Hope everyone had a good holiday weekend. Here are comments from Readware for you all to digest.
=====================
Subject: Re: IPO's
Date: Thu, Jul 2, 1998 12:18 EDT
From: Readware
Message-id: <1998070216184600.MAA02236@ladder03.news.aol.com>
Disinclined as I am to be "negative" on any enterprises, I have to agree with Valuer's answer to your question.
Let me put it this way: you can have an almost identical system for 40% the cost. I do not know why it cost them so much to put this system together. There are other similar efforts afoot now being assembled whose outlines I have seen, and their cost structures are significantly lower for the same amount of service to be provided.
Subject: Re: Readware-old news-Zenit
Date: Thu, Jul 2, 1998 19:12 EDT
From: Readware
Message-id: <1998070223122800.TAA20362@ladder01.news.aol.com>
The assembly, design, and launching of Zenit-2 is in the hands of some seven major international aerospace companies, representing over 100 years of aerospace technical competence. This was not the case with the prior Zenits.
Subject: re: MERRILL LYNCH UPGRADE
Date: Thu, Jul 2, 1998 19:30 EDT
From: Readware
Message-id: <1998070223304300.TAA22634@ladder01.news.aol.com>
I have indeed read the Loral piece by Merrill Lynch's Thomas Watts, as well as the Satellite CEO Conference Review Merrill Lynch put together. It was quite well done.
As for our pricing objectives: we will not redo a Loral pricing model till December. The new model is necessitated by the 15 June 1998 Loral business plan update, which is a substantial emendation of its original plan. As the mariner looks out across the ocean where it meets the horizon he has to see if there are any more ships coming. I want to wait in the same way especially given the Intelsat developments, which has followed so quickly on the
aforementioned change (increase) in Loral's business plan. The somewhat stormy waters of May have subsided, and I think there is clear sailing again. But till we reach more specificity on the Skybridge financials, a Loral pricing model update has to wait for that reason too.
In answer to the other questions, Loral owns 12% of Skybridge. And we are maintaining our $36/share 1998 target and $51/share for 1999. It does appear that the years after that will be getting higher prices-- I would say 7-9% higher/year.
Subject: re: MERRILL LYNCH UPGRADE
Date: Thu, Jul 2, 1998 21:16 EDT
From: Readware
Message-id: <1998070301162800.VAA05056@ladder03.news.aol.com>
No, not 7-9% higher than 1999's $51-- 7-9% higher than our original prices for those years after 1999.
Subject: Kistler K1
Date: Thu, Jul 2, 1998 22:18 EDT
From: Readware
Message-id: <1998070302184200.WAA14000@ladder01.news.aol.com>
Kistler Aero is a pioneer in the RLV (reusable launch vehicle)-- which uses a two acre wide canopy to "float" back to earth. The first stage separates 135,000 feet (the rocket uses liquid oxygen instead of hydrogen). The second stage delivers the payload into low-earth-orbit, while the first stage has air cushions to cushion its descent back to earth. They have the brilliant George Miller (Space Shuttle chief engineer) and I know they have
had a successful testfiring of the K33-- a major, major milestone for them. Their plan is to launch every 9 days-- they are making 5 RLVs. Also, they are using all hardware that has been time tested-- so there is no real new technology to concern them.
To answer your email, I do believe that G* has made plans for the K1 in the second gen, but the RLV still has a few more hurdles (the most important I heard is the timely completion of the Nevada facility). I don't know if the company is going to become a New York stock-- I am not aware of that. Given the financing needs for such a project, maybe they will.
Subject: Re: Kistler K1
Date: Fri, Jul 3, 1998 10:46 EDT
From: Readware
Message-id: <1998070314465500.KAA07108@ladder01.news.aol.com>
No, my comment is from the company. From its president Robert Wang :"Instead of using dangerous liquid hydrogen, the Kistler K1 is powered by an efficient liquid oxygen and kerosene fueled system."
Subject: re: MERRILL LYNCH UPGRADE
Date: Fri, Jul 3, 1998 10:56 EDT
From: Readware
Message-id: <1998070314563100.KAA07981@ladder01.news.aol.com>
If Skybridge estimates for 2002 come in line with what is anticipated, the projected numbers you post appear to be about correct. We have to assume that a 6% 10 year bond rate is operant throughout the next few years, and Loral executes its planned launches in a timely (= within 39 days) manner.
If Loral buys more cash generating assets before the end of this year, as some have been commenting seems quite possible-- that's another reason it's necessary to wait. Pricing models are run with the idea that they provide good guidance over a period of time. We have changed ours twice since 1996-- the delayed start-up of Telstar and the announcement at around the same time of the G* October 1997 launch being postponed, and the purchase of Orion.
Continually changing a pricing makes the term "pricing model" oxymoronic. That's why one waits until an element of stability (=predictability) [no more major corporate developments] arrives.
Subject: Re: Another PanAmSat in trouble
Date: Fri, Jul 3, 1998 10:57 EDT
From: Readware
Message-id: <1998070314572100.KAA07952@ladder03.news.aol.com>
The Galaxy has on-board redundancy-- it will do just fine.
Subject: Re: Comforting News
Date: Fri, Jul 3, 1998 15:42 EDT
From: Readware
Message-id: <1998070319422500.PAA07532@ladder01.news.aol.com>
The Zenit launch facility is some 12 miles east of the Soyuz. Loral confirmed yesterday afternoon that it anticipates no delays with its G* launch in August.
I am reminded last year-- and I doubt if anyone on this post knows this-- when Loral was to launch one of its sats-- last May-- from China. There were news reports that the launch facility had been destroyed by a mudlside.
There was no truth to the news at all. The GEO launched, and no one was the worse for it.
Subject: Thermo-ionic converters
Date: Fri, Jul 3, 1998 20:59 EDT
From: Readware
Message-id: <1998070400595100.UAA10826@ladder03.news.aol.com>
On your email: you must be a sat engineer.
Yes I am aware of thermo-ionic converters as possible new power sources for propulsion, sat orientation, and on-board power. These are in the design stage to replace what only a few years ago was considered "new"-- i.e., sulphur and lithium based batteries.
I am sure, however, you are aware of the new engineering attempts now at ground-based photon beams or microwave transmissions that some claim will stabilize satcoms and provide them with their on-board power. Perhaps they will be available in 30-40 years.
Some engineers a;so are of the opinion that battery efficiencies could reach a point where solar panels (satcom power sources) are no longer necessary. This would mean that one less problem for sats would be overcome-- the some 90 eclipse cycles a GEO has to put up with every year.
So these developments would be an advance over the fly-wheel concept of Satcon in Massachussetts.
Subject: Re: Thermo-ionic converters
Date: Sat, Jul 4, 1998 00:20 EDT
From: TASTYCHAP
Message-id: <1998070404205000.AAA04171@ladder03.news.aol.com>
Readware.
I saw a post on one of the other LOR boards...Talking about LOR being acquired at some point...Do you think B.S. would sell the company out, before the mission was completed.???
May the Schwartz be with you.
T.C.
Subject: Re: Thermo-ionic converters
Date: Sat, Jul 4, 1998 10:42 EDT
From: Readware
Message-id: <1998070414424800.KAA07376@ladder03.news.aol.com>
Not a chance. If LOR does as we expect by 2001, in line with its new business plan, Bernard Schwartz would have to sell LOR today at at least 2 1/2 times its current value. Its EBITDA at the end of 2000 alone (just 2 1/2 years from now) will, on our work, be more than 4 times this year's. Based on its GEO launch plan, its EBITDA/transponder growth rate going forward over the next 6 quarters will increase by some 192% alone. And given the
upgrade in the design of the Orion platforms, it may even be higher (depending on how their VSAT service value-added system pans out). Skynet is looking at interactive DBS platforms, and so that too has high growth possibilities.
I cannot imagine any circumstance where Loral would let itself be bought out. It would cost too much money to the potential bidder. I think by 2001 there will be three satcom communications service powers: Loral, Hughes, and Motorola-Marconi. Lockheed will still be a giant, but only 30% of its business by the year 2001 will be satcom communications.
If anything, I would think Loral would be looking at further acquisitions. Given the money the stock offering raised, and the Loral chairman's disdain for idle cash balances, one would think the moneys recently raised would be deployed quicky in an efficient use of capital.
Subject: Re: Thermo-ionic converters
Date: Sun, Jul 5, 1998 00:37 EDT
From: Smolky
Message-id: <1998070504372900.AAA25502@ladder01.news.aol.com>
The PanAmSat Satellite that has problems is just minor problems that probably wont even shorten the life of the satellite. It was made by GM Hughes, go figure, lol.
Any word on the IRIDF advertising campaign? So far I haven't seen one ad, not that NY City will be a place they will concentrate on, but a little advertising or news about this should pop up.
Well, one interesting thing:
Does anyone remember my post before I left about a full year ago. It mentioned that someone had told me Ron Perelman was involved in Loral. I never produced any proof for this, and it was canceled as a rumor. Well, for good or bad, (Ron isn't a nice shareholder friendly man) I found proof that he is in Loral he has a Director representing him and his company on the Loral board. I had specific info on this that I got last week and I cant find it
right now, when I find it I will post it.
This is only to say that Ron has a director spot not an investment in Loral. I have no proof for an investment in the company by Ron other then the stock options the directors might receive for being a director.
We had a great week in Loral and GSTRF was a little weak. I don't know why Loral went up 11% they had two recommendations one from Lehman and one from Merrill, that is all I know about any news this week with Loral. But I don't know if that was enough of a reason to have the stock up 11% for the week. GSTRF was down for reasons dealing with the Zenit delays, I believe, others have disagreed with me on this point.
Technically Loral broke out, actually thinking about it the only thing that might fit with the Loral rise is Clinton in China, maybe all the junk has gone by the waste-side.
ORBComm IPO has been canceled for now.
No word on Skynet IPO within the 1998 calendar year, as of yet.
UUplink thanks a lot for the Leonid postings
Readware your comments about a strong battery that would render the solar arrays obsolete would be a great solution to the meteor showers that will always be in the solar system.
Smolky
Hoping for another great week
Subject: Re: Thermo-ionic converters
Date: Sun, Jul 5, 1998 10:34 EDT
From: Readware
Message-id: <1998070514341000.KAA24523@ladder03.news.aol.com>
Good insight Smolky-- now I see why I was asked the question about thermo-ionic conversion. I did not realize that the writer who posed the question had in mind Leonids attacking the solar array panels, and if then there was anything that could replace the solar panels.
I told you you should become a sat engineer, didn't I?
Subject: ICO Telephony voice quality
Date: Sun, Jul 5, 1998 11:42 EDT
From: Readware
Message-id: <1998070515423200.LAA00441@ladder01.news.aol.com>
There will be 10 MEOs for the ICO system (to commence in AD 2000, with the first MEO scheduled for launch this December), with two spares. As for the question about "delay" because of the "altitude" and "speed of light" transmission:
I posted not a while ago that LEOs theoretically relay a signal more quickly through space than light travelling through glass fiber. This is well known, and not in dispute. On a LEO delivered voice call, there is no delay experienced at all to the end-user.
Today there have been developed "digital echo cancellers" for GEOs and MEOs.
Many people today associate satcom voice service with that of the 1960s Early Bird, where there was a "delay", an "echo". Back then satcoms with their 4 Khz channels fpr voice transmission were better than the 3KHz submarine cable service, so the need for echo cancellers was not pressed.
Today, of course, with long distance QOS (quality of service) being demanded at least as comparable to ground-based ISDN standards this has changed. High quality satcom digital echo cancellers installed properly in a country's telecommunications network for GEO and MEO calls should virtually eliminate the effects and sounds of an "echo" in a national or international satellite circuit. These devices cost about $750 and can be installed for every
voice channel.
So, one might want to suppose that ICO will deploy these echo cancellers for their telephony services. I had also indicated in early January (I believe it was) that Thomas Riley, chief engineer of the Lockheed Martin AceS GEO, project had indicated that Lockheed Martin designed handset modifications had shown a good advance in QOS relative to the question of "echo" for ACeS.
I have read the prospectuses for ICO-- both for their equity and bond servicing. There are many ICO board members who are, it seems to me, a bit inexperienced in advertising and free-market competition. As you know ICO was effectively a quasi-government model, agency. ICO claims a subscriber base of 22 million users by the year 2005 for mobile satcom telephony, acknowledging other competitors citing higher numbers. Hughes, which is making their MEOs,
has indicated its belief that 10 MEOs might not be enough to handle all the traffic being expected, which is a touch contrary to the ICO prospectus statement (p. 50, "ICO Global Communications [Holdings] Limited Ordinary Shares, dated 30 June 1998). We shall see.
Subject: Re: Thermo-ionic converters
Date: Sun, Jul 5, 1998 18:53 EDT
From: Readware
Message-id: <1998070522534300.SAA20527@ladder03.news.aol.com>
In testimony before the House in Washington on 21 May Aeropsace Corp.'s Dr. William Bailor indicated that some 500 sats will be "sandblasted" (damaged by the creation of plasma [free electric charge]) by the upcoming 17 November Leonid shower, and not by a rock blasting a hole in any of the sats. E.g., in the 1993 Perseid shower, the Olympus communications satellite failed as a result of meteoric induced plasma.
There was a conference in Manhattan Beach 27-28 April on this subject of the Leonid. All in all, there is nothing that can materially be done. I am not sure "evasive maneuvers" would occur in time. Bailor's statement is an aerospace concensus finding. There are just too many variables to make any firm prediction on what Leonid will do. I had posted once that a NASA manager in Houston told me on Leonid that "we'll be able to predict what's going to
happen after it happens".
|
