|Bid||60.82 x 800|
|Ask||60.83 x 1400|
|Day's range||59.87 - 60.96|
|52-week range||52.28 - 62.22|
|Beta (5Y monthly)||0.49|
|PE ratio (TTM)||15.66|
|Earnings date||29 Jan 2020|
|Forward dividend & yield||2.46 (4.11%)|
|Ex-dividend date||08 Jan 2020|
|1y target est||61.67|
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- There’s a fine line between a fudge and a workable compromise. In Britain’s handling of Huawei Technologies Co., Prime Minister Boris Johnson has just about managed to secure the latter.The U.K. has brushed off the U.S.’s complaints and decided to allow its telecoms operators to install equipment made by “high-risk vendors” — read: Huawei — in their networks. But the government drew a line, excluding it outright from sensitive core parts of the network and capping its gear’s presence in the non-sensitive parts at 35% of the total.Outwardly, President Donald Trump won’t like the solution. But if the U.S.’s loudest protestations about security concerns were genuine, and not in fact an effort to stymie Chinese economic influence, then it should be able to stomach the compromise. American concern has focused on the risk of Huawei building backdoors into networks that can be readily exploited by Chinese state-sponsored actors. After all, China passed a law in 2017 obliging companies to assist the state with espionage efforts. And while no such backdoors have yet been found, that isn’t proof that they don’t exist.QuicktakeHow Huawei Landed at the Center of Global Tech TussleBut at the same time, a great deal of capital, both political and actual, has been invested in the promise of fifth-generation networks. Globally, revenue from the so-called Internet of Things will quadruple to $1.1 trillion by 2025, industry body the GSMA estimates. With about a third of the $50 billion global telecoms equipment market, Huawei has become the biggest player, with some of the best technology and lowest prices. Banning it would have ramifications for the pace of the 5G rollout.That is why the U.K. approach is a pragmatic one. It’s allowing Huawei products into the radio-access network — essentially the antenna and base stations — but keeping it out of the core: the server hubs that direct data around the network. Network security focuses on three pillars: confidentiality, integrity and availability. The first one focuses on ensuring that bad actors can’t see your data. The second is about making sure no-one is altering data during transmission. And the third is about guaranteeing network access when it’s needed.By those criteria, the U.K. decision seems to eliminate most, though not all, of the risk. If there are indeed backdoors into the parts of the network using Huawei gear, then they will likely only have access to data from that 35% of the network using it. It should still be possible to keep the equipment out of sensitive networks, such as those running the power grids and police communications. Indeed, France won’t let operators use Huawei antenna in Toulouse, for instance, where the airplane giant Airbus SA is based. BT Group Plc was already stripping Huawei gear out of its existing core networks. It likely would have been hard to secure lucrative government contracts without doing so.At any rate, telecommunications firms’ cybersecurity efforts will be on heightened alert where the slice of their operations that do still contain Huawei products is concerned. It might be easier to spot disturbing anomalies. If a base station is siphoning off gobs of data to somewhere in Asia, that will be more noteworthy than if it’s coming from the core network. As the distinction between core and edge networks blurs in the move toward full 5G, Huawei’s role must be managed even more carefully.Johnson had three sets of interests to navigate: the Americans threatened to cut off intelligence sharing with Britain in response; China’s ambassador warned a Huawei ban would have “substantial” repercussions for investment in the U.K.; and Britain’s own network operators — Vodafone Group Plc., BT, O2 (part of Spain’s Telefonica SA) and Three (owned by Hong Kong-based CK Hutchison Holdings Ltd.) — also had their say.The stakes are higher for these companies than for their U.S. peers, who are already prevented from using almost any Huawei products. That’s because they’re poorer. AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc. enjoy average revenue per customer of close to $50 a month. In the U.K., Vodafone gets just 14 pounds ($18.22), according to Bloomberg Intelligence.British carriers are therefore much more cost sensitive. Knocking Huawei out of the running in the radio-access network would have left a duopoly of Nokia Oyj and Ericsson AB, giving the suppliers a huge amount of pricing power. Samsung Electronics Co. is accelerating toin the industry, but its gear is often even pricier. And U.S. suppliers such as Juniper Networks Inc. and Cisco Systems Inc. compete more effectively in the core network.The European Union looks set to issue guidelines that imitate the U.K. approach. The U.S. may not like it, but Johnson was never going to keep everyone happy.To contact the author of this story: Alex Webb at firstname.lastname@example.orgTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Melissa Pozsgay at email@example.comThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg LP and its owners.Alex Webb is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering Europe's technology, media and communications industries. He previously covered Apple and other technology companies for Bloomberg News in San Francisco.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinionSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
Development of scalable, low cost and highly powerful 5G network is likely to have translated into incremental revenues for the Consumer segment, driving Verizon's (VZ) fourth-quarter 2019 earnings.
Secular and pricing pressures resulting in decline in legacy wireline services are likely to have hurt Verizon's (VZ) fourth-quarter 2019 earnings.
Increased 5G mobility services, technology collaborations and expansion of fiber optics network are likely to have driven Verizon's (VZ) fourth-quarter 2019 earnings.
The prime minister is expected to allow Huawei a limited role within the UK's 5G infrastructure, despite aggressive lobbying for a ban from the US.
Leveraging 5G Ultra Wideband network, Verizon (VZ) collaborates with Dignitas to foster next-gen esports viewing experience and fan interactivity with low-latency backed wireless connectivity.
Continued investments in HBO Max for its upcoming launch are likely to have affected the profitability of AT&T (T) in fourth-quarter 2019.
Verizon (VZ) collaborates with financial services company, Synchrony, to offer exclusive credit card services to its customers, which are expected to be launched in the first half of 2020.
(Bloomberg) -- Xerox Holdings Corp. said it intends to nominate 11 directors to replace the board of HP Inc. after the personal-computer maker refused to engage in takeover talks, according to a statement Thursday.The iconic printer maker hasn’t increased its $22-a-share takeover offer after HP rejected its proposal, which it argues undervalues the company. Instead, Xerox will seek to replace HP’s entire board through a proxy fight to push the merger through.The nominees include former senior executives from dozens of companies including Aetna Inc., United Airlines Holdings Inc. and Novartis AG.“HP shareholders have told us they believe our acquisition proposal will bring tremendous value, which is why we lined up $24 billion in binding financing commitments and a slate of highly qualified director candidates,” said John Visentin, vice chairman and chief executive officer of Xerox.Xerox filed its slate ahead of a Friday deadline for board nominations. The move could potentially be a precursor to Xerox taking its offer directly to shareholders through a tender offer at the current offer price or a premium if HP continues to rebuff its efforts, according to people familiar with the matter. No decision has been made on whether to pursue a tender offer, the price it would be put forth at, or when it would do so, the people said, asking not to be identified because the matter is private.The push to replace the board marks an escalation of the simmering tensions between the two hardware giants that have withered in a world increasingly driven by software. Xerox has argued the tie-up would revive both companies and unlock about $2 billion in synergies.“These nominations are a self-serving tactic by Xerox to advance its proposal, which significantly undervalues HP and creates meaningful risk to the detriment of HP shareholders,” HP said in a statement.HP said that it would review Xerox’s nominees and respond in due course. It also said that it was committed to serving the best interests of all shareholders, and that it had many avenues that it could pursue to create value. Those efforts are not dependent on a combination with Xerox, it said.Activist shareholder Carl Icahn, who owns about 11% of Xerox and has a 4.3% stake in HP, has pushed for the tie-up.HP said Thursday it believed Xerox’s proposal to acquire HP was being driven by Icahn. The billionaire has considerable influence over Xerox because he is its largest shareholder, the role he played in appointing Xerox’s CEO, who was a former consultant to Icahn, and the ties he has to members of the board, including its chairman, who is also the chief executive officer of Icahn Enterprises, HP said.“Due to Mr. Icahn’s ownership position, he would disproportionately benefit from an acquisition of HP by Xerox at a price that undervalues HP,” the company said, adding that his interests were not aligned with those of other HP shareholders.A representative for Icahn wasn't immediately available for comment.HP’s board currently has 12 members. Dion Weisler, the former chief executive officer of the company, has said he would step down at the next annual general meeting, which the company said would reduce the board size to 11. Its last annual meeting was on April 23.HP in November rebuffed an unsolicited, cash-and-stock offer from Xerox, citing concerns about the financial health of its smaller rival, which has experienced declining annual revenue since 2012.HP’s board said it was open to exploring a merger, but believed the offer undervalued the company.Xerox announced Jan. 6 that it had arranged a $24 billion loan with a group of banks to finance the takeover. HP and its advisers had questioned Xerox’s ability to raise the money for the deal.Following the financing announcement, HP said it believed the offer still undervalued the company.Xerox’s director nominees are:Betsy Atkins, CEO of Baja Corp.George Bickerstaff, co-founder and managing director of M.M. Dillon & Co.Carolyn Byrd, CEO of GlobalTech Financial.Jeannie Diefenderfer, who spent 28 years at Verizon.Kim Fennebresque, who was CEO of Cowen Group for nine years.Carol Flaton, who has served as a managing director at AlixPartners.Matthew Hart, who most recently served as president and chief operating officer of Hilton Hotels until the buyout of Hilton by Blackstone in 2007.Fred Hochberg, who was most recently the chairman and president of the Export-Import Bank of the United States during the Obama administration.Jacob Katz, who was chairman of Grant Thornton.Nichelle Maynard-Elliott, who most recently served as executive director of mergers & acquisitions for Praxair Inc.Thomas Sabatino, Jr. who most recently served as executive vice president and general counsel of Aetna Inc.Citigroup Inc. is acting as Xerox’s financial advisor, and King & Spalding LLP is providing legal counsel to Xerox. Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP is providing legal counsel to Xerox’s independent directors.(Updates with additional company comments starting in paragraph eight)To contact the reporter on this story: Scott Deveau in New York at firstname.lastname@example.orgTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Liana Baker at email@example.com, Matthew Monks, Molly SchuetzFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
Verizon (VZ) possesses the right combination of the two key ingredients for a likely earnings beat in its upcoming report. Get prepared with the key expectations.
While Verizon (VZ) is reaffirming its commitment to end carbon emissions in its operations by 2035, Ericsson (ERIC) plans to establish a new R&D center in France to boost 5G momentum in Europe.
In the latest trading session, Verizon Communications (VZ) closed at $60.48, marking a +0.27% move from the previous day.
This article is written for those who want to get better at using price to earnings ratios (P/E ratios). We'll show...
Strengthening its commitment for a greener planet, Verizon (VZ) vows to set a Science-Based emissions reduction Target by September 2021, in accordance with the Paris Agreement.
As yet another streaming service enters the heavily saturated space, one Wall Street analyst says consumers might be starting to feel streaming fatigue.
CenturyLink (CTL) wins a mini contract from the U.S. Department of the Interior to deliver modern network services for the preservation of nation's natural resources.
Zacks Investment Ideas feature highlights: Verizon, Qualcomm, Broadcom, Intel and Skyworks Solutions
Cincinnati Bell (CBB) teams up with YouTube TV to deploy the latter's on-demand streaming services in Greater Cincinnati and Hawaii through cost-efficient content platform.
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- Traders who make a living betting on mergers still won’t touch T-Mobile US Inc. and Sprint Corp.’s deal with a 10-foot pole. The wireless carriers may have been able to butter up two federal regulatory authorities by using the wonders of a 5G-powered America to distract from their deal’s likely competitive harm. Even so, merger-arbitrage traders live in a world of mathematical probabilities informed by laws and legal precedents, and on that basis, it’s hard to imagine that the judge presiding over a case brought by a group of state attorneys general opposing the deal will rule in the companies’ favor. Lawyers for both sides each delivered closing arguments Wednesday, with a decision from U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero expected to come some time in February. Analysts largely view the odds as a toss-up, if not slightly tipped in T-Mobile and Sprint’s favor. But the equity market paints a meaningfully different picture: The per-share value of T-Mobile's offer is 67% higher than where Sprint's shares are trading, by far the biggest spread of any pending U.S. deal. The wide gap implies that traders see an extremely low likelihood that the transaction gets done, and Sprint options activity is sending the same signal.Of course, this also means that if the companies do win in court, some traders popping antacids right now stand to make a substantial return. But for the most part, arbitrageurs have chosen to stay away. “This is one of those seminal situations in merger arb history,” said Roy Behren, a portfolio manager for the Merger Fund at Westchester Capital Management, which oversees $4 billion of assets. He found T-Mobile and Sprint’s arguments persuasive — that together the companies will be able to build out a nationwide 5G service faster, and that Sprint doesn't have the capital or scale it needs to compete. But the potential downside is painfully large, and so it’s simply too hard to make a bet on what will happen. “We like the case, but that doesn’t mean we want to risk shareholders’ money on something where we don’t have a huge conviction,” Behren said in a phone interview. The case may come down to Dish Network Corp. and its assigned role in ensuring the U.S. wireless market remains competitive. Makan Delrahim, the head antitrust enforcer at the Department of Justice, is placing incredible faith in Dish that it can fill the hole Sprint leaves behind and become a formidable new competitor to T-Mobile, AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc., even though it will most likely take years for Dish to live up to those expectations.T-Mobile has relied heavily on the argument that its brand as the customer-first “Un-carrier” means it can be trusted not to raise prices in the meantime, Blair Levin, an analyst for New Street Research, wrote in a report this week. The idea is that with Sprint, it will be able to spread out its network costs across a larger subscriber base and thus keep plan rates low. But as the state attorneys general have noted, AT&T and Verizon have greater scale and higher prices. Judges look at facts and precedent. Just as there was a compelling case to make against AT&T acquiring Time Warner last year in what amounted to a massive vertical consolidation of market power, it was hard to articulate this with facts and not just speculation about what might happen, because of the lack of precedent. The judge in that matter said early on, “I guess I have to get a crystal ball,” which judges do not like to do, and sure enough, he opted to stick with the facts as they were. The Justice Department and Federal Communications Commission have already given their blessing, which carries weight and could mean Judge Marrero will, too. But then if they could look in a crystal ball and see the consequence of doing so, they may not like what they see. Even the stock market knows that the deal shouldn’t go through.To contact the author of this story: Tara Lachapelle at firstname.lastname@example.orgTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Beth Williams at email@example.comThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg LP and its owners.Tara Lachapelle is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering the business of entertainment and telecommunications, as well as broader deals. She previously wrote an M&A column for Bloomberg News.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinionSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.