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 : CAWS - Wireless Cable (New and Improved) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zorro who wrote (5470)	7/30/1998 9:38:00 PM
From: webpilot	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5812

Zorro, Your analysis is very good, we are lucky to have you here. I just wish I was more informed about the business. I have no expertise in this area, and not able to offer any meaningful input. I would gladly go to ALB to show support during the proceedings. The way that I became involved was through a stock hype over CNBC a couple of years ago. I remember that I bought in around 2 and the stock ran right up to 4 immediately. I wonder where all that hype came from on that particular day. HMMMM. Anyway, I am fascinated by the battle cry "we go in, get out, and we all make a lot of money". Van do you remember exactly who said that, and do we have records?

To: Zorro who wrote (5470)	7/30/1998 11:37:00 PM
From: VanGo101	Respond to of 5812

Zorro..."Why CAI management would not fight for the equity of its shareholders is simply beyond me". It's called "screw your fellow man if you can, greed"!! In this case, it's being practiced by ML and JA. I'm not that surprised, anymore, by JA, but you would think that ML would not want to be a part of this smelly, stinking deal being imposed on common stock shareholders. Your analysis is, once again, brilliant! I'm going with Scott to see your new movie!! VanGo101...Van

To: Zorro who wrote (5470)	7/31/1998 8:22:00 AM
From: FraudBuster	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5812

Make Your Reservations Now... Van, Zorro, Webpilot, Ken et al: According to an article yesterday in the Dow Jones Newswires, CAWS' Chapter 11 Bankruptcy petition was filed in Federal Bankruptcy Court in Delaware. I believe this court is located in Wilmington. The Bankruptcy Court set September 9, 1998 as the date for a confirmation hearing on CAWS' Chapter 11 plan. I sincerely hope that all of you and ALL other shareholders will bring your analysis and material evidence of CAWS' management's fraud and misrepresentation and will join me at the hearing in Wilmington. I can hardly wait to question the management face-to-face. Perhaps the lawyers at Milberg should be made aware of this date. If anyone has not seen this article and would like to see it, please walk me through the procedure on how I can copy it to this thread and I will be more than happy to copy it to here. Thank You!

To: Zorro who wrote (5470)	7/31/1998 10:02:00 AM
From: WTC	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 5812

Zorro, One material difficulty with any MDS spectrum valuation analysis is the issue that most of the aggregated spectrum is actually licensed to "dentists and doctors" -- winners of license lotteries in the 1980s. As you know, it is then sub-licensed to MDS operators like CAI, who put forward a business (should that be in quotes, too?) that creates firm value, and thereby, spectrum value. About half of the spectrum out there for MDS operations is that other peculiar animal, ITFS licenses. CAI holds some licenses directly, of course, but the vast majority of their operating spectrum inventory is sub-licensed pursuant to medium to long term license agreements (where Gerry Kittner (Senior Vice President - Spectrum Management) makes his rather grand $180k, but for some reason, the smallest 1997 bonus, $53775, from CAI reports. Do you imagine the shabby bonus reflects some management displeasure in the spectrum management scene at CAI?) It seems to me that valuing MDS aggregated spectrum may necessarily be an exercise in minutiae -- how can you value the 25 or 28 or 31 licenses a company "holds" in a given market/BTA without examining the terms and duration of the sub-license agreements? What if the license holder stands to be able to renegotiate the license fees or withhold the spectrum in two or three years based on the operator's success with its business? On the other hand, some licenses may have just been renegotiated for a 10 year term at very favorable terms -- that is almost like holding the spectrum yourself, but without any terminal value. The ITFS rules could potentially be a stumbling block for some of the data applications being contemplated absent a waiver of the FCC rules, which require, as I recall, 20% of the "broadcast programming" to be qualified "educational" programming. That could be the wrong paradigm altogether for a data service use of the spectrum, complicating the valuation unless you are willing to assume a waiver or change in ITFS rules (I tend to believe such a waiver would not be difficult if there were commitments to certain specific educational access, but I know of no actual tests of these rules.) I did not see or review the CAI valuation methodology, but I would concede to anyone who has plowed through a valuation process that there is nothing tidy or obvious about the most reasonable approach. I would also agree with you, Zorro, that the complications tend to make the process quite easy to game if there is a specifically desirable result sought from all the manipulations and calculations.

To: Zorro who wrote (5470)	8/6/1998 11:11:00 AM
From: Rusti H	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 5812

Zorro, "An analysis of the net price paid "per POP" (an industry term for "per person") for the top 20 markets determined that the average price per POP was $3.17. This figure was multiplied by CAI's 44.8 million POPS (in major markets) and then discounted by the weighted average percent of channels that CAI does not control in each market." Do you remember what CAI got for the rights it sold to Bell South? If it was more, we could probably use it to our advantage in court. Rusti