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: Jason Cogan who wrote (5573)	4/29/1998 6:12:00 AM
From: TheSlowLane	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12468

Just because another technological means may become available, it doesn't follow that it can be deployed instantly. Getting roof rights, CLEC certifications, interconnect agreements, switches installed and so on take time. That's why all of the analysts I've read put WinStar at least 1-2 years ahead of Teligent, for example. As far as chasing away "opinions" goes, when a participant joins a thread with the SOLE purpose of antagonizing other members - how fruitful or enlightening do you think a discussion will ensue? I'd ask you to read back through the thread to find out but the most informative posts have been removed. As I've said before, I could cash out right now with a very respectable gain. If you can do so with your short, great, we've both won. So far you've not converted a single person with your approach, to my knowledge. It's not due to the fact that we are wild-eyed fanatics, though I suspect you believe most of us are, but because the case you have presented continues to be less compelling than: a) the execution by the company that we have seen to date b) analysis by Vogel, Grubman, Governali, Bowen, Guich and Fink (ha ha) Cheers!

To: Jason Cogan who wrote (5573)	4/29/1998 7:37:00 AM
From: Kingpin	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12468

I agree with Jason. Alternative methods of providing high bandwidth local service via technological innovation IS the greatest risk to Winstar. However, and I have stated this several times over the last 6 months, there is a 56 billion dollar market RIGHT NOW that is not being served with adequate bandwidth. Jason do you think that these thousands of companies are willing to wait for the commercial a deployment of such devices? There is no doubt that at some point in time something bigger and better will come along. But by then I am relatively certain that WCII will have billions in Revs and thousands of buildings on net. There are no current obstacles to obtaining new customers. In most cases there is not even competition. A large portion of there targets customers have no fiber running to their buildings. The ones that do cannot get enough bandwidth to move data and video at high speeds. In a nutshell, I agree Jason. Therefore, I spend far more time learning about new competitors and technology than I do on Winstar itself. My conclusion: The simple fact that is obfuscated by the all the technologial retoric is this: There are no current obstacles to rapid revenue growth. If revs ramp up the stock price will rise. If the street feels revenue growth can grow rapidly and unchecked indefinately, the stock will explode. Both of these scenarios are acceptable to me.

To: Jason Cogan who wrote (5573)	4/29/1998 12:02:00 PM
From: silicon warrior	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12468

Jason: Let's assume you're correct that there will be future competition for wcii, perhaps even from another technological advance. So what?? There is presently competition, and we all know there will be in the future--e.g., TGNT. Our analysis, and that of analysts and the company, is not based on capturing 100% of the market. And, if the risk of some unknown future technological advance makes an investment too risky, I don't see how we could invest in anything. All existing entities are subject to future competition from presently unknown technological advances. Moreover, I'd like to believe that competent and experienced management would be sufficiently prescient to adopt to, indeed embrace, such changes. One example is wcii embracing P-MP. As to debt, I really don't appreciate your concern. It is certainly true that the debt holders have first call on marginal revenues to the extent of paying the debt service on a current basis. So what?? That's true of all companies with debt. The fact is that projected revenues are more than adequate to meet the debt service. Indeed, there will be plenty "left over" to be EBITDA positive. It's surely not correct that all debt must be repaid prior to shareholder earnings. Assumption of debt is an obviously prudent way of funding one's business plans if it can be obtained at favorable terms. I much prefer the company issuing "semi-junk" payable only in the future rather than equity at 10-15 or even 20 a share and the dilutive effect of that. As to use of stock for the artt deal, you guys have to be kidding me. First, use of cash creates a need for debt service--sooner or later--when you're ebitda negative. So, you guys think it would be smart to take on more debt for artt, rather than issuing stock??Fact is, stock is cheap currency as long as the markets continue to have faith in your equity. Look at it this way: one year ago, wcii was 9.75. So, it's getting artt for a fraction of that. I look at companies like WCOM. It's extraordinary growth--and great shareholder rewards--have been fueled by opportunistic acquisitions using equity.I would love to have begun my ownership of WCOM five years ago, and I would be screaming if they had been using cash and debt and draining cash flow. Moreover, once you decide on the deal, the real issue is simply is it cheaper to use cash/debt or equity?? Use of equity merely means it's deemed to be a better deal than whatever terms are available for debt. You guys complained that debt was too expensive. So, you're saying what: they should have increased debt, or they should have passed on a strategic opportunity??Either way, your view is not compelling to me..Regards.