VZ, T and TMUS getting crushed on SpaceX news. Is the market overreacting?

u/RaidriarT 47 2 days ago

Completely oversold. Loaded up on Tmobile as its fundamentals are fine, but CEO is a dumbass.

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/Own_Relief_1740 OP 6 2 days ago

Why T-Mobile vs the other two? Just curious.

u/RaidriarT 19 2 days ago

I’m a subscriber and I think the service is great. Not thrilled with their anti consumer moves as of late, but it will help the bottom line

u/dogs_gt_cats 6 2 days ago

I was a 20+ year sprint customer who reluctantly got folded into TMO. I left when they forced me off of my grandfathered plan and switched to Mint, which ironically is a TMO MVNO. Still saving a butt load on the bill, and being able to pay a year in advance is fantastic.

u/[deleted] 0 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/0o0o0o0o0o0z 14 2 days ago

I’m a subscriber and I think the service is great. Not thrilled with their anti consumer moves as of late, but it will help the bottom line

They are rolling out Fiber everywhere... no one wants fucking MUSK as their phone carrier. Buy the dip if you're into telecom, no person or technology is gonna magically replace Verizon, T-Mobile, or At&T services anytime soon.

u/TheSource777 -13 2 days ago

Like how no one wants musk as airline WiFi? 🤣your eds is debilitating

u/0o0o0o0o0o0z 4 2 days ago

ok, have a good one.

u/EquivalentBorn9411 -12 2 days ago

Not everyone is a maoist musk hater.

u/0o0o0o0o0o0z 6 2 days ago

Ok.

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/crazyk4952 11 2 days ago

Musk still has plenty of fanboys. Starlink is still profitable.

u/0o0o0o0o0o0z 8 2 days ago

Musk still has plenty of fanboys. Starlink is still profitable.

Ture, and it's a great product for what it does, NGL. But look, the S1 Starlink "profits" are not even close to a fraction of anything that SpaceX needs ... I bet by the end of 2027 Musk will roll Tesla and all his other companies into SpaceX.

u/sigga_genesis 4 2 days ago

That was the plan a along

u/one-won-juan 8 2 days ago

technically they opened the door to this mess by partnering with SpaceX despite multiple red flags in addition tmobile sold this to grain which sold it to space…. Just complete negligence really

u/X-Net-6158 1 2 days ago rescued

我对你这个挺感兴趣的，比较电信这几家公司各有特点，你当时主要要重T-Mobile什么？

u/Immediate-Run-7085 -6 2 days ago

lol investing in a company when you think they ceo is dumb. Are…you dumb?

u/RaidriarT 10 2 days ago

CEOs come and go

u/Immediate-Run-7085 -8 2 days ago

How do you know he’ll go? Why not buy after he leaves. This is so bizarre

u/RaidriarT 8 2 days ago

Buying opportunity here while he’s floundering….stock goes up when he leaves. Does buy low sell high ring a bell?

u/Immediate-Run-7085 -6 2 days ago

No what’s that? I only buy high sell low

u/Form1040 5 2 days ago

Yeah, MSFT went up something like 7% the day Ballmer left, he was such a terrible employee.

u/X-Net-6158 1 2 days ago

我对你这个挺感兴趣的，比较电信这几家公司各有特点，你当时主要要重T-Mobile什么？

u/firedrakes 2 2 days ago

Agreed. Usa one anyway

u/0Rider 3 2 days ago

I sold puts today for extremely juiced premium

u/Own_Relief_1740 OP 2 2 days ago

Tell us more. What puts did you sell?

u/0Rider 4 2 days ago

T 22.5 and then 22:s for October 30th. Picked up 67 cents a contract

u/Own_Relief_1740 OP 1 2 days ago

Thanks. Good luck!

u/0Rider 3 2 days ago

Companies I wouldn't mind owning at a discount. If I don't get assigned it's free money

u/jarMburger 1 2 days ago

Same here

u/Lazy-Gene-7284 2 2 days ago

Did the same! VZ @ $42 for 1.50 premium, if it’s below 40.5 will be happily called out. Elon is always 3-5 years away from actually doing what he announces.

u/Sea_Local2557 1 2 days ago

i bought 42 calls for next Friday

u/Remarkable_Cat_8696 1 2 days ago

see VZ closed at $41.65. are you assigned the shares?

u/Lazy-Gene-7284 1 2 days ago

No not yet, strike dates 10/30

u/Captndad 1 2 days ago

Bought calls for the same reason.

u/SubjectCode1940 -3 2 days ago

No, I don’t think so. It all depends on the quality and price of star link mobile. If the quality is the same or better with similar pricing, I would say it’s not good for all of them including MVNOs like Xfinity mobile, spectrum and others

u/RaidriarT 13 2 days ago

All the traditional cell carriers have fiber backhaul, something starlink will never be able to compete with. They may be able to offer nice coverage, but speed and latency are going to suffer compared to the V, T, TMUS

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/Own_Relief_1740 OP 1 2 days ago

Quality, price - definitely. Timing as well?

u/KangolTitMouse 3 2 days ago

It won’t work in buildings, unless it piggybacks off cell towers, defeating the purpose of a satellite cell phone network.

u/Dancin-Ted-Danson 0 2 days ago

the 800mhz spectrum they just bought says otherwise.

u/KangolTitMouse 2 2 days ago

Maybe one wall in, covering the perimeter of a building, but beyond that it’s SOL.

u/Dancin-Ted-Danson 1 2 days ago

I'm sure you are an expert in this...

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/KangolTitMouse 0 1 day ago

No, but I have satellite radio and it cuts out every time I park in a multi story above ground parking garage. Also, some skepticism in this blog post. https://techblog.comsoc.org/category/d2d-…

u/VenturaRyanRound2 3 2 days ago

And yet the their satellites can’t even support it today. We’re looking 2 years down the road before they launch ones that do

u/brute-forced 5 2 days ago

Ill never buy fromaNAZI

u/Form1040 1 2 days ago

Would you have voted for that guy in Maine?

u/JennaTulwartz 0 2 days ago

This is the dumbest, weirdest “gotcha” lol like you really thought you cooked here

u/Lollipopsaurus 24 2 days ago

My thought? Stocks are on sale today around 10% off.

u/deancollins 0 2 days ago

Exactly

u/Fit_Context_6064 18 2 days ago

Yup oversold, traders are to emotional

u/ranman0 -2 2 days ago

Oh, the irony of "traders are to emotional" being posted in a "investing" sub whose posts and comments largely reflect reverse engineering stock analysis through the lens of political ideology. The tariff, inflation, tesla, spacex, AI, etc trading misinformation that fill this sub have been consistently emotionally driven and consistantly wrong.

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/Quirky_Weakness6470 5 2 days ago

Sure, they might bounce back quickly but if Starlink actually starts rolling out real coverage in 2027, incumbents could feel pressure sooner than we expect. Keep an eye on their timeline.

u/Fit-Dentist6322 1 1 day ago

I’m not sure a 2‑week rebound is realistic. Even after the spectrum deal, SpaceX still has to go through FCC approval, build ground stations and develop software. That takes time, so a short‑term win might be overoptimistic.

u/Wavedash666 10 2 days ago

Complicated question, Spacex is a cult stock, their cost of capital via dilution is cheap. At a 2T valuation, they can dilute investors 5% to get 100B just like that. If the market stays high for several years, they could easily get the cash needed to fund both their AI dreams, space and mobile investments. Remember the tech of the telecoms isn’t the most, rather the existing investments. I’d say the investment thesis for the telecoms would be a recession (maybe open AI goes bankrupt), causing a massive valuation reset for Spacex, forcing them to make tough decisions.

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/asdafari14 -9 2 days ago

Spacex is a cult stock

Sure because Elon has proved himself a good leader of companies so many trust him but SpaceX has many business areas with huge potential: Launches, starlink, direct to cell, Terrafab, Starshield. It definitely has the potential to 5x in the next 5-10 years if some of these work out.

u/nebraskajone 27 2 days ago

I wouldn't bet against a trillionaire who friends with a corrupt president.

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/hmspain 7 2 days ago

With friends like that…. I’m not sure I would characterize their relationship as friendly.

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/Facebook_Lawyer_Gym 0 2 days ago

All three big carriers essentially lease their towers though MLA's with the big three tower brokers: CCI, AMT and SBA. If SpaceX wanted to build out on these towers, the barrier to entry isn't significant.

u/Sea-Abies-8988 -4 2 days ago

Towers? Towers are going away.

u/Facebook_Lawyer_Gym 4 2 days ago

Unlikely.

u/Sea-Abies-8988 1 2 days ago

Towers projects in rural areas are being cancelled at a fantastic rate. Similarly, high-density towers will not require the infrastructure we see today. Satellite service is already fundamentally changing the landscape.

u/Captndad 4 2 days ago

Unless you’re inside a building…

u/Sea-Abies-8988 -6 2 days ago

LOL...do a little research. I said it will not require, "the infrastructure we see today." I didn't say it required none. You should invest in traditional tower projects...it's a sure bet.

u/flexosgoatee 6 2 days ago

CCI +15.6% AMT +9.3%

u/Sea-Abies-8988 1 2 days ago

Fundamentally misunderstanding the market is nothing new. LOL Today's swings say much more about the limited understanding of investors than the future of towers. Thanks for playing.

u/flexosgoatee 2 2 days ago

Fair, it was low effort. But tell me is your thesis that SpaceX won't use towers or that they will build their own towers? What exactly is this huge swing in needing less infrastructure you think they have? Are we transmitting from the ground? Are we moving to much smaller cells everywhere? Are we not using fiber but instead relying on space to relay to a different ground station? Are we doing 5G-NTN direct to device?

u/Sea-Abies-8988 2 1 day ago

The model doesn't involve the massive tower structures seen today. The capital investment is huge and largely unnecessary. The model will involve transmitters more than towers, using existing structures, rooftops, power poles, to distribute low frequency signals to penetrate buildings. This is for high population density areas. Rural areas, which were famously high cost and low return, will rely almost completely on satellite. If Musk needed, or wanted, the existing infrastructure, he would have pursued the purchase of a company like VZ. He doesn't need it. The technology exists to accomplish the same thing without the enormous expense. Towers will continue to exist but not hold the same importance as they do today. The existing companies VZ, TMUS, AT&T aren't in any immediate danger, and the selloff was far overdone in my opinion. They still hold real value and will continue to for several years. As always, it is the redundant ancillary structures that get replaced and refined with technological advances. I wouldn't touch the tower companies. That's my analysis. The carriers are at great values after the panic.

u/flexosgoatee 1 1 day ago

Agreed about the carriers, I don't think SpaceX's plan *as is* is much of a threat (and I admittedly haven't spent much time researching it in particular). Upcoming 5G-NTN is pretty bad service with bad spectral efficiency. I mean it's amazing compared to nothing (3 Mbps/100s of kbps anywhere! From space with my normal phone!!!! Wow!!!), but it's bad compared to any ground deployment. You won't want to use it when the option of a traditional service is available. As far as towers, you may be right about future investment, but I'm not sure they're going away anytime soon. The legacy carriers have small cells and have used existing structures for years; that's not novel. I think space solutions and small cells don't do much for covering medium demand/sprawling areas suburbs, highways, etc. Maybe starlink has shifted the bandwidth economics for making the backhaul cheaper, but I'd be a little leery about that claim; these are the places likely to have capacity issues in their constellation for air and fixed services, and are places where a right of way exists already to deploy a terrestrial solution. Maybe the lines have moved, but it's hard to imagine we're meaningfully eliminating a segment.

u/flexosgoatee 1 1 day ago

But full disclosure, I'm looking at this like a consumer and engineer. As an investor, I don't bet against companies with giant pocketbooks.

u/Adventurous-Sir2539 1 2 days ago

i think the tower punt is a bit simplistic. 800 MHz can be used for terrestrial or satellite-to-mobile, but the carriers still own the core network. The 14 MHz is tiny next to the carriers' \~1 GHz holdings, so a serious challenge doesn't materialize just yet—most of what you're seeing is hype.

u/ChornWork2 3 2 days ago

it isn't that simple. space on towers can be constrained. in a lot of places public infrastructure is better for coverage and that's a bitch to deal with. buy spectrum is one thing, buying spectrum everywhere you need it to have coverage is expensive. there is a reason mobile consolidated so much. barrier to entry is non-trivial. Not as bad as cable/ISP, but recall how quickly Google got its ass handed to for thinking it was simple biz.

u/overitallofittoo 5 2 days ago

Wall Street bros love Elon. No one else does. ON SALE!

u/asdafari14 -1 2 days ago

Wall Street bros making money for decades and reddit losing money shorting his companies and misssing out on huge gains for decades? I heard those unlocks would dump the stock price but it only increased? Reddit was 100% sure with 3k upvotes. May be reddit are stoopid.

u/GertrudeGarbarcowitz -2 2 days ago

A ton of people love Elon, what are you talking about. He does so much too. Whenever there are huge natural disasters and power is down, he provides starlink free so people can connect with loved ones.

u/SnS2500 2 2 days ago

\> Is the market overreacting? Water is wet.

u/The_Pedestrian_walks 0 2 days ago

They are going to keep falling. Stay away from the rocks

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/powerlustashtodust 1 2 days ago

I run the Nokian One on my 2011. 215/45r17. They are reasonably quiet. Only have about 10k miles on them. Happy so far. I’ve own Nokian tires for the decades. Always been good to me.

u/Travelling3steps 2 2 days ago

hey there, r/prius is over there-> ;)

u/SentenceDowntown591 0 2 days ago

Yes, it happened to also be the ex date for their dividend distribution and also was the 120 day unlock date for the insider investors at SpaceX to sell their IPO shares. Double whammy. I expect this is a great buying opportunity, SpaceX has said themselves something along the lines of they anticipate 2035 ish for full mobile service

u/ComeAtMeBro9 1 2 days ago

I bought TMUS last week. Seemed like a good price.

u/donewithitfirst 1 2 days ago

At one time there was sears and JCPenney. Not saying the same but don’t bet on reputation. Look at Nike.

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/Easy-Reception7030 3 2 days ago

I like T out of the big 3. Also, great buying opportunity for ASTS... Valuation closing in on F it territory. HELOC, I'm coming for you soon!

u/b1gb0n312 1 2 days ago

And at the same time why didn't spcx skyrocket today? Only up a measly 1.26%

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/procheeseburger 2 2 days ago

News, market moves, different news, market moves, more different news, market moves...

u/fakemedicines 2 2 days ago

Asts is cooked anyone else bag holding?

u/Bkfraiders7 3 2 days ago

…why? Because SpaceX got 7x7Mhz of lowband spectrum? This pushes ASTS further into the arms of global MNOs making it more strategically important.

u/tommyrulz1 14 2 days ago

Don’t forget, not one of their deployed satellites actually works with this spectrum They will have to design build and deploy Will take years

u/machinegunkisses -4 2 days ago

This spectrum is licensed for terrestrial use, so, no new satellites required.

u/tommyrulz1 9 2 days ago

Not true

u/machinegunkisses 9 2 days ago

Ah, you're right, I misremembered. From https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/10/starlink-spectrum-deal-boosts-musk-plan-to-beat-att-t-mobile-and-verizon/: \\\The FCC said the 800 MHz spectrum can be used for terrestrial service, satellite-to-mobile service, or both.\\\

u/winpickles4life 8 2 days ago

Rarely see such humility on the internet, bravo.

u/ShartInYourFace 0 2 days ago

Nope. SPCX will force them to consolidate.

u/6100315 0 2 days ago

Honestly, this is probably the beginning of the end for them imo. They'll have to pivot to something else or be absorbed.

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/Alert_One_420 0 2 days ago

Honestly I see the dip as a mix of rational repricing and a dash of panic. $8 B for a 14‑MHz low‑band block is a lot of money, but Starlink Mobile still has to deploy massive terrestrial repeaters to make that spectrum competitive against deep‑penetration 800 MHz from the incumbents. Until they show a clear path to same‑speed indoor coverage the threat feels more like a headline than a reality, so the market’s reaction is probably over‑hyped for the short term.

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/SuperNewk -1 2 days ago

Spacex is super oversold

u/9gxa05s8fa8sh 15 2 days ago

spacex is literally a scam. they need to launch rockets and satellites to compete with companies that... checks notes... have already built their cell phone towers. the only competitive advantage spacex has is remote access, and all the current cell phone companies have to do to compete in remote areas is stop being cheap and build towers out there. it will always be cheaper than rockets and satellites. people are just stupid.

u/Mudfry 2 2 days ago

You nailed it lmao.

u/Wise-Parsnip5803 2 2 days ago

Also, the satellites don't just fly over the US so they can supply cell phone coverage worldwide where allowed.

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/Avsunra 8 2 days ago

they need to launch rockets and satellites to compete with companies that... checks notes... have already built their cell phone towers...

Not disagreeing with you on this, but we should remember that the launch cost per kilogram has been steadily declining as SpaceX builds more ships and gets more launches every year. Will Starship be ready tomorrow, this year, this decade? Who knows, but at this point the trend on falling launch costs seems obvious.

all the current cell phone companies have to do to compete in remote areas is stop being cheap and build towers out there. it will always be cheaper than rockets and satellites.

Falling launch costs as a method of reducing infrax expense isn't the whole story. A legacy provider will never build a tower in a town of 30, without charging an arm and a leg to earn back that cost, it won't happen until it makes financial sense, the infrax is limited by geography in this way. LEO sat constellations don't have the same restrictions, expanding the constellation to include the same town means that other geographic areas falling under the spot beam of these satellites as they orbit the earth get expanded access and more network resiliency. Starlink's infrax cost per user is not restricted by geography in the same way it is for legacy providers. If the major hurdle for expanding infrastructure for Starlink is trending downward while the major hurdle for expanding infrastructure for legacy providers is ever present, do they ever cross over? That's the major question in my mind, again I'm not saying it happens any time soon, but it's a serious question that should not be so easily dismissed.

u/9gxa05s8fa8sh -8 2 days ago

starlink is a fine niche for rich people in remote locations around the world, like iridium. but poor people in 30-person villages who can't afford starlink won't be making it a trillion-dollar business

u/Avsunra 4 2 days ago

This isn't Starlink satcom, it's about Starlink mobile acquiring a nationwide 800mhz LTE spectrum portfolio. Starlink mobile is much cheaper and less capable, and falls under the 3gpp non terrestrial network (NTN) spec. It's not the same thing as a satcom link but it's still supported by a LEO constellation.

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/Gloomy-Knee1401 1 2 days ago

Guess what companies can't profit from poor customers. Money is made from rich customers. And that applies globally. And a satellite cellular network can serve the global rich. T-Mobile didn't sign a deal with ASTS spacemobile for zero reason.

u/rgouda 1 2 days ago

All very good points. Totally agree. What about the hostile risk of other countries shooting down the satellite? Is that not possible?

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/noobgiraffe 1 1 day ago

There are way bigger risks. Someone tasks AI swarm to hack spacex and than they order all satelites to deorbit. Normal carriers can recover from such a hack. It would be expensive and take time but it's doable. Spacex cannot. They would have relaunch all the satellites, it would take years and cost a fortune. All the clients will be gone by than. This might sound like science fiction to some pople but very recently openai Agents brok out of isolated environment using some extremely bizzare exploits and hacked hugging face - website where all open source models are stored just because it wanted to cheat in tasks it was supposed to accomplish. OpenAi didn't even know their agents broke containment until Hugging face noticed they were hacked. The agents worked as a swarm thousands in number which they weren't supposed to do. Each agent was supposed to be in it's own isolated invronment but on figured out how exploit server were test files were hosted and inserter information how to do it, other agents saw it and effectively used it as forum to coordinate their efforts. This is something nobody planned, in fact they planned something completely opposite. Now imagine som state actor decides to do it on purpose and facilitate such attack.

u/Curious_Star_948 1 1 day ago

Space is heavily monitor and regulated at the government level. The US will treat any attempts to shoot down SpaceX satellite as an hostile act, potentially an act of war. Countries would not just shoot them down nilly willy. Also it would be a very difficult task to do. Only 4 countries have demonstrated this capability to date.

u/no_simpsons 3 1 day ago

Fuck, just say infrastructure.

u/IntelligentMarch6827 0 2 days ago

The government has to subsidize that kind of capital buildout. They aren’t. They are subsidizing SpaceX.

u/Flipslips 1 1 day ago

Are they? US Gov famously denied a bunch of subsides to Starlink for internet implementation

u/Curious_Star_948 2 2 days ago

They, in theory, would have competitive edge in remote areas and foreign countries. Have you used the big 3 services in non-US countries? It's unuseable. It's just passed if you pay up for international services (to cover them piggy backing off local companies). Is SpaceX launches their services at 5g speeds with coverage everywhere at a competitive price. The only things keeping you from switching at that point is existing promotions locking you in, your hate of Elon, or your inability to accept change.

u/Boston-Bets 1 2 days ago

Cell phone companies don't need to build towers in rural areas anymore. They are partnering with ASTS to provide direct to cell satellite service, using the carriers own spectrum

u/Sapere_aude75 1 1 day ago

Is this genuinely what you believe? Just because one business built infrastructure first, doesn't mean a superior technology can't be built out to replace it. You are basically arguing that cell phones don't make sense because people already have landlines. Verizon spent 17B last year alone in capex to build, upgrade, and maintain their infrastructure. SpaceX built their whole constellation for 10-12B. Once they get Starship up and running it could be entirely replaced for somewhere in the neighborhood of 6B. 6 Billion to cover the entire planet. SpaceX can literally replace all of their hardware for less than Verizons annual capex costs. Verizon also can't possibly compete in remote areas. The economics don't make sense and are basically physically impossible. Why would they spend 100k or 1 million on a tower getting used once a week or once a month? How are they going to place towers in the middle of the ocean and near the poles? The only advantages Verizon has left is data speed and reliability. I'm not sure if those advantages will last or not. I would say you are being stupid, if this is really what you think

u/9gxa05s8fa8sh 1 1 day ago

SpaceX can literally replace all of their hardware for less than Verizons annual capex costs.

you are smoking elon's dick my man

u/Sapere_aude75 1 1 day ago

What part of that statement do you disagree with exactly? How much do you calculate it would cost SpaceX to replace their constellation? How much do you believe Verizon spends on Capex?

u/Gloomy-Insurance-739 1 2 days ago

I'm still sitting pretty with Verizon at 36 and if it falls below that you can bet your sweet ass I'm going to load up.

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/rebelintellectual 1 2 days ago

I think so Google Fi has been a thing and they are a way better tan company than Space X

u/ra__account 1 2 days ago

Google Fi is just TMobile resold. I don't necessarily believe in SpaceX, but an a viable 4th major network is a significant game changer.

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/EquivalentBorn9411 1 2 days ago

No SpaceX and musk can crush the telecom margins Just buy diluting a little bit

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/tomgreen99200 1 2 days ago

Huge over reaction

u/lushootseed 1 2 days ago

I feel this is complete overreaction. It will take at least a year for SpaceX to come up with anything meaningful. These companies have plenty of time to react/respond

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/Flipslips 1 1 day ago

SpaceX moves insanely fast. Traditional telecoms are horrifically slow and drag their feet/are in denial.

u/Flex1968 1 2 days ago

"VZ, T and TMUS getting crushed on SpaceX news" You sure that what you're seeing is based on SPCX news? I was happy to add additional VZ shares today (been invested for at least a decade). GLTA

u/Traveler_World 2 2 days ago

Somebody else said don't bet against a trillionaire that is involved with a corrupt president. I would add, two people that have very strong relationships with Jeffrey Epstein along with most other people that are billionaires in this current government, including Howard Lutnick who was one of Jeffrey Epstein's buddies and his direct next door neighbor and business partner

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/Mediocre_Safety5743 0 2 days ago

7-8% selloff on this looks overdone, with one caveat. The tech story is real: low-band 800 MHz propagates far and punches through walls, which is exactly what satellite-to-phone was missing. The physics catch: 14 MHz of paired spectrum is a narrow pipe, fine for calls and texts and showing bars in a Montana cabin, not for displacing carrier data revenue. The deal also still needs FCC sign-off, and a nationwide ground buildout is years away. So today's sellers priced in the 2029 endgame. Telecom investors have a proud tradition of panic-first: remember when everyone thought WhatsApp would kill SMS revenue, and the carriers got paid anyway?

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/3rd-Grade-Spelling 1 1 day ago

Boost Mobile (Dish) spent billions putting phone equipment on poles before it failed. It's still sitting out there rotting. I bet StarLink buys it. A lot of the work is already done.

u/InvestigatorPlus3229 -1 2 days ago

Imagine the boomers they got crushed 8% a day waiting for their 6% a year dividend

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/Trick_Job3956 0 2 days ago

Competition can hurt without taking many subscribers: incumbents may cut prices for customers who stay. With hypothetical declines of 2% in subscribers and 3% in revenue per user, service revenue falls 1 - 0.98 x 0.97 = 4.94%. Stress-test both inputs and the costs that actually adjust before calling the selloff an overreaction.

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/Ok-Job1369 1 2 days ago

Thirteen percent for 14 MHz of paired low band? You cannot run a nationwide carrier on that, that is a capacity play, not a coverage play. T-Mobile bought Sprint for 2.5 GHz and a pile of 600 MHz and it took them years just to integrate it. Dish had more spectrum than this and still ended up selling. The fixed cost line is the one thing you got right and it is also the reason this is an overreaction, nobody builds a fourth network from one band. But "credible fourth competitor" is doing a lot of work in that sentence. It is a footnote in a Starlink revenue slide, not a carrier.

u/3rd-Grade-Spelling 1 1 day ago

It's just one piece to the spectrum puzzle though. There are a few of Co's out there that own low band spectrum. Two of them are publicly traded with market caps around 3 Billion. If he buys those two, with grain, his low band would match each of the big 3. for higher band, SiriusXM has a bunch of spectrum. He could by it, merge the media part it into X, and take the spectrum, and there is also a gov't auction for spectrum coming up. It's out there, but no one has had the means to go after it before.

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/tommyrulz1 1 2 days ago

Not that it would happen given how tight Musk is with Trump, but this sale still needs FCC approval and based on the stringent requirements of any buyer in the FCC rules it gave the seller GRAIN, this should never go through. Read the FCC GUIDELINES and you’ll see for yourself.

u/TastiSqueeze 2 2 days ago

There are a lot of ways to spin this. LEO satellites could be leveraged to deploy cell phone service worldwide with very few issues. It would involve some changes to the satellites. IMO this is an expansion of spacex where both data and phone connections will be readily available. With an appropriate converter/amplifier, you could put a unit on the roof to pull in spacex internet and easily convert it to cell phone service inside the building. The key is that spacex needs bandwidth to have these options.

u/[deleted] 1 2 days ago

[removed] — already gone when the archive first saw it

u/Mbhound 1 2 days ago

The market is efficient bro don't try to predict

u/wadejohn 1 2 days ago

Of course it is. That’s what the market does.

u/deancollins 1 2 days ago

Yes market is over reacting. Btfd kids.

u/Money_Aioli_2695 1 1 day ago

Market's panicking over a future threat while fundamentals stay strong.

u/Over_Fly 1 1 day ago

I bought some vz. Starlink is good product I have seen it action .but it doesn't compare at all the FTTH connection. Shame in the politicians that let Starlink compete for BEAD funding. This is not government we have paying taxes to support universal access for years