>>Also bad for GX's competitors, their bond and shareholders, suppliers, employees, and near-future funding of any tech rollout, along with people's retirement plans, etc, and funding for that hospital, and this education facility, all trying to sup from the same poisoned capital pool.<<
You paint with too broad a brush, Jay. It's certainly bad for GX's bond and shareholders, but that's history now. It's also bad for GX's competitors, who must now compete with a player whose depreciation and interest expense is negligible. But competition drives productivity, and GX's competitors must now get serious or go under. Net result - really inexpensive telecommunications. GX has been the long distance telephone provider to my business for the last couple of years. 4.5 cents per minute, 24/7, 6 second billing increments and the phones keep working.
>>... by your logic, that white elephant of a airport and the redundant bridge to nowhere in Japan is all good<<
Possibly. You could also say that about the (English) Channel Tunnel. The world's major infrastructure investments have rarely brought a profit to their original investors if privately funded - this topic has been previously addressed at length with more skill than I can muster - but they do bring long term benefits to their users and provide a means to facilitate future capital accumulation.
>>the market clearing price may in fact turn out to be around 0.05 to 0.10 Euros on the Dollar<<
That's a joke, right? |
