I've seen it many times: a cool product that finds few customers. That seems to be the case with Helio's mobile phones. Basically, customers didn't want to pay premium prices for such things as access to MySpace and other new-fangled features.
It's a tough lesson (and expensive). SK Telecom and EarthLink (NASDAQ: ELNK) formed Helio as a joint venture in 2005 with start-up capital of $440 million. SK Telecom invested an additional $270 million in the venture last year.
Yet, in the end, Helio turned out to be a big dud. That is, the company sold out for a measly $39 million to Virgin Mobile USA (NYSE: VM). In fact, the space is full of dead companies, such as Disney Mobile and Amp'd Mobile.
I had a chance to interview Frank Dickson, the co-founder and chief research officer of MultiMedia Intelligence. According to him:
Honestly, the merger is a desperate move. Overall, the MVNO (Mobile Virtual Network Operator) model makes sense in a limited number of situations. For example, if a cable MSO wants to leverage its customer base and offer triple or quadruple play offering, there is a clear distinctive competency and the MVNO route makes sense.
The week was full of news about handsets. Sprint (NYSE: S) said it would launch an "iPhone killer," a $129 phone from Samsung. Many brokerage firms upped estimates for Apple (NYSE: AAPL) iPhone sales as it appears that the demand for the new 3G version will be tremendous. Nokia (NYSE: NOK) launched its E71 and E66 high-end handsets. Lehman upped its targets for earnings estimates at RIM (NASDAQ: RIMM), the maker of the BlackBerry.
And Motorola (NYSE: MOT) shares hit a five-year low at $7.61. The company did not launch any new products. No one on Wall Street upped forecasts on the company. All that was clear is that the firm is taking a worse beating as each month passes.
Motorola plans to spin-off its handset business and keep its home networking and enterprise operations. The entire company has a market cap of under $18 billion now.
Based on Motorola's last 10-Q, the two units the company is keeping have an annual revenue run-rate of over $16 billion. They should make about $1.7 billion in operating profit in 2008. By many measures, together they would be worth $18 billion on their own.
It is a spectacular sign of how bad things are at Motorola's handset business, that, as an enterprise, it may have no financial value at all. Its market share is dropping too fast and its is losing too much money.
MOT may not even be able to give the operation away for nothing.
Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 247wallst.com.
Ah WorldCom. Aside from its storied history as one of the world's biggest accounting frauds, I remember it as my first cell phone company. My husband bought me a WorldCom phone as a gift and it turned out to not only have terrible service, but ridiculous billing practices, and we ended up paying to get out of the contract as I recall. I remember thinking that there was something really wrong with that company and later wishing I had pursued it as an investigative story, since I was then a writer at BusinessWeek Online and WorldCom was a hot stock.
But no, I never got onto such a story. In fact, I followed WorldCom's stock with interest since I had picked it in an office stock-picking contest years earlier and felt some satisfaction at its meteoric rise through the 1990s (even though I never actually owned the shares; it was just part of a fantasy portfolio).
But here's the WorldCom history that is worth remembering now: WorldCom started as Long Distance Discount Services (LDDS) in 1983. It changed its name to WorldCom in 1995. A series of mega-mergers transformed the company, culminating in its $40 billion deal for MCI. It was rechristened MCI WorldCom in 1998, the second largest long-distance calling company. The following year, just as it announced a deal with Sprint (now Sprint Nextel (NYSE: S)) that never came to fruition, the telecom industry started a prolonged downturn.
Kevin Martin, the chairman of the FCC, has made it his business to try to cut the costs that customers are charged when they cancel their service before the end of a contract. According toThe New York Times, "Mr. Martin's plan would require that fees be related to the actual cost of the phones. A fee for a $50 phone would be higher than for a $5 phone." It would also take into account how many months a customer had left on a contract.
The cellular companies, including Sprint (NYSE: S), spend a lot of money on their poor customer service. They ought to have a chance to get some of that back when a customer walks. It probably also costs the firms money to reconnect all of those dropped calls.
The cellular companies do have initial costs to set-up service and billing when a new customer comes on board. The Martin plan does not appear to take that into account.
Just because the service is no good does not mean that the cellular provider is not out a lot of money to provide it.
When Sprint Nextel Corp. (NYSE: S) releases its own Apple, Inc. (NASDAQ: AAPL) iPhone competitor this month, all eyes will be on deck to see if this new phone can save the Titanic that is Sprint from sinking. The wireless carrier has been in terrible shape for over a year now, losing millions of customers and just struggling to maintain its customers. Although an Apple iPhone -- by its nature -- invites copycats from all over the globe, this new handset from Sprint looks like the most serious effort yet.
The wrinkle is this: Sprint will require a calling and data plan of at least $69.99 per month to activate and use the new Samsung Instinct phone. There are so many data features that Sprint decided to tack on quite a hefty minimum monthly bill. Hey, AT&T, Inc. (NYSE: T) is doing this with the iPhone, right? This may be the start of a new trend: minimum monthly plans (high minimums) for all these new whiz-bang phones soon to be released. Will customers bite, or will they choose phones with similar capabilities but without the large minimum monthly charge? We'll soon see.
Sprint believes the target customer for the new Samsung Instinct phone may have concerns about being "nickel and dimed" to death on all the charges needed to make the phone work with all its functionality intact. So, the carrier decided to have a flat-rate price and get rid of those concerns. Fair enough -- but don't automatically force the customer to a $70 plan. In Sprint's defense, that larger minimum hasn't swayed iPhone customers from buying gobs of that device with AT&T. But again, this is no iPhone -- it just looks like one. It appears to be packed with many more features than the iPhone, but just as thousands of competitors before it have shown, Apple is Apple -- nobody else is. Can it save Sprint? Hardly.
Since its IPO last year, the shares of Virgin Mobile USA Inc. (NYSE: VM) have imploded -- going from $15.69 to a low of $1.90. The stock has lifted somewhat lately though, and is now trading at $3.43.
Actually, the company has confirmed that it is talking with Helio -- majority owned by SK Telecom (NYSE: SKM) -- about a possible merger.
Both companies are known as mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs), which means that they provide cell services by using another carrier's infrastructure. Unfortunately, the MVNO model has been extremely difficult to pull off (in fact, there have been several high-profile blow-ups in the space, such as Amp'd).
So will a combination help things?
To get some perspective on things, I had a chance to interview Frank Dickson, who is the Chief Research Officer at MultiMedia Intelligence. According to him:
But when Sprint reports its first-quarter results tomorrow, analysts polled by Thomson Financial expect the company to report earnings of a mere penny per share, down from the same period in 2007 when it earned 18 cents per share, and from the previous quarter's 21 cents per share. The company has beat quarterly estimates over the past year -- by 17.3% in the fourth quarter -- and it certainly has plenty of room to best analysts' low expectations for this past quarter.
Overland Park, Kansas-based Sprint Nextel operates a nationwide digital wireless network with more than 50 million subscribers. In the past year, Sprint's revenues were $40.1 billion. The company's long-term EPS growth forecast is 8.22%, which is less than the 8.67% of rival Verizon (NYSE: VZ) and the S&P 500. The consensus recommendation of analysts continues to be to hold Sprint.
Shares closed Friday at $9.39, up from a 52-week low of $5.48 in March, but still well off the 52-week high of 23.42 last June.
For news that could influence these results, see BloggingStocks' Sprint coverage.
As Tom mentioned earlier, Sprint Nextel Corp. (NYSE: S) is merging its next-generation wireless assets with Clearwire Corp. (NASDAQ: CLWR) to form a new joint partnership that -- finally -- will create a high-speed wireless internet network that covers most of the U.S. Although Sprint's Xohm service has been decried by investors as a "non-core" asset weighing down Sprint's pocketbook, it still has enormous potential in the near future. Sprint's not in terribly good shape -- but it does have vision. Of course, vision and execution are two different things.
So, it is pleasing to think that if the new Sprint-Clearwire venture can build out is national presence successfully and capture customers tired of limited high-speed internet service, the world will be its oyster. Of course, other companies are contributing to the venture as well, including Google, Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG). Why would Google want to put money into this? Because this could be Google's most important investment ever.
Bypassing the telephone and cable companies that have a stranglehold on most of the high-speed internet business in the U.S. has long been the dream of Google. It doesn't want a middleman in the way of it connecting consumers and businesses with the information they seek. Although Google wasn't successful in the recent FCC radio auctions (maybe by design), finding a way to provide internet service directly to its customer base would give Google on a much more powerful perch than it has even today. Google could even buy the new Clearwire partnership outright once it's established.
I think they're starting to get giddy in the Google board room.
After hitting a one-year high of $46.24 in October, the stock hit a one-year low of $33.00 in March. This morning, VZ opened at $38.47. So far today the stock has hit a low of $38.09 and a high of $38.72. As of 12:10, VZ is trading at $38.67, down $0.22 (-0.6%). The chart for VZlooks bullish and steady, while S&P gives the stock a positive 4 STARS (out of 5) buy rating.
For a bearish hedged play on this stock, I would consider a July bear-call credit spread above the $42.50 range. A bear-call credit spread is an options position that combines the purchase and sale of call options to hedge risk in case the stock doesn't do what you think but still leverage nice returns. For this particular trade, we will make an 8.7% return in ten weeks as long as VZ is below $42.50 at July expiration. Verizon would have to rise by more than 9% before we would start to lose money. Learn more about this type of trade here.
I've seen it many times: a cool product that finds few customers. That seems to be the case with 
The week was full of news about handsets. 
This post is part of a series on some of the most memorable 
When 
Since its IPO last year, the shares of 
Despite .gif){kind=logo}
As 
Comfort Zone Investing: Exploit volatility with constant dollar investing
Merck earnings preview: No miracles expected
Apple reports Monday -- buy AAPL before earnings?
