I doubt it
I have heard Sprint is going to buy out Metro Pcs.
What do you Think ?
I doubt it
nahh, but it would be much better than say, Verizon buys Metro.
rumors all rumors until there are cold hard facts who cares.
Code Name: L0GiC4L 3ViL
Status: Metro Mafia®
Quote: "Make love not war... Contribute dont leech.My insane logic gets the job done..."
evo full flash (yes mms works), samsung intercept web (ask around), moto droid full flash
Next Hijack: AFFLICTION ROM
11/4 3000th post
Seems unlikely after how hard they are fighting the AT&T-Mobile buy out.
I said this a while back .. it would give them a jump in LTE
Sent from my PC36100 using HowardForums
No. Sprint has like a billion sub carriers already ... theres no benefit ... Verizon buying Metro is more believable to me.
Would make sense to fold Cricket in as a fully owned subsidiary, like Virgin Mobile. But Virgin is already Sprint's "budget" brand. So, if Cricket got bought it might actually disappear as a brand.
Your creed may be interesting, but your deeds are much more convincing.
well don't think it won't happend but i would assume metro would decline as they are doing good in there own market..
Unless Sprint came up with a heck of a deal (>$35/share) I don't see the benefit of MetroPCS shareholders to sell.
paul k. sanchez
I think it would be more a case of Metro waiting till the right moment when Spring off-loads some of their debt after the government pays them for iDEN, and Metro either buys, or merges with Sprint. Metro has a TON of cash, and Sprint's damn near broke and still losing customers. Metro could buy, if 'ole Rogers could stay in control, and he could steer that company out of the depths of ****-dom. Sell off Clear, and stop pissing customers off, and move towards LTE, and thy could be a real force to be reckoned with.
But, I do think Metro is making an effort to shop themselves around. I think ti's the reasoning behind forcing the dealers to have planograms, suction cups instead of tape for window posters, cleaning stores up etc. Not that it's a bad thing, but it's all about branding, and if you want to make yourself look ripe to be purchased.....
I don't think this happens ...no way!! Not when At&t is going to be merging with T mobile. That instantly vaults Metro into the 4th largest carrier in the country.
With Verizon's new tiered data plans coming, lots of new customers coming Metro's way and that translates into $$$$$.
As for everyone panicking that Roger Lindquist was selling off over 45,000 shares of his stock in Metro... I say don't panic, he owns over 7,000,000 shares!!
as metro grew bigger, he legally had to sell of some of his shares, as being a CEO its illegal to actually own a majority stake in the company you control (depsnds on the size of the business, employees and profit and such)
1) CEO Roger Linquist -- who is just a hired hand -- does not now nor never has owned a majority stake in MetroPCS.
According to several respected financial sources, MetroPCS has 358.76 million shares outstanding,
and Linquist -- who has been an "officer" of the company since 2004, owns just 7 million shares.
Divide 7 (million) / 359 (million) and you will see the percentage of the company that he owns. Miniscule. He owns less than 2% of the company.
Compare that to Google co-founders s Larry Page and Sergey Brin who jointly own 59% of that public multi-billion dollar company.
Over the next five years they are cashing out some billions -- not because they are forced to, but because that's the only way they will see some real wealth instead of just "on paper". They are going from 59% to 48%. Bill Gates periodically did the same thing with his Microsoft stock -- sold batches of stock -- otherwise all his "wealth" was locked into the stock.
2) I've never heard of any law forcing CEOs to sell stock in companies (large or small) they control. I'm not saying there is not such a law, but I can't find it. I do have a degree in business but I work more in media technical operations, so maybe some law was passed in the past few years of which I am not aware. Still, I'm skeptical. I remember many moguls like Ted Turner that owned majority stakes in the companies they controlled. Richard Branson owns 51% of Virgin Air (as of Feb 2011)
But yes, knowing Linquist still owns 7 million shares and has sold only 90,000 in 2011 (so far) shows he's not "dumping" his shares. He's just exercising his option to some supplemental income. The share price has gone up due to Metro's success -- for which he can claim a lot of credit -- and he's cashing in on it.
Last edited by ChazzMatt; 07-12-2011 at 01:35 PM.
ever hear of anti-trust, and the SEC and FTO? the SEC and the FTO are the law for major compaines. they are the reason why CEO's own less then a certain amount. if they fail to do so, when yearly and quartery numbers come in, they can be held in violation.
this information is from when I was going to get a business law degree, but then realized how f'd up major corporations and the like, are, and I refused to go any further. that information is almost 10 years old, and a lot has changed, especially econmically, so my info may be a little old.