After months of aggressive moves by T-Mobile US to lure customers from other carriers, No. 2 operator AT&T Inc counter-attacked on January 3 by offering to pay consumers to switch from T-Mobile. Days later, No. 3 ranked Sprint Corp promised big discounts for family and friend groups. On Wednesday, T-Mobile upped the ante, saying it would pay hefty exit costs for converts. The moves by Sprint and AT&T come after No. 4 U.S. operator T-Mobile, a long-time industry straggler, was able to report three full quarters of customer growth after four years of losses. While discounts are always welcomed by consumers, the intensifying competition is a new challenge to a U.S. industry long used to imposing its will on consumers, and analysts fear it could result in the loss of billions of dollars of revenue. How sad is it that articles such as this are able to be written? Do you mean to say that due to actual competition between the wireless carriers for the first time in years that their record profits are at risk of declining? Ridiculous. Furthermore, how sad is it that Ms. Carew is able to write an article like this couched around the idea that Wall Street is concerned, yet very little mention about how this could be a massive benefit to customers.
In an article written by Sanjay Bhatt, for The Seattle Times:
One guy rooting for the smaller institutions is Tom Behan, a Vietnam veteran and retired marketing executive in Seattle whose daughter lost her home to a bank foreclosure during the recession. Since early October, Behan has protested six days a week during the lunch hour outside Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo and other bank branches in Seattle, holding a sign encouraging passers-by to join a credit union. (He's a BECU member.) After one bank told the police he was trespassing, he armed himself with a copy of the city code on trespassing and right-of-way maps from the city, county and local archives. "I had to prove to the Seattle Police Department that the sidewalk was public and did not belong to the bank," said Behan, 66, who has a pacemaker. "I don't have a hell of a lot of stamina, but I have a lot of animosity against the banks." I guess I shouldn't be surprised.
Andy M. Zaky, writing for Bullish Cross:
If it then carried that 2013 0.00% growth rate into 2014, the company would have $230 billion in cash or just about $250 in cash per share. 2015 it would have $300 billion in cash or $330 in cash per share. Again, that assumes 0.00% growth for 2013, 2014, and 2015. So if Apple grows 0.00%, then by 2015, it will have more cash per share than the stock is trading at today. While the whole world already discusses Apple's massive cash holding, they have absolutely no clue just how major that cash flow is going to actually be. If Apple is trading anywhere close to where it's trading today 2-years from now, it would be able to take itself private with very little outside help. Just something to think about as wall street debates its daily moronic bullshit about whether there's an iPhone delay, whether Steve Jobs is coming back or whether iPad production is hurt as a result of some explosion in china. Indeed.