Frontier Communications stock received a rating of underperform Wednesday in an equity research note from analysts at Wells Fargo Securities after Frontier's Q2 2019 earnings report Tuesday. Frontier reported $2.07 billion revenue for the quarter, down from the Q1's $2.1 billion (see 1904300217). The company's net loss for the Q2 was $5.32 billion, for a net loss of $51.07 per common share. It reported a net loss of 71,000 broadband subscribers. On an earnings call Tuesday, Frontier CEO Dan McCarthy called the increased customer churn to 2.14 percent on the consumer side "disappointing," blaming it partly on seasonality, competitive pressures and customer roll-off as promotional bill credits ended. McCarthy said it's premature to speculate how the company's federal broadband subsidies will fare under an upcoming USF transition from the Connect America Fund to the proposed Rural Digital Opportunity Fund still at the NPRM stage. He suggested the terms of the RDOF reverse auctions may be less favorable to Frontier than they were under CAF Phase II auctions. Frontier plans to participate in the RDOF auctions and is pleased that latency will be a consideration in how the bids will be weighted, McCarthy said. The company said it expects to close on the sale of its operations in Washington, Oregon, Idaho and Montana, announced in late May, sometime in the first half of 2020 (see 1905290042). "The focus is clearly on liquidity, with plans of divesting its northwest operations to bring $1.3 billion in cash to the balance sheet," said Wells Fargo, "but the incremental investment required to meet the terms of the deal coupled with lower than expected benefit from FTR's transformation program and higher payments due in 2H 2019 that weren't initially considered with 2019 guide, all leave us firmly on the outside looking in." Frontier's share price dipped under a dollar early Wednesday and closed at 94 cents, down 23.59 percent.
Frontier Communications stock received a rating of underperform Wednesday in an equity research note from analysts at Wells Fargo Securities after Frontier's Q2 2019 earnings report Tuesday. Frontier reported $2.07 billion revenue for the quarter, down from the Q1's $2.1 billion (see 1904300217). The company's net loss for the Q2 was $5.32 billion, for a net loss of $51.07 per common share. It reported a net loss of 71,000 broadband subscribers. On an earnings call Tuesday, Frontier CEO Dan McCarthy called the increased customer churn to 2.14 percent on the consumer side "disappointing," blaming it partly on seasonality, competitive pressures and customer roll-off as promotional bill credits ended. McCarthy said it's premature to speculate how the company's federal broadband subsidies will fare under an upcoming USF transition from the Connect America Fund to the proposed Rural Digital Opportunity Fund still at the NPRM stage. He suggested the terms of the RDOF reverse auctions may be less favorable to Frontier than they were under CAF Phase II auctions. Frontier plans to participate in the RDOF auctions and is pleased that latency will be a consideration in how the bids will be weighted, McCarthy said. The company said it expects to close on the sale of its operations in Washington, Oregon, Idaho and Montana, announced in late May, sometime in the first half of 2020 (see 1905290042). "The focus is clearly on liquidity, with plans of divesting its northwest operations to bring $1.3 billion in cash to the balance sheet," said Wells Fargo, "but the incremental investment required to meet the terms of the deal coupled with lower than expected benefit from FTR's transformation program and higher payments due in 2H 2019 that weren't initially considered with 2019 guide, all leave us firmly on the outside looking in." Frontier's share price dipped under a dollar early Wednesday and closed at 94 cents, down 23.59 percent.
The House Commerce Committee continued considering the Save the Internet Act net neutrality bill (HR-1644) through Wednesday afternoon, after spending hours debating and voting on a litany of Republican-led amendments that Democrats claimed were mainly aimed at stonewalling advancement of the measure. The committee was expected to have ultimately advanced HR-1644 on a party-line vote. It still needed to handle many amendments and the measure's underlying text. HR-1644 and Senate companion S-682 would add a new title to the Communications Act that reverses the FCC order, rescinding its 2015 rules. The bill would restore reclassification of broadband as a Communications Act Title II service (see 1903060077).
The House Commerce Committee continued considering the Save the Internet Act net neutrality bill (HR-1644) through Wednesday afternoon, after spending hours debating and voting on a litany of Republican-led amendments that Democrats claimed were mainly aimed at stonewalling advancement of the measure. The committee was expected to have ultimately advanced HR-1644 on a party-line vote. It still needed to handle many amendments and the measure's underlying text. HR-1644 and Senate companion S-682 would add a new title to the Communications Act that reverses the FCC order, rescinding its 2015 rules. The bill would restore reclassification of broadband as a Communications Act Title II service (see 1903060077).
NARUC's Telecom Committee unanimously cleared an amended Lifeline resolution urging the FCC and Universal Service Administrative Co. ensure the national verifier accesses state databases required to automatically check users are eligible. USAC is responding to concerns and committed to making the NV work, South Dakota Commissioner Chris Nelson told us after the vote.
NARUC's Telecom Committee unanimously cleared an amended Lifeline resolution urging the FCC and Universal Service Administrative Co. ensure the national verifier accesses state databases required to automatically check users are eligible. USAC is responding to concerns and committed to making the NV work, South Dakota Commissioner Chris Nelson told us after the vote.
There are ways to move forward on policymaking to improve broadband deployments as the new Congress begins, federal and communications sector officials said Tuesday during a Next Century Cities-led event. Officials highlighted the potential for compromise as a contrast to the rancor over the ongoing partial government shutdown. They also noted policy disagreements. Later, the conference heard about spectrum (see 1901150043).
There are ways to move forward on policymaking to improve broadband deployments as the new Congress begins, federal and communications sector officials said Tuesday during a Next Century Cities-led event. Officials highlighted the potential for compromise as a contrast to the rancor over the ongoing partial government shutdown. They also noted policy disagreements. Later, the conference heard about spectrum (see 1901150043).
Nebraska commissioners voted 4-1 for a hybrid state USF contribution mechanism with a $1.75 per connection surcharge for residential wireline, postpaid wireless and interconnected VoIP services and a 6.95 percent revenue-based surcharge for business and other services. CenturyLink and small rural carriers Wednesday applauded the Public Service Commission’s Tuesday rate design order in docket NUSF-111, which followed last year’s decision to move to a connections-based contribution mechanism. Cox and CTIA raised red flags. Other state commissions are working toward USF updates, including Alaska, New Mexico and Oklahoma.
It's "extremely troubling" the FCC proposed a 15-year telco separations freeze "without any consideration of the recommendation" from federal-state joint board members, emailed Colorado Public Utilities Commissioner Wendy Moser, the state member who sponsored a NARUC-passed resolution backing a two-year freeze (see 1807180018). “Given that the majority of the Joint Board rests with the state members, and all that is needed for a recommended decision is a majority, the FCC should take the Joint Board recommended decision as submitted by the states. The FCC can then decide whether to adopt it or explain why not. ... Given the simplicity of the process, one has to wonder what the FCC is trying to accomplish in acting contrary to Congress' intent of having a Joint Board in the first place.”