dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
26
share rss forum feed

Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Can't Be!

How can they all of a sudden offer such speeds?!?!?!? They clearly are going bankrupt and are trying to offload all their packets now for as cheap as they can for tax reasons.

Oh that's right, just the threat of competition brings good things to those that get to be in a (threatened) competitive market. Google in all of their evilness surely is not responsible for such good things in Austin. That thought is preposterous I tell you!

elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·EarthLink
Grande is privately held, so they're free from the much-maligned pressure to make the quarterly report, but it also means we have even less insight into their financial health.

They could very well be in trouble.
Moody's isn't very keen on their debt.

Not that it bothers me one bit - so long as they're using their own (investor) money, they're welcome to take their chances and roll out fiber at $65/month.


SRFireside

join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX
reply to Skippy25
Grande has always been a very good competitor in Austin. Their price point and bandwidth options were pretty impressive. I just now checked out their website and they lowest tier is 15Mb speeds for $35. 50Mbps, 75Mbps and 110Mbps (at $65) pretty much puts any competition to shame.

All they are doing is upping the ante to reflect the local competition. They are nowhere near as stingy as AT&T, TimeWarner and the rest when it comes to their broadband offerings.

I remember using them when I was in Austin back in 2001. I was living cheap back then, but was still able to get 384k service and a full cable TV channel lineup for about $35 if I recall. This was back when 56k dialup was still being offered at $20.

Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
reply to elray
So what you are saying is that it is the stock holders of our major ISP's that are holding up investment into the future of their companies......

Who would of thunk it?

elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·EarthLink

1 edit
Nope. Shareholders are the greatest source of that investment capital. They don't hold it up, they enable it. The quarterly filing simply means that the company is more closely scrutinized.

Privately held firms are simply able to take greater risks, including those which imperil the future, the very existence of the company. I don't know, in the case of Grande - this appears to be a small cherry-picked market segment, so they might be able to absorb a loss, but again, Moody's doesn't seem to approve.

Again, it doesn't bother me either way. If they go belly-up, the fire-sale will generally result in cheap assets for whoever takes over, which artificially lowers the cost to the consumer, at nominal cost to the treasury and the bondholders who believed in them.

If they profit, selling $65 FTTH against Google and AT&T, that's fantastic, more power to them.

Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
You are delusional. Shareholders, the very first people to buy a companies offering, "may" contribute to capital investment. Beyond that, the money goes between one investor to another and the company sees none of it. The only ones that see money are the investment firms and the seller. If a company offers 1 billion stocks for $1, they will get $1Billion dollars from the buyers. That stock can then go up to $1000 a piece in 6 months and that company will see $0.