Author Topic: I - Intelsat  (Read 7002 times)

ValueMaven

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 499
Re: I - Intelsat
« Reply #10 on: January 30, 2020, 05:11:38 PM »
Hedge Fund favorite which has official blown up ... I picked up some spec shares today.  Amazing how some of these guys can be so wrong with their analysis.  Someone wrote a huge report saying NYSE: I was worth over $80+ ... 

Calling all deep value investors?  5 to 1 upside/downside ?? 


Scunny Bunny

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 59
Re: I - Intelsat
« Reply #11 on: January 30, 2020, 05:19:30 PM »
Very game with upwards of $14bn of debt & $435m mv of equity.... plus limited compensation for C-Band & negative FCF.

ValueMaven

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 499
Re: I - Intelsat
« Reply #12 on: January 30, 2020, 05:34:00 PM »
hence why I called it a lottery ticket - any change to some of the recent suggested news flow and this thing zooms (righly or wrongly)

Castanza

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1791
Re: I - Intelsat
« Reply #13 on: January 30, 2020, 05:47:22 PM »
Is this going to become the new FNMA and FMCC thread? Looks like a really interesting situation. Thanks for bringing this to light!

Edit: Was reading a bit more about this. Essentially the government is coming in and claiming "national security" to seize Intelsats assets at bargain basement prices (1-5B vs the estimated value of 40-80B). How would this not go to court?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/intelsat-bonds-fall-on-fears-over-fcc-auction-plan-11580408121

"We’ve tried to establish for the record that the actual value of the spectrum is between $43 billion and $77 billion,” said Dianne VanBeber, vice president for investor relations at Intelsat. “We have a fiduciary duty to our stakeholders and can’t surrender the value of our rights for less than the market value.”

"That's right. The uncertainty regarding the spectrum 'product' would result in a very low price achieved by the government. Further, how would capital markets underwrite investments in spectrum-related companies when their rights are uncertain?" Twitter - Dianne VanBeber

https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/senators-introduce-c-band-legislation-to-prevent-windfall-for-satellite-companies
« Last Edit: January 31, 2020, 05:57:59 AM by Castanza »
Core: MSFT | GOOG | AAPL | INTC | PLTR | CMCSA | VZ | RTX | MSGS | BATRK | WFC | USB | PNC | BAC | TPL | PPL | PCYO | GRBK | PLNT | ATCO | ESPO | HACK

Funny Money: NIO

mwtorock

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 230
Re: I - Intelsat
« Reply #14 on: January 31, 2020, 06:25:46 AM »
It seems one of bull argument is about clearing the C-Band. Quoted from Bloomberg:

Setting the bandwidth up for terrestrial use, a process known as clearing, “is an enormously complex undertaking, especially while ensuring the networks don’t have any service interruptions."

Without the participation of satellite companies like Intelsat and SES SA, it’s “impossible to imagine” the C-Band being freed up.

If the satellite companies don’t like what they get, they’ll “say we’re not going to do the clearing”. That would force the FCC to delay the auction or conduct it with “an incredible amount of uncertainty” about how the spectrum would be cleared, likely resulting in auction proceeds at a fraction of the amount expected under the original plan.

blainehodder

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 420
Re: I - Intelsat
« Reply #15 on: January 31, 2020, 09:06:38 AM »
It seems one of bull argument is about clearing the C-Band. Quoted from Bloomberg:

Setting the bandwidth up for terrestrial use, a process known as clearing, “is an enormously complex undertaking, especially while ensuring the networks don’t have any service interruptions."

Without the participation of satellite companies like Intelsat and SES SA, it’s “impossible to imagine” the C-Band being freed up.

If the satellite companies don’t like what they get, they’ll “say we’re not going to do the clearing”. That would force the FCC to delay the auction or conduct it with “an incredible amount of uncertainty” about how the spectrum would be cleared, likely resulting in auction proceeds at a fraction of the amount expected under the original plan.

The problem with that argument is the C band can be cleared up if legislation dictates it so. Sat companies do not own the rights to C band.  Senators can do whatever they want. What are the odds Sat companies are well compensated for clearing the space? I don't no, but it is absolutely clear it could be well below any assumption of market value. Once again, the sat companies have no ownership and therefore there is no guarantee for fair compensation. Every penny may go to the treasury.
« Last Edit: January 31, 2020, 09:09:54 AM by blainehodder »

Castanza

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1791
Re: I - Intelsat
« Reply #16 on: February 01, 2020, 05:54:14 PM »
It seems one of bull argument is about clearing the C-Band. Quoted from Bloomberg:

Setting the bandwidth up for terrestrial use, a process known as clearing, “is an enormously complex undertaking, especially while ensuring the networks don’t have any service interruptions."

Without the participation of satellite companies like Intelsat and SES SA, it’s “impossible to imagine” the C-Band being freed up.

If the satellite companies don’t like what they get, they’ll “say we’re not going to do the clearing”. That would force the FCC to delay the auction or conduct it with “an incredible amount of uncertainty” about how the spectrum would be cleared, likely resulting in auction proceeds at a fraction of the amount expected under the original plan.

The problem with that argument is the C band can be cleared up if legislation dictates it so. Sat companies do not own the rights to C band.  Senators can do whatever they want. What are the odds Sat companies are well compensated for clearing the space? I don't no, but it is absolutely clear it could be well below any assumption of market value. Once again, the sat companies have no ownership and therefore there is no guarantee for fair compensation. Every penny may go to the treasury.

The contract between the FCC and the companies who purchased the licenses can not be violated. There are terms for “non-interference” meaning the FCC has the right to dictate who can use the C, but they don’t have the right to circumvent contracts. That’s a pretty dangerous precedent to set. Think how many industries rely on licenses to operate.

Core: MSFT | GOOG | AAPL | INTC | PLTR | CMCSA | VZ | RTX | MSGS | BATRK | WFC | USB | PNC | BAC | TPL | PPL | PCYO | GRBK | PLNT | ATCO | ESPO | HACK

Funny Money: NIO

Castanza

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1791
Core: MSFT | GOOG | AAPL | INTC | PLTR | CMCSA | VZ | RTX | MSGS | BATRK | WFC | USB | PNC | BAC | TPL | PPL | PCYO | GRBK | PLNT | ATCO | ESPO | HACK

Funny Money: NIO

ValueMaven

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 499
Re: I - Intelsat
« Reply #18 on: February 02, 2020, 04:28:34 PM »
WOW!  What a find...thank you!

Bucket up

shamelesscloner

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 23
Re: I - Intelsat
« Reply #19 on: November 19, 2020, 01:49:28 PM »
What do folks think of David Tepper buying into Intelsat earlier this year? Where do you value this company now?