To: ChopChop99 who wrote (5693 ) 6/27/1999 6:29:00 PM From: Praetor Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 16809
Ohhh, I hate to do this... But... I'm not real fond of NPLS. I know, I know, it's got the right UWs - GS, ML, and DLJ. But it just seems wrong . I've been reading over their prospectus, and I just don't like 'em. First, they're very regional - they're heavy into New England, with "satelite" networks in a few places in CA, lots out of Atlanta (I live in the Southeast, where they claim one of their major networks is, and I've never heard of them), etc. Also, this line from the Overview in their prospectus bothers me:As of May 15, 1999, we served approximately 40,000 customers representing in excess of 200,000 access lines. We had total revenue of $105.5 million in 1998 and $33.6 million in the first quarter of 1999, substantially all of which was attributable to the sale of long distance services . We commenced offering local services in September 1998 and DSL services in May 1999 . (My emphasis.) They're a long distance company. Plain and simple. They started offering DSL (the Buzzword-du-jour) last month. Last Month! With revenues of $105MM, they're still losing $6MM - that's not a bad ratio, especially if they're a pure Net play. But they're not. They're selling a service that virtually everyone in the US uses (long distance), and they're not making a profit doing it. They're also planning on using almost half of the proceeds of their IPO (assuming a $15 pricing) to pay off debt. Almost $46MM of it. So while they may have the right underwriters, this deal smells an awful lot like the GreenMountain.com deal, where NPLS is counting on the buzz of the Internet and DSL to save their bacon. I'd be interested to see how NPLS does in the TopAnnuity 10-point Questionnaire, too. But I just don't like 'em. So, I guess Chop and I have weighed in, and it's sure to be a moon-shot now... Praetor