Member Info for fleccy

"Bitcoin is too big now, bubble won't burst"

I'm sure Isaac Newton said the same thing before the South Sea Bubble burst. Who knows if Crypto mania won't replace Tulip mania, as the talking point in future years. In my opinion, Crypto currencies only have value because people say they do, just like the Emperors New Clothes were real until they weren't. Maybe I just don't understand how something created out of thin air can have any value, and since crypto currencies appear to be created willy nilly, maybe hundreds, how can they really be worth anything?

https://www.coingecko.com/en

"The Coinbase news was very interesting."

If Crypto gets flushed, the exchanges will follow them around the U Bend.

NFT's are another non sensical bubble, in my opinion.

Look on the bright side, the FTSE is already underperforming the rest of the worlds markets dramatically, think of the bargains that will appear; Truely a fill your boots opportunity should it happen.

All the articles comparing BT to the likes of CityFibre ignore BT's contribution to communications in general, and how they'll reap more profits in the Future.

"Since then BT has also started trials of a new type of hollow core optical fibre cable – Nested Anti-Resonant Nodeless Fibre (NANF) – at their BT Labs R&D facility in Adastral Park (Ipswich), which could in theory be more resistant to damage, while also delivering better performance (e.g. latency) for future broadband ISP and mobile connectivity services."

https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2021/09/bt-uk-trials-quantum-key-distribution-via-hollow-core-fibre-cable.html

"True Fleccy, but how low does the share price(s) need to go"

If you're accumulating stock, you want to buy it as cheap as possible, and Drahi secretly accumulating over 12% of BT, without any notification, proves that the rules around disclosure are easily defeated. Clearly retail purchases in Telecom stocks isn't great, which possibly gives big vested interests the opportunity to do what they want with the price.
I've heard at least two of my neighbours have invested some money into Bitcoin, which I don't really understand. The current market cap is $838,379,979,982, so over $838 Billion invested in some code that has no intrinsic value; It can't do anything in the real world, and arguably doesn't exist in the real world. Dogecoin, which started out as a joke, currently has a market cap over $30 Billion, who's really having a laugh? Should this be a crypto bubble that bursts, most of the small investors like my neighbours, will probably lose a couple of hundred, or thousand, but it appears they're currently helping inflate what I perceive as a bubble, that will only burst once the big players are out; All just my own personal opinion.

"However, just so happens there's another significant (Fibbo) level (distinct from the 200 trend) around the 150/151 area so the SP could "look" as if it's going to get worse but instead bounce off the 150/151 area instead."

Velo I'd be interested to read your views around charting and the impact of Algo trading. Since many traders use charting to govern their trades, does that make a large body of trades predictable and at the mercy of the Algo's? I realise that many algo's rely on momentum, and therefore amplify swings, having an almost steroidal affect on the movement, but the Algo's can also be used to trap the predictable short term traders. Are charts really any good in the current world of shadowy off book trades and algo's shaping movements in nano seconds?

Does anyone else think that BT's share price decline since late June is strange, considering all the speculation around BT being a takeover target?

Share price action raises lots of questions.
It isn't just BT, Vodafone's share price isn't doing well either, currently approaching 2020 low, and VOD is in the midst of a share buyback program. Why are essential stocks being pushed into the doldrums, when future growth and profits in IOT are around the corner? Could it be that the sector valuations are being purposely manipulated down, to allow big players the opportunity to carve out large holdings at a low price? Surely what I've just suggested is impossible. right? Yet Drahi managed to purchase over 12% of the company in secret, without apparently alerting the market, how does that happen?
No doubt BT will take off again at some point, it's just a matter of when the major vested interests allow it to; I'm just going to keep holding and adding until that happens. Telecom networks can survive without the FAANG's, but not the other way around.

"There's nothing wrong with the stock markets robleo mate. The FTSE 100 is still over 7000, just down a hundred and odd points from its latest high. Only dinosaurs like VOD, BATS, IMB, BT and few other high dividend payers are about to extinct."

I wouldn't invest in Tobacco companies, as I have issue with the product offerings, but they're moving into vaping technologies where there will clearly be big markets for years to come.
Listing Telecom companies along side Tobacco companies is disingenuous in my opinion, clearly they're both completely different animals. You describe Vodafone and BT as Dinosaurs, yet companies like Google, Facebook, Amazon and Netflix can't survive without them. All it would take to dent the FAANG's is changes in legislation around Net Neutrality, and they would transform into completely different beasts. By describing Telecom companies as Dinosaurs, you're completely ignoring how essential they are to modern life and business, and therefore showing a lack of understanding.
I also disagree with the statement about thee being nothing wrong with the stock markets. Have you looked at the 5 year charts, comparing the various markets? The closest market performers to the FTSE 100, over the last 5 years, is the DAX up 51.9% and the CAC up 53.81%, whereas the FTSE 100 is up a measly 4.75%; The DOW is up 90.95% and the NASDAQ a colossal 188%.

https://www.google.com/finance/quote/UKX:INDEXFTSE?sa=X&sqi=2&ved=2ahUKEwi0td-3p_nyAhWAF1kFHfmJBq4Q_AUoAXoECAEQAw&comparison=INDEXDJX%3A.DJI%2CINDEXDB%3ADAX%2CINDEXEURO%3APX1%2CINDEXNASDAQ%3A.IXIC&window=5Y

There is clearly something very wrong with the markets, and like gravity eventually brings objects down to Earth, the markets will eventually equalise. One of two things will happen, either the FTSE 100 will climb., or the other markets will fall.

"I do not think the stock will return to 300p any time soon."

Usually when people say things like that, the opposite occurs. We may see £3 in short order next year, who knows? Drahi and Höttges have both raised BT's profile recently, with Höttges's most recent statement.

“In the next 12 months something is going to happen there around this asset because the shareholder side is changing rapidly,”

I'm not sure the market knows how to read that statement, but I think the descriptive term "this asset", rather than using terminology like the company, would suggest he's only referring to DT's shareholding in BT. My guess is that DT have been approached to sell their 12%, and since DT are sitting on a massive paper loss, I suspect it would have to be for much more than the current price. Höttges has also apparently described himself as "Kingmaker", suggesting a Game of Thrones type scenario next year, whether that signals a tussle between the board and external shareholders, or a tussle between external shareholders for DT's holdings is anyone's guess.

Tim, I disagree with virtually everything you've said.

"1) Risks that come with an old company trying to modernise."

BT aren't just modernising, they are moving to a completely new access network model. BA's an airline and BT's a Telecom provider, different sectors and not comparable. Once FTTP is completed, BT will be a much slimmer company with a much cheaper to run network, and around 4/5 th's of the current building stock, which will mean much less leaseback payments.

2) "Competition. Anyone used the TalkTalk site recently?"

TalkTalk are among the most reliant ISP's on Openreach network, their margins must be pretty thin. As far as CityFibre and VMO2, it's unclear on whether they'll be able to pull in wholesale business, since Openreach are already well established. VMO2 have started out with more debt than BT, and have stated in their quarterly report that they will likely have issues raising further capital on the Bond markets; From press releases, it appears Telefonica are looking for FTTP investment partners on their behalf. CityFibre have also been looking to the Middle East for investment partners; If there was no risk there, I'm sure Goldman's would be throwing cash at them.

"3) Poor product choice."

Pretty much the same across all ISP's for product choice on FTTP. Since BT own EE outright, it gives them the flexibility to price as they see fit, and since BT own most of the Openreach infrastructure geographically, it gives them a competitive price advantage for rolling out 5G nationally. EE will see growth through mobile IOT, so EE has great potential, as do the other mobile infrastructure owners.

"4) Slow fibre roll out. Based on past performance, BT will be the slowest rolling it out and by I'm not sure they'll recoup their investment"

From what I've been reading, Openreach are rolling out FTTP faster than all the others put together. 25 million premises passed by 2026.

"5) Disruptive tech. Easy to dismiss StarLink, 6G and other next gen connecitivty tech"

We've flogged these subjects to death previously. Starlink may have uses for sparsely populated areas like the Sahara, Siberia, Alaska, and Rural Africa, etc, but it will be of little use in the UK, and there are so many limitations to providing internet via line of sight RF, like the weather for example. 6G is likely to be an extension to the 5G network, and will be used in arena's, shopping centres, etc for direct line of sight use; More like Wifi for large population areas, rather than classified as mobile. Starlink, etc presents no risk to BT's core business, since the bandwidth capability of that tech firmly places it within the Access network categories.

"6) Leadership. Can't see Philip sticking around, same with the other senior leaders."

Purely speculative, and nothing to support the view.

"Good luck with that idea and wanting to still sit on the Global Player's Top Table"

I don't hold the view that GDP is important, and I actually invite a more inward looking UK. I take the view that the rest of the world can do what it wants, and welcome the UK taking a step back from Global politics. I do believe we should be a militarily powerful country though, so I would like the UK to maintain a strong nuclear deterrent. It's only the politicians who take that view that the UK should have some sort of Global role, I take the view that we should look after ourselves and the rest should look after themselves.

"I think if you look under the surface Germany isn't quite what the book cover suggests"

I understand your point, but I'd classify Wirecard under the paper shuffling category, so not important to your average leave voter. I think people want to see a more self sufficient UK, not a country at the mercy of Global players working under a completely different set of rules.

"Brexit : "take back control".....
has turned out to mean the people have lost all of the control and put it into the hands of total incompetents"

"I am sure everyone is waiting with much eagerness as to what trade deals can be achieved by the mighty Liz Truss with the likes of India and China ( and what political trade offs we will have to give to get them.. ) ...now that we have secured the ability to export biscuits tariff free to the Aussies and New Zealanders"

Before the Brexit referendum, I had various conversations and expressed the opinion that leave would win, although media reports made me doubt my view in the days before the vote. When it comes to Brexit, I don't believe it has anything to do with the economy, as such, but more about the direction the country was and possibly still moving in. What most people want is a decent job where they can feel a sense of purpose, and my own personal view is that the UK is lacking in that type of career path. We need more decent manufacturing jobs, not paper shufflers or McDonalds servers, and then people may feel like the country is back on course.
In my opinion we need to become like Germany. who appear to have it all and seem to want the rest of the cake too. People voted for Brexit because they want change, and I believe most who voted leave did it for emotional reasons, which is why the economic arguments fell on deaf ears. All the media stories, in outlets like the Independent and Guardian, saying look at the damage Brexit is doing are ignored, as leave voters don't like the make up of the current economy anyway, so are willing to take whatever pain may result. Brexit may be a form of collective anarchism, with the motivation to shake things up regardless of the consequences.

"US, German, French, Japan, Australia ... you name them .... all markets UP ..... except, yep ... FTSE, down >1%"

Possibly partly to do with sterling outperforming against the dollar, not sure why Telecom stocks took such a hit today.

"Broadband and mobile operators have called for the freedom to allow them to charge bandwidth-heavy services such as video-on-demand providers and online games, which account for a substantial proportion of UK internet traffic."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/09/07/ofcom-eyes-break-brussels-rules-boost-broadband-firms/

"i would be careful about putting any "limitations" on what you think may or may not be possible ....you are only likely to be very surprised by the results"

I only left Telecoms in late 2019, so I have a pretty good idea of what's possible and how long it takes to roll out new technology.

" It might not be too difficult to integrate the tech into existing infrastructure."

You still have to distribute the data, requiring ever faster router/switches to cope with the amount of backplane data. The article is really about transmission speeds, not delivering data to the premise. The average capacity on a transatlantic submarine cable is around 8 terabits per fibre pair, so a system with 4 fibre pairs would currently be able to handle around 24 terabits. On a submarine cable all sorts of things come into play, like distance, noise, pre-emphasis, and dispersion. Although 319 terabits per second is impressive, it will be a long time before we see that on subsea capacity; The technology might be useful in terrestrial backbone applications, but it wont help with the Routers that form the cloud network, as they will still have to process the data at the maximum speed allowable on their backplanes/cards.

"Technology means the streaming rates needed for upload and download ..even for live streaming are not what you might expect...."

There's only so much compression you can use to reduce HD and UHD content, so the Network traffic bandwidths will increase in line with the amount of content customers subscribe too. The content providers will invest in Submarine cable capacity and backbone into the the cloud server sites, but the distribution capacity will land on the Telecom companies. 4K/UHD content needs at least 20mb/s, and the core routers will be able to efficiently distribute data to the edge routers, but millions of people watching such content will require faster high capacity routers, using more power. Imagine the whole country watching the European cup final, via the internet in 10 years time in UHD, at around 27 million households streaming 20mb/s content the network would have to continuously cope with 540,000 Petabits/s of data, and that wouldn't include other internet traffic.
By 2030, I suspect other high bandwidth applications will appear around various streaming applications and content, so it stands to reason that the content and high bandwidth application providers, who are making massive profits, should shoulder a fair share of the costs.

The days of the internet being a place where people went online to browse low bandwidth content have long since gone; The internet has transformed into a distribution platform for TV, Voice and any other high bandwidth streaming media/communications you can think of. The current net neutrality rules subsidise FAANG type companies in my opinion. It's about time Net Neutrality was reviewed, since international companies who make massive profits online don't appear to be paying their fair share of the costs, or contributing enough to local economies where they profit.

"Net neutrality review"

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/224142/call-for-evidence-net-neutrality-review.pdf

"Although Openreach is said to be the Crown Jewels and has been given an improved charge out rate in the shape of equinox, maybe it’s time to sell/offload Openreach while it’s never been so attractive and had such a good rapport with OFCOM, whilst saddling it up with its share of the pension shortfall and all of the fibre investment costs."

Larry, I don't think it's that simple. BT owns the Fibre that Openreach installs on their behalf, at a cost of £2.7 Billion last year. If Openreach was completely separated from BT, it would possibly cost BT a lot more. If it suited BT to sell Openreach tomorrow, they'd probably do it; The fact that they want to keep it close, suggests they currently need it.

"250p is fair value, £3 is wishful thinking."

What analysis do you base your 250p figure on?
Don't get me wrong, 250p would give me a profit of nearly £42,000 on my BT shares, so i'm fine with that, but I think £3 would be more realistic and would bump my profit up to nearly £80,000. I think I'll stick with £3 lol.