To: quidditch who wrote (937 ) 5/18/1999 10:37:00 AM From: CF Rebel Respond to of 15615
“It this is the case, does it appear that Winnick's and Scanlon's original vision of the creation of the last, needed large bandwidth link for global traffic was flawed in that, as a business model unto itself, it wouldn't have been the killer business some had thought?” I considered that when the earnings report came out. Revenues were down sequentially but the market was pretty quiet about it. I also wondered if the announcement of the cable-laying fleet purchase wasn't timed to distract from the earnings. I'm not saying that that was definitely the intent of management, just that I'm willing to be a bit paranoid about my preference for a lean, mean, IP-focused company being screwed with. I really could do without the slow-growth, have-to-please-every-resident-‘tween-the-Mississippi-and-California issues. With Annunziata being on-board for less than three months, we already have three major deals on the stove. This raises a yellow flag for me with respect to having an empire-builder running the show. I have to balance my preference for a fast-growing company with the reality that the three deals puts together a capital base which could be a springboard for expanding the fiber side of our business in a bigger way than was possible three months ago. I was hoping that GBLX would be establishing business interests or acquiring companies outside the U.S. where the greatest growth is going to be. If this deal makes us able to do that in a more serious way, that's great. But, I'll have to keep an eye on ol' Bob, The Kid in the Candy Store. The one thing we do have going for us is the fact that the people running the show do have a mentality that is outside the box. They understand the transformation telecom is undergoing and they can do more things and act more quickly than their counterparts in the more bureaucratic telcos. We just have to make sure that they don't lose the vision. CF Rebel