M&A Journal: CenturyLink and Level 3?

February 19th, 2012 by · 45 Comments

A reader recently asked me to comment on a possible combination of CenturyLink (NYSE:CTL, news, filings) and Level 3 Communications (NYSE:LVLT, news, filings) after the two have finished their respective integrations. Various articles and research notes have alluded to the possibility of late, including this IBD piece.  And of course I'm a sucker for the occasional M&A speculation, so here goes.

Both companies look far different today than they did a year ago. CenturyLink's purchases of Qwest and Savvis gave it much greater scale, an international focus, and a real presence in the cloud. Meanwhile, Level 3's purchase of Global Crossing has now put it in a position where its debt no longer looks as formidable alongside the business as a whole as it once did, lowering the barrier to an offer that had seemed insurmountable for so long. Hence, the possible merger of the two is a completely different question now than it was a year ago. So let's take a quick survey of things:

In support of the combination:

  • Asset Fit — CenturyLink's main problem is the same one that Qwest faced earlier - the lack of metro depth, especially in the tier 1 markets outside their LEC footprint gives them a scarcity of off-ramps. Meanwhile Savvis had an international presence that, as nice as it was, didn't have fiber underlying it. Level 3's metro and international footprint would give CenturyLink some real infrastructure muscle to go with the international foothold they now have.
  • Synergies — There can be no doubt that the potential synergies would be substantial. The savings on the combined longhaul networks alone would be a couple hundred million dollars, while Level 3's metro presence would help the former Qwest business's margins.
  • A Cloud Boost — Savvis and Qwest gave CenturyLink a substantial colo footprint, but Level 3 has quite a lot of square feet as well and in a lot more places. Additionally, Level 3's multinational enterprise presence would be very complementary, giving CenturyLink more exposure to customers in this vertical and a more viable way to take on AT&T and Verizon with cloud-based services.

Hurdles it must clear:

  • Intangibles and Multiples — Level 3 has gone through hell and back to get to the position it is in now. Both its management and its investors have something to prove here -- something they can't do by selling at multiples that don't give them credit for the unrealized potential they have been working for so long to bring out.  To entice them over that hump will require a substantial premium well beyond the one their assets have always given them relative to other competitive operators. Putting it simply, Level 3 doesn't need to deal anymore whether it be buying or selling. CenturyLink paid up to bring home the Savvis deal, but would they do it again on a scale several times larger? I'm not so sure.
  • Better targets — If CenturyLink is after those metro off-ramps, there are cheaper ways to get there. There are other collections of national assets out there that would give them what they need for a fraction of the overall price. tw telecom wouldn't be cheap, but their enterprise business is very finely tuned and always seemed to be a possible fit for the Qwest assets to me, with little baggage. XO would be a cheaper alternative that is likely to be available later this year, while AboveNet's tier-1 focus would be the most targeted purchase. Then there are regional possibilities too: Sidera or FiberLight would give them metro depth in the right places, for instance.  Meanwhile, Level 3 has been hinting its inorganic interests are more of the international variety for now.
  • Regulatory Scrutiny — The combination of Level 3 and CenturyLink would bring together such a large fraction of the most recent national (Level 3, Qwest) and partial national (Broadwing, WilTel) fiber/conduit builds of the bubble era that they would be sitting on the vast majority of raw theoretical intercity capacity in the ground. Level 3 already took some flak for its transit marketshare over the summer, but if you take out Qwest's remaining wholesale potential then some people are going to get quite nervous about the transport side of things.
  • Culture — When it comes right down to it, both CenturyLink, Qwest, Embarq, and others purchased along the way are all ILECs, and the addition of the Savvis colo/cloud assets hasn't shifted that balance the way that the PAETEC/KDL/NuVox deals may be shifting Windstream. Level 3 and all those it has purchased have always been from the other side of the competitive tracks. You can make it work on a spreadsheet, but there are some major cultural pitfalls out there that don't show up on spreadsheets.

Final thoughts — I guess what I'm saying is that while one can definitely make the case for a CenturyLink purchase of Level 3 next winter, it isn't nearly as obvious a case as the CTL/Q or LVLT/GLBC deals were. The synergies and strategies are there, but the underlying driving forces aren't as compelling because both companies have other options and no particular urgency.  It certainly could happen, but there are other combinations that seem just as likely to me, if not more so.

What do you think?  Are these two destined to get hitched?  Or are analysts barking up the wrong tree?

Categories: ILECs, PTTs · Internet Backbones · Mergers and Acquisitions · Metro fiber

Join the Discussion!

45 Comments So Far


  • en_ron_hubbard says:

    Two thoughts:

    — I think CTL’s “biggest problem” is a declining top line given its ILEC business. More metro connectivity would be nice of course but as you point out cheaper options than LVLT exist.

    — Perhaps the largest impediment to a deal is value expectations. SEAM, almost a control holder of LVLT, just recently said they value LVLT at 3x its current price. That’s not a recipe for a deal.

  • Anonymous says:

    XO will be sold one day after Icahns death. For a $1. LOL.

  • Anonymous says:

    the question isn’t whether or not this is a good deal but whether or not i-bankers can find enough yield hungry investors to finance yet another massive tranche of Level 3 debt.

    I-bankers will pitch any and every combination to corporate boards. They’ll present staggering DCF models along with napkins for executives and board members to wipe the drool from their chins after showing their wildly unattainable shareholder return expectations based on fictitious multiples and synergies.

    Level 3 shareholders have been poorly rewarded over the last 5 and 10 years while creditor returns have been quite impressive. Two questions seem relevant: How much more debt can level 3 take on before credit investors balk? and how much longer will shareholders wait before demanding an alternate course of action — e.g., selling off assets or selling the company?

    Level 3 reminds me of that kid in school that many teachers loved — the one with all that potential, chart-topping standardized test scores and quick understanding of every subject — that never went on to do anything because no one ever demanded anything from her for fear they’d disturb this gifted child’s learning process.

    This “gifted company” syndrome plaques many public companies. Boards keep permitting long-standing executives to under-perform virtually every relevant index in the hopes that these gifted executives’ talents will shortly emerge, unleashing a tsunami of shareholder value. The tsunami never occurs, board members become complacent with each new annual stock award and pretty soon only the shareholders that put their own money at risk find themselves forced to dump their shares onto another of group of unwitting investors sucked into the “gifted company” narrative.

  • CarlK says:

    Anonymous, is that your attempt in getting Level 3 to capitulate? That was a spectacularly written Bear Thesis you created.

    Here’s why a deal won’t happen beyond the fact that Level 3 is the buyer, not the seller, when they decide to consolidate further.

    Enron_Hubbard has just dismissed SEAM’s analysis as flawed at least for the time being.

    Although Rob points to international opportunities in order for Level 3’s zest to expand, I keep wondering about the mobile space, and bringing together Sprint, Clearwire and Level 3 with the right management team being adopted on the wireless side.

    Sprint is an enterprise that needs a change of leadership starting at the head of the class, not unlike AT&T!

  • B says:

    I would say Anonymous summarized LVLT’s existence quite nicely and accurately. Without going BK they have been about the next closest thing for shareholders yet the Execs get paid handsomely like they have been doing a good job for all these years. I hold some shares still and I hope they get bought out and I can just move on and salvage some return and then forget this company and bad management ever existed.

  • CarlK says:

    You can criticize the Level 3 Management Team, especially Jim Crowe all you like, with plenty of Monday morning quarterbacking complaints like I have over years; however, I don’t think there has been more INEPT managerial decisions and blunders than what Hesse of Sprint has done recently, while Stephenson of Telephone is only elevated above him for blowing the $4B owners capital while expecting his MONOPOLY HUBRIS alone to afford him the necessary slam dunk on what was a good idea, except for the customers who would have suffered being usurped by his company during the process!

    Big (3) is finally coming to a telecom playing field near you soon!

    Count on it with the rest of the global “ENTERPRISES” craving the “CHANGE!”

    • B says:

      You state:
      “Big (3) is finally coming to a telecom playing field near you soon!”

      Lol..never heard that before in what now..11, 12 years or however long this pig has been around. Don’t get me wrong I want to make money too but every year is the year for Level 3. And well…how is that working out?

  • schmuckinsurance says:

    ERH,

    My opinion after 2 reviews of CTL is that they are too focused on the topline and I also worry that they are at a permanent strategic disadvantage to comcast post the VZ deal.

    As it relates to L3, I don’t think SEAM’s valuation is that far from my number or yours which hopefully for the three of us means that let’s just call the biggest thing holding up a potential deal – time.

    While cheaper options exist, CTL has a record of pursuing acquisitions that provide scale which helps them solve to their aforementioned topline obsession that makes L3 or TWTC top targets. I just wonder if cable would ever decide to be the 2nd bidder for assets of this size.

    SI

    • robert says:

      Well a valuation of three times where the pig is at today is $60. $4 on a pre-split basis. I don’t think SEAM is in this for $4. Try $20 on a pre-split basis, or they take their ball and go home.

      • Level3 says:

        Level 3 is under fire for being a possible take over target, I think the big gun should show his hand. Put Warren’s feet to the fire and take over SEAM’s shares.

        Roll up your sleeves WEB make a big snowball.

        Time to put your money where your mouth is.

        I like how you think robert – Try $20 on a pre-split basis

        *******************************************
        Warren Buffett, chairman of Berkshire Hathaway, issued the following comment on his company’s investment in Level 3: “Liquid resources and strong financial backing are scarce and valuable assets in today’s telecommunications world. Level 3 has both. Coupled with the management of Walter Scott and Jim Crowe, in whom I have great confidence, Level 3 is well equipped to seize important opportunities that are likely to develop in the communications industry.”

  • CarlK says:

    B, you seem to have TUNED OUT to the flawless delivery of the Superbowl from Lucas Oil Stadium this season. The Level 3 Network did that for those with their EYES peered to SCREENS of all shapes and sizes.

    Don’t worry though. Their ubiquitous network is connecting to playing fields around the globe in order for pundits as well as the impatient to see the LIGHT!

    Rome was not built in a day, nor were all the IP ROADS leading to Level 3.

    “Walter Scott is a great builder.” Warren E. Buffett

    You must “THINK AHEAD” with Level3! 🙂

  • Anonymous says:

    Carl, unfortunately for investors, Level3 isn’t a builder anymore. Level3 is in the business of selling network services to carriers and enterprise customers.

    Lest you forgot there were some great railroad builders in the 19th century also, but, sadly, not many profitable railroads.

    Level 3 needs to sweat the lines or assets it owns. It needs to fill those lines (or glass) with profitable traffic instead of commoditized traffic.

    As for your superbowl remark, would the viewing experience really have been any different if VZ or T had dropped it drawers sufficiently to win the superbowl contract? I suspect it would not have been but neither T nor VZ are dependent on the headline/pr news from such a sale to sell their other services to other customers. Therein lies one of the many many differences between Level3 and the companies whose club it wants so badly to be a member of.

    Instead of thinking of themselves as builders Level3 needs to think of themselves like marketers. They need a fresh non-telecom set of eyes to chart their future in the same way IBM brought in Lou Gerstner from Amex Travel Services to chart theirs.

    Staying with the same “builders” or merely recycling old telecom executive talent will not radically change Level 3’s course.

    This company is now 2x bigger (in revenue and workforce) than anything Jim Crowe has ever run, including Crowe’s MFS days.

    Unfortunately, the bungling Level 3 board of directors lacks the gumption to bring in fresh executives, for example, from Caterpillar, IBM, M&M Mars, GE, etc. So instead investors get more of the same thinking, strategy, tactics, marketing, service delivery, bundling, and so on.

    An executive appointment from a strong outsider would send a meaningful signal to investors, customers and stakeholders that Level3 plans to grow its business beyond the traditional models currently tweaked from time to time at the edges.

    Too many of us in this business think it’s impossible for an outsider to step in and understand it. We look back at one poor example from the 90s, C. Michael Armstrong, RR Donnelly’s former (second rate) CEO who became the CEO of ATT as evidence that an outsider can’t run a telecom firm.

    That’s nonsense and the sooner XO, Level3, CTL and others recognize this, the sooner they’ll be searching for unique ways to create shareholder value.

  • CarlK says:

    Anonymous, did I not suggest that the building is much closer to complete and the selling is revving up for enterprises, now that prior buy it vs. build it integration messes are behind the company?

    Warren E. Buffett

    There are going to be some people with their heads handed to them before this is over. It won’t be soon enough when it finally happens. If your Anonymous state provides you with any clues, I recommend that you hand them over to the authorities for a whistle blower fee.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16993488

  • CarlK says:

    Where did that pasted WEB quote go that I thought I had released while dovetailing it with the full quote posted by Level3 earlier? Oh, here it is, and we are still in good management hands nearly ten years later:

    “Coupled with the management of Walter Scott and Jim Crowe, in whom I have great confidence, Level 3 is well equipped to seize important opportunities that are likely to develop in the communications industry.”

  • Anonymous says:

    I wouldn’t put too much weight on SEAM’s valuation process for LVLT. The only people that have been more wrong about LVLT than SEAM are the ones that bought before they did.

    When you claim a company is undervalued every single year and the stock price doesn’t cooperate, you need to reexamine your valuation method, not the stock market. Markets occasionally get things wrong, but not for 10-15 years.

  • B says:

    But, but…THIS IS THE YEAR! Seriously, I hope LVLT makes it big some day (err..I mean decade) and ends up a solid company and at least repays some of the many burned shareholders that have been absolutely raked over the coals with this pig and are still hanging on (as bad mgmt fed off this hog for free year after year). I just hope those people are still alive to enjoy it if it ever happens.

  • Parkite says:

    Lvlt…….where equity capital goes to die.

  • Rob Powell says:

    Now now guys, it’s actually been quite a long time since the paradise on the horizon seemed so near for LVLT. Not since the summer of 2007 actually – every year since then has looked bleak well ahead of time. Right now it doesn’t take heroic assumptions at all to see both positive eps and substantial free cash flow by next spring.

  • Anonymous says:

    Rob, “next spring” as in 2013? Why not tell us now what you forecast for FCF at that time? Without an actual number your “substantial free cash flow” forecast is merely an empty statement.

    Carl, sorry, as usual, I understand about 25% of your comments. The other 75% are unrelated, irrelevant, unintelligible or undecipherable.

    All I know is that Level3 has failed to create any shareholder value over the last 5 and 10 year windows. Over that horizon they have acquired numerous companies with a variety of different assets and accumulated massive amounts of debt.

    It naturally follows that either they’re paying too much for these assets to service the debt and, simultaneously, create shareholder value OR their management is incapable of creating shareholder value with the assets they acquire.

    There really is no other explanation.

    Given their history why should investors have a warm and fuzzy feeling about their most recent acquisition or their next one?

    As noted above, the only Level3 investors that have consistently made money are the creditors. Shareholders, on the other hand, passively listen to Level3 management promise game changing results, tectonic shifts in the telecom landscape and paradigm shifting models that year after year fail to materialize.

    Executives are gifted, not granted, Restricted Stock Units (RSUs) year after year regardless of performance. (Just check the SEC filings and def-proxy statements.) These golden handcuffs keep dead-wood executives tethered to the company, especially when successive awards rain down annually regardless of performance. This same scenario applies to the dead-wood board members as well. In fact, a depressed stock price is a boon to executives if the price decline occurs coincident to the annual award. (Award is merely a dollar amount divided price of stock. Cheap stock equals more stock to executives and more dilution to patient shareholders.)

    Parkite nailed it — LVLT is the place equity capital goes to die.

    • en_ron_hubbard says:

      Anonymous:

      FYI, Citibank, which has a neutral outlook on the stock, recently came out with new estimates for FCF generation. These numbers are based on 3-4% revenue CAGR and are as follows:

      FY 13 $144
      FY 14 $266
      FY 15 $452

      My own estimates are far more aggressive because they are based on a 7% CAGR, and I get to $500+ by FY ’14. I think that would qualify as “substantial”.

      • CarlK says:

        Enron, “substantial” or not, NEXT acquisition, PLEASE!

        I am thinking there is now a CLEARWIRE to SPRINT onto BIG (3)’s backbone!

        Anonymous, YOU SOB, can you decipher that!

      • Robert says:

        With those estimated cash flows, the monopolative (is that a word) powers that be better make a move soon, or the price could get away from them. Then they will no longer be as monopolative.

      • Anonymous says:

        En_Ron, thanks for your forecast.

        There are substantial risks to cash flow forecasts which always seem to be under-considered in the present but seem so obvious in hindsight.

        Is there anything that could possibly impair those numbers? Given that Level3 has repeatedly missed forecasts in the past, I’m just curious about what events could cause Level3 to miss the Citi forecast and your optimistic forecast.

        How much would each event alter the forecasted FCF outcome? And what is the probability of each event arising?

        Here are some very basic risks I see and this is hardly an exhaustive list:

        (1) Net Neutrality moves against Level3 and IP Transport revenue which is quite substantial stagnates or, worse, shrinks considerably;
        (2) Comcast/VZ/T introduce their own successful CDN solutions causing Level3’s CDN business to suffer greatly;
        (3) Euro crisis goes unresolved impacting European economy, including the UK where Global Crossing derived a large portion of their revenue and margin dollars;
        (4) Latin American economies stagnate or fail to maintain same growth trajectory;

        These are just a few. We can add to the possibility of potentially large new entrants in the telecom space, namely google and microsoft which have acquired substantial telecom assets over the last 5 years and have balance sheets to support more aggressive participation if that’s the direction their managements’ chose to go. Also, Comcast has been slowly moving up the telecom value chain starting first with consumers and micro-businesses but now setting sights on regional small and medium size enterprises.

        The examples above are simply macroeconomic, regulatory or industry phenomena. What about at the enterprise level? What could impair cash flows there?

        To name a few:

        (1) Synergy savings don’t meet the forecasted targets;
        (2) Layoffs cut too deep;
        (3) Insufficient investment in system integration causing inefficiencies;
        (4) Quick cash dark fiber sales dry up.

        Obviously, there are numerous variables that can impact a precarious growth story, many of which are out of the company’s control. Nonetheless, as an investor I care about the outcome, not about the excuses for missing numbers. If the cash flow forecast is rife with risk, I’m better off investing in companies whose risk profile is not so precarious.

        • Rob Powell says:

          Heh, nobody can guarantee the future – which is why I said simply that heroic assumptions aren’t needed in this case. Run of the mill assumptions, however, certainly are! 🙂

          • Anonymous says:

            Rob, this may sound harsh, but that sound like a cop-out answer. If you’re merely saying “hey, there’s risk in the world and no one can predict the future so let’s not think about those possibilities”, then I’d say you’re missing the point of forecasting. Your answer also explains why they have repeatedly failed to convert acquired assets into shareholder value.

            Shareholders are paying JC, Storey, Patel, et al a lot of money not to run a company under a perfect set of conditions. They’re paying them a lot of money to think and prepare for possible risks to the plan.

            Sensitivity analyses must be performed to consider potential variances. Any company that is not baking risks into the plan is planning for a surprise. And that company will spend more time preparing the excuses for missing forecasts than they did for planning possible pitfalls in the plan.

            I don’t expect level3 to hire macroeconomists to forecast the euro crisis outcome. But I do expect them to think about possible courses of action they will take or alternate investments they will make should a high risk market jeopardize their forecast.

            Shareholders don’t want to hear JC on a conference call tell them that “well, the euro crisis hurt us and there was really nothing we could do about it. So our numbers were off considerably.” Or “Well, the FCC got net neutrality issue all wrong and our IP Tranist revenue suffered.”

        • schmuckinsurance says:

          Anon –
          I think you confuse the magnitude of risks with the materiality. Your risks –
          (1) Net neutrality. Not sure this is more of a concern that it was before, if anything it seems like the web is getting less neutral than before please see TWTC comments/Govt filings on VZ/T cost of access .
          (2) CDN is tiny, less than 2% of revs, and the carriers have failed at this business for years. Not sure what changes this.
          (3) Europe is 18% of revenue but I don’t think anyone has talked about turning off their internet other than Iran.
          (4) LatAm at 12% of revs may slow but that’s fine from these levels.
          (5) Synergy savings may not meet targets, layoffs could run too deep, investment may be insufficient but these are all lessons they are proactively addressing. Expensive lessons are hard to forget.

          When you balance the above risks with even Citigroup’s analyst FCF number, who doesn’t care for the stock, you are looking at 5% forward cash yield by this time next year.

          As it stands, without looking at the future, this cash coupon is backed by an undeniably strong asset base, in a growing market, with a broadening customer base, financed by falling & cheaper leverage, with less geographic concentration, in a tax deferred way when it becomes taxable in a decade. For all of these reasons, I believe the risk to the coupon is falling precipitously.

          Armed with a lower risk 5% coupon you are getting a productive asset with an upside case Wall Street or even this board has been unwilling to make publicly.

          Maybe they they successfully continue sweating the asset base, but if not I will pocket a cash coupon which is better than I can get in a high grade bond. If so, than maybe there is something more than a nice yield and inflation protection. I am obviously in the latter camp.

          • Schmuckinsurance says:

            Simon flannery looks like he jumped onboard. While cowen and davidson beat him to punch, there have been 11 other analysts who wouldn’t recommend l3, now there is a bulge bracket on board.

  • Justin says:

    As with any large project untaking of this size and magnitude and with the intentions of changing the communications industry things don’t happen overnight. I am currently engaged in a Tier 1 system project in healthcare that is going to take approx 6 years to complete not to mention the payback period it will take. We’ve had bumps in the road, re-scope efforts, and then government mandates pop up to change things. This company has put together a global network. Things I like to look at are the past track records of leadership, technology they hold, and the investors backing the company. Investors need to be patient. Projects come with risks and there are always bumps in the road along the way. Look at the past track records for SEAM, Walter Scott, and Jim Crowe. SEAM added during the last quarter again as well if you review the quarterly report.

    Thanks for the great analysis Rob!

  • CarlK says:

    Spoken like a TRUE MISCREANT, Anonymous. Yes, embarking upon creating the most advanced communications network the world will ever know, in front of the demand which was stymied by Monopolists along the way, has made them vulnerable to attacks such as yours.

    Understand this, you SOB! For if it hadn’t been for nefarious, illegal practices by the criminals behind “Mr. Market’s” curtain, who were intent on pummelling the price of this security at the same time foregoing “supply/demand” factors during the process, this ENTERPRISE would never have fallen to the price per share levels it has. Therefore, hedge fund criminals caused much of the DILUTION equity owners have needed to endure up to date. I guarantee it!

    Don’t worry though. Today’s dilution as I have postulated over time, are tomorrow’s share buybacks in the form of the perpetual cash flows this enterprise is on the cusp of GENERATING!

    http://www.thewallstreetconspiracy.com/

  • Anonymous says:

    Carl, seriously, share buybacks? I think even Sunit fell off his chair and is rolling on the floor wildly scissor-kicking his legs in the air in uncontrollable laughter over that one. I think it’s pretty safe to say there won’t be share buybacks at level 3 anytime soon.

    A somewhat more curious observation that highlights just little confidence investors seem to have in this management:

    ATT made one of the most costly errors in judgment in recent financial history when they included in their term sheet billions in break-up fees if the t-mobile deal failed to close. It didn’t close and it cost ATT billions. At the same time your beloved Level3 actually closed a deal to acquire a company it wanted, Global Crossing.

    How have the stocks performed since Oct 1 when the Level3/Global Crossing deal closed and ATT/T-Mobile deal denied?

    Miraculous as it sounds, ATT has actually outperformed LVLT.

    (Just so we’re clear, I believe, ATT CEO, Randall Stephenson, should have been fired for that horrible miscalculation — if for no other reason than his idiotic acceptance at the time of the deal’s announcement of the onerous and costly break-up conditions should the deal fail to close.)

  • CarlK says:

    Interesting filing after market. Why doesn’t ANONYMOUS write us a full ONE PAGE long DIATRIBE on what this means including all the RISK FACTORS!

    Anonymous, you SOB, you’re UP!

    http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/794323/000110465912011747/a12-5658_18k.htm

    • Anonymous says:

      Carl,at least, i will say this: you consistently don’t disappoint with your pointless nonsequiturs.

      But if your feeble mind needs an explanation, it appears to be name change to a board committee.

      You remind me of the guy at the party who walks up to a group deeply engaged in a conversation about yankees pitching and interject with a superbowl comment.

  • CarlK says:

    Anonymous, I am glad you bring up my favorite sport and team in the history of the game; The New York Yankees, because I despise football, unless of course, my Big (3) Network is delivering their Super Bowl Game, and all of their games during the season in HD ubiquitously, unlike those PIRATES at Akamai who only wish they were delivering Super Bowl content in the shapes, sizes, and manner that Big (3) just did!

    Nope, you are failing at becoming an Accountant or Lawyer, Anonymous, for you must read every line with INTENSE FOCUS, and WRITE less.

    Try door #2, and if you’re lucky Carol Merrill of former “Let’s Make a Deal” fame, might have a valuable PRIZE for you instead of the DONKEY’s ASS that appeared from your FIRST TRY.

    (2) change the Company’s registered office in the State of Delaware and registered agent in the State of Delaware to: 1209 Orange Street, Wilmington, New Castle County, Delaware 19801 and the Corporation Trust Company, respectfully.

  • Anonymous says:

    nice job columbo, you really blew the lid off of the address and agent change…relevance?

  • CarlK says:

    Confer with the second smartest DONKEY’s ASS hiding his IDENTITY on this forum for advice. He’ll know what to say, except when the criminal empires of his great “little companies” who were caught transporting illegal content, including the ongoing “investigation,” doesn’t seem to make it in any of the headline Wall Street reports post earnings, nor are there any comments by those including him after listening in to the CC. You would think that someone who was not in the mood to look the other way during such serious matters, might have asked, so Dave, WTF are THE RISK FACTORS for your company GOING UNDER tied to this CF with MEGAUPLOAD!

    You want RISK FACTORS, ANONYMOUS! Go ask that other SOB!

  • Anonymous says:

    elbarehpicednu era stnemmoc ruoy .ssakcaj etelpmoc dna ,tihs bmud ,norom gnikcuf a era uoy ,snoitalutargnoc

  • CarlK says:

    !!!!REKCUF REHTOM UOY,UOY OT KCAB THGIR

  • Rob Powell says:

    Et’slay eepkay itway eanclay olksfay.

  • CarlK says:

    ANONYMOUS, after more than twelve years of witnessing the Wall Street CRIMINAL CABAL utilize every dirty trick in the book, legal and illegal to destroy a valuable U.S. Enterprise encroaching on their DEAD WOOD MONOPOLIES including but not limited to that Dean Davidson RUSE and LIE they just used to stop our forward momentum, you are now my LAP DOG!

    Go FETCH, PHIDO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Liz says:

    I see the FCC jumping in when it comes time to sign the dotted line. Big companies = lots of power. question is will they be too powerful?

  • It looks like the Rumor Mill likes this scenario again. Today, C-Link merging with L3 rumors popping up

  • schmuckinsurance says:

    Surprised it ended for L3 with CTL, I would have thought Google or Comcast would have been more interested.

  • Andy says:

    What do I think? I think you nailed it!

Leave a Comment

You may Log In to post a comment, or fill in the form to post anonymously.





  • Ramblings’ Jobs

    Post a Job - Just $99/30days
  • Event Calendar