More waivers to meet build out requirements from D2D from a company that is definitely building a large terrestrial network over the next 2-3 years. $SPCX

A JV between $CMCSA $CHTR and $SPCX would be interesting.

Musk says it will take 2 or 3 years to rollout the terrestrial network. If that's the case, $SPCX shouldn't be pushing so much for buildout requirements to be met by D2D. He's going to have a full network over 80k sites in ~2.5 years anyways.

Interesting part of $VZ transcript this morning talking about $SPCX plans for terrestrial network: "First of all, I appreciate the question and the concern. I'll just start off by saying my operating philosophy in general is to be very thoughtful, the analytic and to never take anything for granted. I always have my eyes wide open. Clearly, the tech and the wireless landscape is rapidly evolving, and we need to rapidly evolve along with that. That's why I've been so demanding from everyone at Verizon. I mean I just don't want us to get incrementally better. I want us to leapfrog, I want us to think about not improving by 10%, which is great, but that we improve by 10x. How do we do that in months, not years? And I'm pushing hard on everyone. So that we can shape the market and not react to it. And I want to be sure that we're always in a position to play to win. I also operate under the assumption that everything SpaceX says they will do, they will do, and that they will execute flawlessly. That's my operating assumption on it. I think assume anything else makes no sense from my perspective. And everything that we've seen so far, all of their announcements, everything we're hearing in the market, and I'll talk about that in just a second, is, so far, the path that we've basically predicted that they would do. We always knew that they needed a terrestrial network to have any chance at providing a competitive service. I don't really need to rereview the satellite beam physics, but just suffice it to say that without a terrestrial network, their addressable market for broadband services is relatively small. It's in very rural areas. And their service just can't compete with the terrestrial network. In suburban and urban areas where like 98% of our revenues are, we're somewhere between 100 to 1,000 times more efficient than they are. And when you think about wireless, it's even more difficult with them to compete on a satellite basis. So I think that SpaceX realizes this, and they're exploring a potential path to creating a terrestrial network. It's not surprising. They said it on their call. So I think we should take it quite seriously. And from what we see and what we hear in the market, because there are no secrets in the market, we know exactly what they're going to do. We know what their RFIs are. We know who they're talking to on towers. We know who they're talking to put terrestrial equipment in place. Like inside the industry, we know exactly what they're thinking about doing it. And if they build a terrestrial network, it will basically look and feel like every other network, right? There's no magic wand. There's no secret sauce. There's no shortcut. There's no radically lower structural cost advantage. If they build one, they're going to look at 65,000 to 80,000 macro sites. They're going to need backhaul, some combination of fiber and maybe some satellite. They're going to need RAN. They're going to need a tremendous amount of spectrum. And assuming that's the case and assuming they try to go do that, it's going to take a minimum of 4 to 6 years to fully build that out. It's going to cost hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars, I assume somewhere between $300 billion and $0.5 trillion over the next, like, 7 or 8 years. And then they need to build retail, customer service, back-office systems, et cetera. And all of that gets them basically the same network and saving capabilities and same cost structure as what we have today. And then sometime over the next 4 to 6 years, they have the possibility of becoming the sixth, not the fourth, the sixth competitor in the market. And frankly, at that point, welcome the opportunity to compete against them. It's very hard to throw a punch against something that doesn't exist. But once they come into the market, we will be ferociously competitive. We already have America's best network in terms of coverage, performance and reliability. We already compete against 3. I mean 2 of our competitors out there offer free wireless service, and we are not only competing extremely well, but we're now holding share and beginning to gain share. And you can sure, over these next 3 to 5 years or 6 years, we're not going to be standing still. I mean 4 to 5 years from now, we will be 2 to 3 generations better than where we are today. We'll have high-speed broadband, gig-plus coverage across the country with our millimeter wave, which has now become this tremendous advantage for us with 1,700 megahertz of millimeter wave, 2x that of any of our competitors. We'll put that and deploy that we are ahead of most people and already experimenting with what 6G applications will look like. We are going to have a host of AI-enabled new value propositions using our data, our information, our AI tech stack to create new products, new services to be able to play into edge computing and all of the applications around that, whether it be robotics or agents. In 3 to 5 years, most of our base will be fully bundled and we will be massively more efficient and massively more optimized in terms of our cost structure. And of course, AI Connect is going to be a major business for us. So we are more than ready to compete on our network, on our value prop on our service and much more. And there's no reason to think that with the same network, same cost structure, that we won't be very successful by continuing to grow our business and compete strongly. I do think there is a role for satellite, for sure. In remote areas, it's a great service for those customers. And I do think there are ways that we can work together, either directly or through our JV, with satellite providers, to provide a complementary service and a differentiated value proposition. I will say, and I'll repeat it again, that there are no back doors to any of our MVNO agreements. And I see absolutely no benefit whatsoever to extending an MVNO deal to any satellite provider. I don't buy into the idea of this prisoner's dilemma. That's ridiculous. There is no benefit to Verizon extending an MVNO deal. And we look forward to being able in 4 to 6 years to finally punch back, and we'll punch back hard when that happens."

For a company the everyone says will be installing low-band spectrum on 80k towers, $SPCX is sure focused on making sure that they can meet buildout requirements through D2D... $CCI $AMT

$CATX is an interesting situation. Down ~50% over the last two days.

Results out

Cell towers really booming on this $SPCX report. $CCI $AMT $SBAC

.MD is the new .PDF

Musk: "Maybe it's a small possibility at this point, but it's not zero, of having -- of SpaceX having over 20 gigawatts of Super Intelligence compute online next year. A small possibility, but it used to be zero, it's not zero anymore." $SPCX

$SPCX The Starlink Mobile plans are certainly hard to follow. Femtocell, towers, WiFi... I am looking forward to the Musk call on the pieces that we don't know about yet.

Pretty crazy how the market is only a few percentage points off ATH but so many stocks on my watchlist are down >50%. Telecom and space especially have been hit bad. $CABO $CCOI $ASTS $RKLB

I guess $RKLB was expensive at $150. 🤷‍♂️ Nailed the top.

Programming is the largest token use case for AI. If software is dead, will people continue to build software? 🤔 Will everyone build their own personal software or will everything be done within ChatGPT?

Many investors used to think $CABO had a good management team when the stock was going up.

I do not believe $SPCX will roll out a significant terrestrial network. That is my opinion today.

WSJ reporting $SPCX will pay $8b cash for the 800 MHz. $ECHO had the option to buy it for $3.59 billion. Large valuation disconnect to $ATEX 900 MHz spectrum current trading valuation.

It seems to me that this is a pressure tactic to get an MNO to agree to a deal with $SPCX. The 800 MHz spectrum they bought does not solve the penetration issue. This will give you a signal indoors, but a pretty crappy one. Is $SPCX going to buy more midband now and become a full-blown terrestrial carrier? Will it make some sort of deal with cable? If this was really the plan, why didn't they just buy all of $ECHO?

$SBAC now +13% AH. Not only does this $SPCX news appear to allay fears that towers are getting replaced by SpaceX, it also appears to indicate that there is the potential for a new 4th carrier that will likely use towers. One with MUCH deeper pockets than the last one that tried...

$SPCX announced it will build a terrestrial layer with 800 MHz. Cell towers +4% AH. $AMT $CCI $SBAC $AD It's very interesting that Musk chose not to buy the $ECHO network. 🤔