing academic presentations at Opticomm was given by Dr. Ben Yoo, from the University of California at Davis, who is working on photonic packet routers using what are called "wavelength converters." These devices can switch each packet of data by changing its color to a new wavelength every billionth of a second, or nanosecond. "Basically, we're building an all-optical router," he remarked in his talk. Yoo says the resulting optical router can scale to about 1,000 times the largest electronic router and the speed could be 1,000 times faster. That would result in 1,000 trillion bits, or one "petabit" per second switching, something unthinkable for electronic routers relying on repeated signal conversion between optics and electronics.

The secret is Yoo's design for wavelength converters fabricated in a standard semiconductor material that has no moving parts like MEMS. Firms such as SmartMoney pick Vitesse Semiconductor (VTSS) already know how to fashion such high-speed semiconductor materials in high volume at commercial prices. Yoo's all-optical router research is in two phases, the first utilizing off the-shelf commercial components, and the second utilizing advanced wavelength converters.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: 100cfm who wrote (35211)11/26/2000 12:39:59 PM
From: Eric L   of 54800
 
100,

Re: QCOM slide set featuring "3G CDMA for Wireless Internet Access"

qualcomm.com 

Notice that Q actually confirms Docomo's 5/01 release of their WCDMA system in this slide. They label it as initial deployment of 2nd qtr 01, then they show Q's commercial availability for their wcdma chip as q3 01. Then they show an estimate of commercial availability for docomo's wcdma system as 2003. Don't get that >>

When I first studied that slide, I considered it to be a bit "flaky" for several reasons. The good Doctor seems to be saying that (in reality) 1xMC & 1xEV will be commercially available before WCDMA is. It appears to me he may be applying "commercial availability" a little inconsistently in each of the 3 line items.

As for WCDMA he has the NTT DoCoMo 1st Phase Deployment plugged in as Q2 2001. He then has WCDMA "Commercial Availability" (I read this as not exclusively DoCoMo) as 2003 (ESTIMATED). This is Qualcomm's estimate obviously, and not 3GPP's (which estimates 2002.

I guess we will have to wait till 2002 to see whether this is correct in this estimate, or Dr. Jacobs. The key point is we are talking about "Commercial Availability" as opposed to "Limited Deployment" or "General Deployment" (terms used by Andrew Seybold in his "Wireless Roadmap" which has recently been updated:

wirelessroadmap.com 

Andrew Seybold can hardly be considered "technology neutral" as he has a decided bias (as I do, and I'm sure you do) towards CDMA for any number of valid reasons. Despite this, I think he attempts to be objective in his mapping.

I somewhat question his start dates on 3GDS-WCDMA "Trials Start". It seems to me that these actually proceeded any 1x-EV "Trials Start", but I won't nitpick. It appears he has 1xMC IS-2000 plugged in right for limited deployment end of Q1 2001 (MSM5105 IS-2000 compliant chipset rather than MSM5100) and he is showing IMT-2000 WCDMA commencing end 1st quarter 2002, where it is supposed to (which dictates "commercial availability", one would think.

At the very least, Seybolds roadmap is a good supplement to Dr. Jacobs, to my way of thinking.

Seybold explains his terms this way:

>> The table above summarizes the main wireless data technologies and key deployment dates. When Infrastructure manufacturers provide dates that their technology will be available, such dates indicate when the technology will be available to service providers. Typically, trials begin three to six months after a technology is "available," and about a year later there is limited deployment- the technology is made available commercially, but in limited geographic locations.

General deployment has been achieved when the data technology is available in nearly the same coverage area as the existing voice technology . At this stage, products and solutions enter the market.
<<

[EL - the tornado begins]

>> For example, a computer manufacturer would most likely deploy a handheld device with an internal wireless modem at the general deployment stage. We wouldn't expect to see name-brand palm-size computers with GPRS wireless modems until the end of 2001. <<

<< If docomo launches in q2 and we have commercial availability of our chips in q3 why would it be 2003 until docomo has commercial availability for their system. >>

This is where I think the term "commercial availability" may be being misapplied or applied spuriously.

Here is what I think I have been able to piece together about DoCoMo's plans.

* DoCoMo plans to (hopes to) commence a VERY limited commercial trial of WCDMA on an Evolved GSM/MAPP core end of May 2001. Necessary debugging will take place in this stage and will impact on future dates. The trial will use infra and handsets manufactured to a stripped down version of the DRAFT 3GPP 'R99' standard. One of the reason that the trial will be very limited (infra. handsets, subs or users) is that components are NOT to IMT-2000 'R99' standards, and no question but there will be bugs. The network is probably in place now, operating in test mode, but not commercially "On Air".

* DoCoMo plans to (hopes to) take delivery of standardized 'R99' infrastructure about 6 or 7 months before commencing a VERY limited commercial launch of WCDMA. This commercial launch is scheduled for late 2001 but could stretch into early 2002. Focus will be on corporate customers. There will be some introduction and testing of new services during this period.

* DoCoMo plans to (hopes to) build out and begin commercial general deployment by end of Q1 2003 at which time they have conservatively targeted 150,000 WCDMA subs on their 3G 2GHz network.

<< What exactly is an erlang? >>

Voop and Tim ("tbancroft") nailed this one nicely.

One interesting aspect of WCDMA is that it (like 1xMC) CLAIMS to double VOICE capacity as compared to CDMA IS-95 and is 7x as spectrally efficient as 2G GSM). One of these days we'll see some slides out of the WCDMA proponents to compare to Qualcomm's widely used example. I'll let the folks that are into "erlangs" debate them.

<< is this the reason for the recent docomo confession re 3g shortfalls >>

ROFLMAO!

I guess you are talking about what Ben Garrett called "THE CONFESSION". Cracked me up when I saw it at 5 AM on Turkey Day" before motoring up the turnpike.

I must say that his post has encouraged some very good posts on the "Moderated Qualcomm" thread.

Let me direct your attention to the "1xEV Supporters" slide in Dr. Jacobs presentation:

qualcomm.com 

"1xEV (Operator) Supporters" in the slide include:

* KTF (SKT curiously lacking)
* KDDI
* Verizon
* Sprint PCS

And most importantly:

* Vodafone

I have long stated that Vodafone (perhaps more than any other GSM operator) is the potential key to unlocking GSM land for cdma2000 - either straight up or as an overlay).

Vodafone is every bit as much a proponent and driver of the UMTS UTRA (WCDMA) specifications as DoCoMo and is also a proponent and driver of the GPRS specifications. They are a part owner of Globalstar, owner of one of the largest cdmaOne networks in the world, and managed the first cdma overlay of a GSM network (trial basis).

If 1xEV has as much potential as we think it has why not WCDMA/1xEV (as well as 1xMC/3xMC/1XEV)?

Regulatory barriers? Chris Gent would have something to say about that.

This might require 3GPP2 disbanding and CDG & Qualcomm moving into 3GPP. I have conjectured before that when Qualcomm management thinks that this is appropriate, that it will happen.

- Eric -

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: Brian K Crawford who wrote (35275)11/26/2000 1:04:19 PM
From: StockHawk   of 54800
 
>>it sure seems to me that this is a pretty good time to be Gorilla hunting.<<


Someone recently posted that often-quoted line from Warren Buffett, which says that people who intend to add money to their investments should be pleased if those investments decline in value. That sounds counter-intuitive, but makes sense if the goal is to accumulate additional shares at bargain prices.

In a similar vein, is your thought that a down market is a good time, not just to hold gorillas, but to hunt for gorillas. As with Buffett's idea, this one too goes against Human nature. It is Human nature to become discouraged, to forsake investing when prices have fallen dramatically.

The greatest amounts of money are not made at the top of bull markets, the seeds of great wealth are planted at the ends of bear markets. At the very time when adding to investments seems so futile.

Even on this thread, followed by devotees of long term buy and hold, when were most new candidates brought to the thread? Was it this Fall or last Fall? When were most of the Hunt Reports done?

The enthusiasm to add more money strikes most severely right about the time when adding money is ill-advised. And the best opportunities for adding to one's holdings are often bypassed and overlooked.

At least, its something to think about.


StockHawk

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: StockHawk who wrote (35278)11/26/2000 1:21:30 PM
From: Mike Buckley   of 54800
 
StockHawk,

Even on this thread, followed by devotees of long term buy and hold, when were most new candidates brought to the thread? Was it this Fall or last Fall? When were most of the Hunt Reports done?

To add to that, participants in the thread on the whole consistently post less when the Naz is down.

--Mike Buckley

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: Mike Buckley who wrote (35279)11/26/2000 2:36:56 PM
From: LindyBill   of 54800
 
, participants in the thread on the whole consistently post less when the Naz is down.

We get depressed Mike. Especially when it hits as hard as this year has, and a lot of us thought we could do no wrong.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)
Previous 10 | Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2013 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.