morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs: | AT&T greed...
AT&T' greed: it's 'Inevitable'!
 |
|
nightwalker
Nightwalker
join:1999-08-07
Appleton, WI
1 edit | Clearly they notice how much money they can make charging their cell customers for usage.
According to:
»finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=T&annual
They doubled the amount of revenue since 2006, 118 billion from 63 billion.
And their net profit after taxes was 11.9 billion (2007) verses 7.3 billion in 2006.
--
»www.reverse.net |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
| reply to morbo
said by morbo  :AT&T' greed: it's 'Inevitable'! It is called making enough money to pay back your stockholders and bondholders for the money they lent the corporation. If they pay back too little, the lenders lend their money elsewhere(called cost of capital) and the company can't expand its infrastructure. You call it greed. I call it making enough money to stay in business.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| reply to nightwalker
said by nightwalker :According to: » finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=T&annualThey doubled the amount of revenue since 2006, 118 billion from 63 billion. And their net profit after taxes was 11.9 billion (2007) verses 7.3 billion in 2006. 11.9/118=10% . Meaning that 10% goes back to the stockholders. Almost all corporations cost of capital is 10% or more. And this means that AT&T is barely making enough money to stay in business over the long haul.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
Devorius
join:2008-06-06 | Actually, aren't share payments based on profit? That would mean only 1.9B going to shareholders, with 10B net profit left over for AT&T. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| said by Devorius :Actually, aren't share payments based on profit? That would mean only 1.9B going to shareholders, with 10B net profit left over for AT&T. Some are for direct dividends to shareholders as you say. But retained profits also jack up the stock's price and that is also a return to stockholders, if they decide to sell.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
MrSpock29
join:2008-02-09
Hammonton, NJ
| reply to TKJunkMail
said by TKJunkMail :said by nightwalker :According to: » finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=T&annualThey doubled the amount of revenue since 2006, 118 billion from 63 billion. And their net profit after taxes was 11.9 billion (2007) verses 7.3 billion in 2006. 11.9/118=10% . Meaning that 10% goes back to the stockholders. Almost all corporations cost of capital is 10% or more. And this means that AT&T is barely making enough money to stay in business over the long haul. Actually, that 10% is their profit margin based on those numbers. Net profits increased 4.6 BILLION, so I am not nearly as concerned about them staying in business now, as I was several years ago when I said that if they didn't do something else (just stuck with phone), they would go out of business. They finally saw the light. The way I look at it is, earnings increased 63% (excluding any special items etc, true accounting might be different) from 2006 to 2007. |
|
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
1 edit | reply to TKJunkMail
AT&T is making plenty of money and it's increasing. Usage based revenues are totally unjustified.
If they do it it's because they simply want to gouge customers, not because it's necessary to preserve their margins. |
|
MrSpock29
join:2008-02-09
Hammonton, NJ
| said by Dogfather :AT&T is making plenty of money and it's increasing. Usage based revenues are totally unjustified. If they do it it's because they simply want to gouge customers, not because it's necessary to preserve their margins. agreed. If a company can't handle growth, then that shows poor planning.
And, anything technology related gets cheaper over time. That first VCR and video camera my parents bought around 1980 was about 2k, and didn't do nearly as much as today's technology, at 10% of the cost.
I just bought a quad core computer for $600 at newegg. I remember that IBM PC jr in 1984 that was over $1500. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
1 edit | said by MrSpock29 :said by Dogfather :AT&T is making plenty of money and it's increasing. Usage based revenues are totally unjustified. If they do it it's because they simply want to gouge customers, not because it's necessary to preserve their margins. agreed. If a company can't handle growth, then that shows poor planning. And, anything technology related gets cheaper over time. That first VCR and video camera my parents bought around 1980 was about 2k, and didn't do nearly as much as today's technology, at 10% of the cost. I just bought a quad core computer for $600 at newegg. I remember that IBM PC jr in 1984 that was over $1500. And your supposition is based on MANUFACTURED products - and NOT services. Services don't have that same price curve as manufactured devices - even in the high tech area.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
Mizzat
Will post for thumbs
Premium
join:2003-05-03
Atlanta, GA | reply to morbo
Who knew...a business trying to earn more money...
--
-M |
|
morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs: | reply to TKJunkMail
no one believes your rationale. at&t has raised rates on internet services across the board. $5/mo per customer. that's 25% increase in some cases.
they are doing fine. |
|
Mizzat
Will post for thumbs
Premium
join:2003-05-03
Atlanta, GA
 ·AT&T Southeast
| said by morbo :no one believes your rationale. at&t has raised rates on internet services across the board. $5/mo per customer. that's 25% increase in some cases. they are doing fine. I pay less now for 6Meg DSL than I did for 1.5 Meg 5 years ago. Can't say the same for cable.... |
|
morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs:
·Charter Pipeline
·AT&T Southwest
| said by Mizzat :I pay less now for 6Meg DSL than I did for 1.5 Meg 5 years ago. Can't say the same for cable.... me too. DSL was $50/month for early adopters. since that time, the price reached a low of 14.95/month and is now $19/month or more. |
|
MrSpock29
join:2008-02-09
Hammonton, NJ
| reply to TKJunkMail
said by TKJunkMail :said by MrSpock29 :said by Dogfather :AT&T is making plenty of money and it's increasing. Usage based revenues are totally unjustified. If they do it it's because they simply want to gouge customers, not because it's necessary to preserve their margins. agreed. If a company can't handle growth, then that shows poor planning. And, anything technology related gets cheaper over time. That first VCR and video camera my parents bought around 1980 was about 2k, and didn't do nearly as much as today's technology, at 10% of the cost. I just bought a quad core computer for $600 at newegg. I remember that IBM PC jr in 1984 that was over $1500. And your supposition is based on MANUFACTURED products - and NOT services. Services don't have that same price curve as manufactured devices - even in the high tech area. yes, but my point was that there are manufactured products behind the services. I was referring to things that go into the service itself. |
|
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | reply to morbo
And even cable is cheaper if you look at it on a per Mb basis.
The cost of delivering services is getting cheaper not more expensive. |
|
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
·Cox HSI
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Cox VOIP
·ViaTalk
·RoadRunner Cable
·MegaPath
·Verizon west (ex G..
·Time Warner VOIP
| reply to MrSpock29
Manufactured products behind the services are getting cheaper per performance. Also the cost of operating those products is getting cheaper as their efficiency improves.
And given how they're OUTSOURCING a good portion of "services", there is no justification for caps or price increases. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| said by Dogfather :Manufactured products behind the services are getting cheaper per performance. Also the cost of operating those products is getting cheaper as their efficiency improves. And given how they're OUTSOURCING a good portion of "services", there is no justification for caps or price increases. We will have to agree to disagree. The published SEC financial statements justify my position. I'd like to see some real financial analysis that backs your feeling that they would be just ripping you off.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | Their margins are increasing even without caps. That's all the justification I need. |
|
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
1 edit | That and their operating income was billions of dollars.
That is operating their current capacity, which isnt saturated and that is enough for them to rollout fiber to the home to a large percentage of their customers. Which would allow them to compete more, allow them to scale more, and would allow them to save even more in operations later on down the road.
The only reason they are going this route is because they have discovered they can't force the Google's to pay them, but they can force the costumers. I say force, because when they all do it through either direct or indirect collusion, you have no choice and are forced to eat it. Going after billion dollars companies that have the same access to political scumbags and lawyers isn't a good idea, so they go after the little people. |
|
