 levI think there is a target on my backPremium,Ex-mod 2002-08
join:2001-05-30
Chicago, IL
kudos:2
 ·AT&T Midwest
| reply to Camelot One
Re: Our new "customer retention plan"..... For over a year now, U-verse has been getting primary focus in AT&T. AT&T's decided that's where the future is, and they're putting eggs into that basket. Traditional POTS/DSL is a low priority, and seen as lower profit.
The problem is, U-verse is deployed in far too few places.
Unless they're actually losing money on DSL customers, AT&T is driving away a revenue source, and probably a few POTS accounts in the process. Let's see what things look like in a year.
With the Dow at 8635, AT&T closed at 28.15. Anyone want to post yesterday's closing numbers for Comcast, Verizon, Charter, TWC, and Qwest? |
|
 Doctor FourMy other vehicle is a TARDISPremium
join:2000-09-05
Dallas, TX | said by lev:With the Dow at 8635, AT&T closed at 28.15. Anyone want to post yesterday's closing numbers for Comcast, Verizon, Charter, TWC, and Qwest? Comcast - CMCSA - 16.16
Verizon - VZ - 33.19
Charter - CHTR - 0.168
Time Warner Cable - TWC - 20.80
Qwest - Q - 3.03
Looks like VZ is doing the best, share price-wise, of the bunch.
--
"The trouble with computers, of course, is that they are very sophisticated idiots." - Doctor Who (from Robot)
|
|
|
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | Market cap is more relevant than share price.
T = $165.89B
VZ = $94.28B
CMCSA = $46.54B
TWC = $20.32B
Q = $5.16B
CHTR = $69.25M |
|
levI think there is a target on my backPremium,Ex-mod 2002-08
join:2001-05-30
Chicago, IL
kudos:2 Reviews:
·AT&T Midwest
| The reason I chose stock price over market cap is that I'm expecting AT&T to perform more poorly in a year than now relative to the rest of the market.
Also, stock price reflects investors' belief in value based on performance.
I'm saving the link to this thread in my calendar for both June 1, 2009 and December 1, 2009. Let's see what all these numbers look like then. |
|
 jsinaikoPremium
join:2001-04-25
Chicago, IL
 ·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Midwest
| Would you say the disparity between ATT and Verizon involves the fairly low penetration of U-Verse vs. the longer reach and higher deployment levels of FIOS?
As least in terms of what investors are thinking?
--
Illegitimati non carborundum
|
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | reply to lev
I don't believe T will perform much worse than its peers over the next year. said by lev:Also, stock price reflects investors' belief in value based on performance. Only for the investor sheep. Educated investors will look at many different aspects of a company before investing. A $20/share stock can be much more valuable than a $50/share stock. |
|
| reply to openbox9
said by openbox9:Market cap is more relevant than share price. T = $165.89B VZ = $94.28B CMCSA = $46.54B TWC = $20.32B Q = $5.16B CHTR = $69.25M Especially with telecoms enterprise value is more relevant than market cap. |
|
| reply to lev
said by lev:The reason I chose stock price over market cap is that I'm expecting AT&T to perform more poorly in a year than now relative to the rest of the market. Also, stock price reflects investors' belief in value based on performance. I'm saving the link to this thread in my calendar for both June 1, 2009 and December 1, 2009. Let's see what all these numbers look like then. For what yuo suggest market cap or enterprise value would be the better guage than stock price. Stock price is meaningless. a company with 50 shares trading at $2 is not worth twice as much as a company with 100 shares trading at $1 |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | reply to captain456
said by captain456 :
[Especially with telecoms enterprise value is more relevant than market cap. Ok. Like I stated previously, there are many aspects of a company that should be examined before making a financial investment.
EV
T = $241.07B
VZ = $137.38B
CMCSA = $77.31B
TWC = $32.49B
Q = $18.55B
CHTR = $20.60B |
|
 r81984Fair and BalancedPremium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T DSL Service
 ·row44
| reply to lev
said by lev:Also, stock price reflects investors' belief in value based on performance. HA
Stock price has nothing to do with a company's value, performance, or anything realistic.
Stock prices are just numbers made up to gamble with.
--
For those of you playing a drinking game.... MY FRIENDS! |
|
Reviews:
 ·Hargray Cable
| said by r81984:said by lev:Also, stock price reflects investors' belief in value based on performance. HA Stock price has nothing to do with a company's value, performance, or anything realistic. Stock prices are just numbers made up to gamble with. No not made up numbers. A true base is P/E. Simple way to think of it is how much would you pay for the company? Would you buy a company thats profit the next year would pay off what you paid for the company? Yes you would. Next question is how many years would it take to pay off your orginal investment? 10 years sound reasonable? 15? 20? A high P/E ratio is used for companies that are growing profits because they will pay off quicker then a company that has flat profits. Flat profits will get you a lower P/E than a growth copmpany.
There are other things involved but the numbers aren't made up. |
|
r81984Fair and BalancedPremium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T DSL Service
·row44
| Nope they are based on nothing more than what someone is willing to pay to gamble with.
Why do you think all the stocks crashed, no one wants to buy stock so the price tanks.
Basically you can say it based on demand of stock buyers, but really I say its just what gamblers are willing to pay in a russian roulette. Everyone pays more than the last guy until someone does not want to pay a higher price and that guy gets screwed. The price goes down, that guy looses money and it starts all over again.
The stock market is no different than going to Vegas.
--
For those of you playing a drinking game.... MY FRIENDS! |
|
