To: Crystal ball who wrote (6426 ) 5/30/1999 2:19:00 AM From: yzfool Read Replies (1) | Respond to
Crystal ball, I'm unraveling your post and me thinks I understand your points . So correct me if I am wrong. 1. You are short on GNET to 96, with a floor at 90 because of PA purchase. So below 96 your long again? 2. Cable is expensive with ever increasing surcharges. 3. Making money is synonymous with inefficiency. 4. Iridium failed and therefore we don't have a wireless future. 5. GNET's corporate structure will change negatively somehow with PA affiliation. So take #1, I agree with 90 as a floor because it was feared that such a low ball offer would cause a retreat in share price; the opposite occurred. Also, PA could only get 34% at this price because management knows that share value has greater potential. As far as the short is concerned; you sound very determined and I wish you good luck. I will say that there has been a lot of PR from the PA and the GNET camps with more to come, technically GNET is oversold, and the sell-off in GNET was sector specific. #2 Even with rising cable surcharges, cable will prove to be cost effective for both consumers and businesses in the near term. Eventually, technology will equilibrate all modes of access including satellite, cellular, dsl, and cable; prices will equilibrate with competition. #3 the government is synonymous with inefficiency not big business; look at the US postal service since its corporate remodeling. #4 Iridium had the right idea at the wrong time. #5 If GNET's corporate structure changes due to PA affiliation, I'm sure it will be for the better. A change for the worse would benefit no one including PA. The GNET/PA relationship is mutually beneficial because GNET is content for PA's pipe. And content steers revenue more than pipe.
