Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Winstar Comm. (WCII) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Richard Dunaven who wrote (3777)	2/9/1998 11:37:00 PM
From: ziad daoudi	Respond to of 12468

Ric it is always a pleasure to read your input

To: Richard Dunaven who wrote (3777)	2/10/1998 12:19:00 AM
From: DubM	Respond to of 12468

Ric, thanks for your post. Jack Grubman's latest update of 1-27-98 put the number of fully diluted shares outstanding at 46.2 million. If the company were valued at 3.5 bil, the per share value would be about $ 75. As far as the LMDS auction is concerned, having the license is one thing, doing something with them is quite another. It takes time to build a business and WinStar has already invested a lot of that required time. By the way, Grubman put TGNT's 1997 revenue at (Don't laugh)$400,000. It will be interesting to see where they are at the end of this year. Another observation, WinStar's cumulative lines ordered was about 118,000 at 97 year end. 40,000 or almost 34% of these were ordered in the 4 th quarter! Imagine if they can maintain any where near this kind of growth rate. 300 million 98 revenue could be within the realm of possibility! JMHO, Dub

To: Richard Dunaven who wrote (3777)	2/10/1998 12:30:00 AM
From: SteveG	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 12468

<...so now we have a 3.5 bil Co... E) If all employee options were excersized then the value of this CO would be well above the 65 / share mark....> Hi Richard- SalSB's Jack Grubman, in recently re-computing his "ground up" (15% DCF) valuation model using all options/ performance warrants, etc. available 10 years out, used 46.2MM SO. If we use JUST your proposed license value of $3B, we get $65/share. This doesn't include plant, or the more important - end-end owning the customer. WCII offers (as I understand) LD as well as local, and the ability to "bundle the churn" is what EVERY telco salivates for. Then they also offer ISP service as well - true end-middle-end. (And is their WinStar Media content any good?) THEN, with P-MP rolling out last and this month, turns their T1 (P-P) lines into P-MP OC-3 (155Mbps). (yup, that's three T3s). Whether these are provisioned/muxed for (64kbps) pairgain voice or for highband data, this CLEARLY brings the holy grail (and ATM) to the EDGE. What value THIS? (According to Nacchio/Chambers/Sidgmore, et al., last week, it's gold) As you may have seen, the value argument (relative to Teleport) that in ~2 years, WCII will have twice the plant (and with P-MP, 3x the bandwidth of TCGI's OC1s) at TWICE the margins, for which AT&T agreed to $11B. And wireless fiber doesn't get back-hoed <g>. (Story is - as I remember - when WinStar's Doug Morgan went hiking/camping in Colorado, his NY friends told him to take a 1 ft length of fiber, so that if he got lost and the rangers couldn't find him, the diggers would) What do you see as the biggest uncertainties/weaknesses from here, Rick? Management failure? Competition? Technology glitches? Public acceptance? I'm loking for the the best bear stories of why I would SHORT WCII - as 4+MM already have. (fwiw, I am very long and like to know the negatives in great detail) Thanks in advanced for your input, and clarifications. Steve (PS. Just got back from a "teach-in/management meet" with Rockwell Semi, so have yet to catch up posts. I see ICIX came in to us today. KP, did you get in? And anyone up on Verilink (VRLK)?)

To: Richard Dunaven who wrote (3777)	2/10/1998 10:15:00 PM
From: Bernard Levy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12468

Dear Richard: I think that your comment concerning getting the FCC's authorization for LMDS spectrum reuse is not totally accurate. The FCC has given wide latitude to LMDS operators concerning the use of their spectrum. The only technical constraints involve a) the specification of the polarization scheme at each BTA's edge, b) a constraint on the amount of radiated power across the BTA's edges and c) a specification on the frequency accuracy of transmitters. There is no constraint on the location and number of transmitters. All this information is available on the FCC Web site concerning the LMDS auction. Best regards, Bernard Levy