I may not have an MBA, but this seems a bit pricy.

[theNEOone]

Originally posted by: UncleWai
$800 million worth of fiber lines don't go disappear after the company pays for it, it's an asset to the company.

that really makes no difference in this case, because verizon doesn't have a plan to sell its fiber optics in the foreseeable future. it may be 40 years after they sell their fiber optic capabilies, at which time the value of the asset has declined nearly to 0. if verizon's plan was to use the fiber optics and sell within 5 years (and you could accurately predict its future value) then you would use the projected sales price in your profit analysis, but because verizon would probably keep the "wires" indefinitely, it really doesn't affect the bottom line.

basically, you're mixing up a cash flow analysis with something that affects the balance sheet. on your balance sheet you would have a loss of $800 million in assets (the money you paid for the new fiber optic system) and a gain in your fixed assets (the actual fiber optic system). if you borrow the money, the scenario would have an extra consideration, but the bottom line is the same - you zero out. however, that asset you now hold will generate cash over the future, which is coming from services that asset provides. in some cases you might consider the final sale as one of the avenues of cash flow, but that's not the case here.


=|

 

[AFB]

Originally posted by: theNEOone

Originally posted by: UncleWai
$800 million worth of fiber lines don't go disappear after the company pays for it, it's an asset to the company.

that really makes no difference in this case, because verizon doesn't have a plan to sell its fiber optics in the foreseeable future. it may be 40 years after they sell their fiber optic capabilies, at which time the value of the asset has declined nearly to 0. if verizon's plan was to use the fiber optics and sell within 5 years (and you could accurately predict its future value) then you would use the projected sales price in your profit analysis, but because verizon would probably keep the "wires" indefinitely, it really doesn't affect the bottom line.

basically, you're mixing up a cash flow analysis with something that affects the balance sheet. on your balance sheet you would have a loss of $800 million in assets (the money you paid for the new fiber optic system) and a gain in your fixed assets (the actual fiber optic system). if you borrow the money, the scenario would have an extra consideration, but the bottom line is the same - you zero out. however, that asset you now hold will generate cash over the future, which is coming from services that asset provides. in some cases you might consider the final sale as one of the avenues of cash flow, but that's not the case here.


=|

That was pretty much what I was trying to get at. Will it be more of a burden to them than a benefit.?

And yes, I suck at the computer math. I was trying to copy, paste , but I see I wasn't very accurate.

 

[toekramp]

Originally posted by: amdfanboy

Originally posted by: theNEOone

Originally posted by: UncleWai
$800 million worth of fiber lines don't go disappear after the company pays for it, it's an asset to the company.

that really makes no difference in this case, because verizon doesn't have a plan to sell its fiber optics in the foreseeable future. it may be 40 years after they sell their fiber optic capabilies, at which time the value of the asset has declined nearly to 0. if verizon's plan was to use the fiber optics and sell within 5 years (and you could accurately predict its future value) then you would use the projected sales price in your profit analysis, but because verizon would probably keep the "wires" indefinitely, it really doesn't affect the bottom line.

basically, you're mixing up a cash flow analysis with something that affects the balance sheet. on your balance sheet you would have a loss of $800 million in assets (the money you paid for the new fiber optic system) and a gain in your fixed assets (the actual fiber optic system). if you borrow the money, the scenario would have an extra consideration, but the bottom line is the same - you zero out. however, that asset you now hold will generate cash over the future, which is coming from services that asset provides. in some cases you might consider the final sale as one of the avenues of cash flow, but that's not the case here.


=|

That was pretty much what I was trying to get at. Will it be more of a burden to them than a benefit.?

And yes, I suck at the computer math. I was trying to copy, paste , but I see I wasn't very accurate.

i think you two are talking about two different points. he is saying is it worth it to the company and you are saying it's going to cost too much to the consumer. fiber optics are only limited by the hardware sending the data. while there will be some technology that will eventually surpass it, this is the way of the future. it's a smart investment that will have make me a verizon customer.

 

[AFB]

Originally posted by: toekramp

Originally posted by: amdfanboy

Originally posted by: theNEOone

Originally posted by: UncleWai
$800 million worth of fiber lines don't go disappear after the company pays for it, it's an asset to the company.

that really makes no difference in this case, because verizon doesn't have a plan to sell its fiber optics in the foreseeable future. it may be 40 years after they sell their fiber optic capabilies, at which time the value of the asset has declined nearly to 0. if verizon's plan was to use the fiber optics and sell within 5 years (and you could accurately predict its future value) then you would use the projected sales price in your profit analysis, but because verizon would probably keep the "wires" indefinitely, it really doesn't affect the bottom line.

basically, you're mixing up a cash flow analysis with something that affects the balance sheet. on your balance sheet you would have a loss of $800 million in assets (the money you paid for the new fiber optic system) and a gain in your fixed assets (the actual fiber optic system). if you borrow the money, the scenario would have an extra consideration, but the bottom line is the same - you zero out. however, that asset you now hold will generate cash over the future, which is coming from services that asset provides. in some cases you might consider the final sale as one of the avenues of cash flow, but that's not the case here.


=|

That was pretty much what I was trying to get at. Will it be more of a burden to them than a benefit.?

And yes, I suck at the computer math. I was trying to copy, paste , but I see I wasn't very accurate.

i think you two are talking about two different points. he is saying is it worth it to the company and you are saying it's going to cost too much to the consumer. fiber optics are only limited by the hardware sending the data. while there will be some technology that will eventually surpass it, this is the way of the future. it's a smart investment that will have make me a verizon customer.

But my question is will it make other people customers fast enough? Knowing Verizon, they won't advertise this enough and only the geeks will buy it.

 

[jm0ris0n]

800 million is big investment to be making right now...especially for a telco company like verizon...

 

[darkamulets]

The B-PON technology that can run on those lines is catching on real quick as of late. Especially with recent ruling by the FCC.

 

[hans007]

i'd have to say , over the 10 -20 years that im sure this fiber will be used, they will easily recoup their 800 million dollars. there are a lot of other services they can probably run on that fiber than just internet access.


i'm sure it could be used for tv, or regular phone etc as well.

 

[iwantanewcomputer]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: PoPPeR
i would be horrified if you had an MBA after reading this thread

seems about average for an MBA, actually

just argued with an mba friend about who has harder work (i'm ChemE)

 

[luvya]

Being a MBA student myself, I think it's fair to say that the burden of studying is quite heavy for someone who has a regular job already. Really, it all depends on how you want to take it, you can do a haf-ass job and still get ur degree, or you can do a lot of works and research to get ur degree...I am doing the later one though.

 

[miniMUNCH]

Originally posted by: iwantanewcomputer

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: PoPPeR
i would be horrified if you had an MBA after reading this thread

seems about average for an MBA, actually

just argued with an mba friend about who has harder work (i'm ChemE)

For his benefit I will state without proof the fundamental theorem relating engineering and business

limit of ENGINEERING as (GPA --> 0) == BUSINESS

And that includes MBA's too

I'm here at Carnegie-Mellon Univ. [studying for a Ph.D. in ChemE] which has one of the best MBA programs in the country...the classes are hard as MBA's go but they are not nearly as daunting as courses in Engineering, Physics, Chemistry, CS, or Math.

PS -- most of the folks in the MBA program here at pretty smart cookies.

 

[Svnla]

Originally posted by: PoPPeR
i would be horrified if you had an MBA after reading this thread

Don't worry, he will come to work at Enron type company...LOL. j/k

<<<<======== MBA grad.

 

[stnicralisk]

Originally posted by: luvya
Being a MBA student myself, I think it's fair to say that the burden of studying is quite heavy for someone who has a regular job already. Really, it all depends on how you want to take it, you can do a haf-ass job and still get ur degree, or you can do a lot of works and research to get ur degree...I am doing the later one though.

lat·ter

Being the second of two persons or things mentioned: Between captain and major, the latter is the higher rank. See Usage Note

Near or nearer to the end: the latter part of the book.

Further advanced in time or sequence; later: a style that has been revived in latter times.

VERSUS!

late
adj. lat·er, lat·est

Coming, occurring, or remaining after the correct, usual, or expected time; delayed: The bus is late. See Synonyms at tardy.

Beginning after or continuing past the usual or expected hour: a late breakfast; a late meeting.
Occurring at an advanced hour, especially well into the evening or night: a late movie on television; the late flight to Denver.

 

[theNEOone]

Originally posted by: stnicralisk

Originally posted by: luvya
Being a MBA student myself, I think it's fair to say that the burden of studying is quite heavy for someone who has a regular job already. Really, it all depends on how you want to take it, you can do a haf-ass job and still get ur degree, or you can do a lot of works and research to get ur degree...I am doing the later one though.

lat·ter

Being the second of two persons or things mentioned: Between captain and major, the latter is the higher rank. See Usage Note

Near or nearer to the end: the latter part of the book.

Further advanced in time or sequence; later: a style that has been revived in latter times.

VERSUS!

late
adj. lat·er, lat·est

Coming, occurring, or remaining after the correct, usual, or expected time; delayed: The bus is late. See Synonyms at tardy.

Beginning after or continuing past the usual or expected hour: a late breakfast; a late meeting.
Occurring at an advanced hour, especially well into the evening or night: a late movie on television; the late flight to Denver.

haha!

you also forgot to call him out on "half-assed" and "do a lot of work". he sounds like an int'l student though, so i'm no going to make too much of it.

as for the rest of the thread, it really makes no sense to be talking about this because you can damn well be sure of the fact that verizon has paid big bucks to some very intelligent people to determine whether or not this project is going to be profitable.


=|

 

[z0mb13]

Originally posted by: Evadman

Originally posted by: z0mb13

Originally posted by: Evadman
MBA = teh dumb. I agree with ElFenix for once.

uhhh why?

With the exception of one person, everyone I have interviewed or met that had a MBA was dumber than a box of rocks; and rocks are pretty dumb.

probably those MBA that u interviewed dont have any technical background at all

or maybe their concentration is in marketing or OB

 

[Doggiedog]

You do realize fiber optics can be used for more than just voice and data traffic don't you?

What Verizon and SBC are doing is they want you to subscribe to all their services including the upcoming video service. The only way to accomplish this is by adding high-speed (20Mbps+) lines to their customers.

So basically you can take that $75-odd per month for voice and data and tack on another $50-$100 for video services and your time to recoup your investment goes down by a lot.

What they are doing now is called the "Triple Play". Voice, Video and Data. SBC last week announced their $1.7B investment in their Triple Play network.

 

[Albis]

According to FASB, the optics line will most likely be listed as an R&amp;D expense which they will not add as an asset into their balance sheet. Even though it is counted as an expense, it is generally known to be well listed and explained in the company's footnotes. While it is an expense in the books, stock traders generally look at R&amp;D expenses as part of an asset when they do ratios for a company. So until FASB changes their rules, R&amp;D is an expense.

Just because Verizon may take awhile to recoup their costs, this may help the company in other ways and be a strategic move for the long run.

 

[Doggiedog]

Originally posted by: Albis
According to FASB, the optics line will most likely be listed as an R&amp;D expense which they will not add as an asset into their balance sheet. Even though it is counted as an expense, it is generally known to be well listed and explained in the company's footnotes. While it is an expense in the books, stock traders generally look at R&amp;D expenses as part of an asset when they do ratios for a company. So until FASB changes their rules, R&amp;D is an expense.

Just because Verizon may take awhile to recoup their costs, this may help the company in other ways and be a strategic move for the long run.

Where does it say in FASB that fiber optics is an R&amp;D expense?

Laying of fiber should be a capital expenditure which would not be counted as R&amp;D expense.

 

[puffff]

Originally posted by: theNEOone

Originally posted by: UncleWai
$800 million worth of fiber lines don't go disappear after the company pays for it, it's an asset to the company.

that really makes no difference in this case, because verizon doesn't have a plan to sell its fiber optics in the foreseeable future. it may be 40 years after they sell their fiber optic capabilies, at which time the value of the asset has declined nearly to 0. if verizon's plan was to use the fiber optics and sell within 5 years (and you could accurately predict its future value) then you would use the projected sales price in your profit analysis, but because verizon would probably keep the "wires" indefinitely, it really doesn't affect the bottom line.

basically, you're mixing up a cash flow analysis with something that affects the balance sheet. on your balance sheet you would have a loss of $800 million in assets (the money you paid for the new fiber optic system) and a gain in your fixed assets (the actual fiber optic system). if you borrow the money, the scenario would have an extra consideration, but the bottom line is the same - you zero out. however, that asset you now hold will generate cash over the future, which is coming from services that asset provides. in some cases you might consider the final sale as one of the avenues of cash flow, but that's not the case here.


=|

the fiber lines will retain their value. just like the telephone lines that were laid down many years ago and the cell phone towers that are being built now. you can hardly call those worthless assets.

 

[stnicralisk]

Maybe they finally plan on giving america the fiber speeds other countries have had for a while now! Where is 10MB internet!?!