SBC has joined forces with AT&T and taken its name...but the growth
still isn't there.
By Paul R. La Monica, CNNMoney.com senior writer
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) - Ma Bell is back. But it almost seems like
she never left.
SBC, the Baby Bell that was spun off during the AT&T breakup in 1984,
agreed to buy AT&T earlier this year. But SBC decided to hold onto the
old AT&T name for the combined company.
The deal was completed in November and shortly after closing, SBC got
rid of its "SBC" ticker symbol. Effective Dec. 1, the new AT&T
(Research) even adopted Ma Bell's old "T" ticker symbol.
So SBC no longer exists. It's now AT&T. Get it?
Lots of static
But can the new AT&T do any better in the cutthroat world of telecom
than the old one, or for that matter, the standalone SBC, did?
Analysts are skeptical.
Investors looking for the merger to quickly boost profits through cost
cutting may be in for a surprise.
"We think full realization [of cost-saving efforts] may not come until
2009 or beyond, which is a long time in this industry," wrote Dave Novosel,
an analyst with fixed-income research firm Gimme Credit in a recent report.
The other rationale behind SBC buying AT&T was that SBC would be able
to bolster its presence with so-called enterprise accounts, large
national corporations buying long-distance and data services.
SBC, like fellow Baby Bells Verizon (Research), BellSouth (Research)
and Qwest (Research), had struggled to extend its corporate business
beyond local regions. AT&T and its rival MCI (the former WorldCom)
remained tops in the enterprise game.
But holding on to AT&T's enviable list of Fortune 500 clients won't be
easy. With MCI (Research) being bought by Verizon, one analyst said he
thinks that the competition between the new AT&T and Verizon could be
After all, the old AT&T and MCI often had to resort to price wars in
order to hold onto enterprise business and that's a big reason why
revenues at the old Ma Bell had started to decline.
"It's possible that Verizon and AT&T will come to unwritten terms on
having their own fiefdoms and not killing each other," said Patrick
Comack, an analyst with Zachary Investment Research. "But these guys
are going to be shooting for national accounts and I don't see how
they avoid bumping heads in a serious way."
Another analyst points out that as a result of the merger, AT&T will
not have as big a presence in the more lucrative wireless market. SBC
co-owns Cingular Wireless with BellSouth but the old AT&T unloaded its
wireless unit a few years ago and was left with mainly consumer long
distance and corporate divisions.
"We remain concerned with AT&T's higher exposure to the declining
enterprise long distance market as well as its moderately aggressive
broadband strategy which dilute the benefit of Cingular," wrote Kevin
Moore, an analyst with Wachovia Capital Markets, in a recent report.
Moore estimates that the new AT&T will generate less than a quarter of
its sales and about 21.5 percent of its earnings before interest,
taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) from the Cingular
By way of comparison, BellSouth generates about 41 percent of its
total revenue and 31 percent of EBITDA from wireless, Moore estimated.
Comack added that investors considering bets in telecom should focus
on companies that have stronger wireless businesses. He said that in
addition to competition from Verizon's wireless unit, the new AT&T
will face increased pressure from Sprint Nextel (Research) and the
group of top cable companies that are partnering with Sprint to offer
their own wireless service.
"If you are going to be in telecom at all, you want to be in wireless
stocks. There is no reason to be an investor in SBC/AT&T," he said.
And if competition from other big phone and cable companies wasn't bad
enough, AT&T also has to contend with a host of new challengers such as
Internet phone companies Vonage and Skype, which is now owned by eBay
(Research). Search giants Google (Research) and Yahoo! (Research) could
become a force in the so-called voice over Internet protocol (VoIP) market
To be sure, the new AT&T has a VoIP offering of its own. But Victor
Schnee, president of Probe Financial Associates, an independent
telecom research firm, said that the toughest task for the new AT&T
will be trying to expand in emerging telecom businesses like VoIP and
digital television services while also dealing with the integration of
the more mature assets from the old AT&T.
"This is a work in progress," said Schnee. "They are struggling with
how do they modernize and take advantage of new growth markets. It's
hard to get excited about closing the AT&T deal."
Other telcos are much better bargains
Of course, some might argue that all these risks are already priced
into the stock. AT&T, after all, trades at just 14 times 2006 earnings
estimates. But that's not exactly a bargain considering that analysts
expect earnings to increase by just 6.7 percent next year.
BellSouth also trades at 14 times next year's profit projections but
analysts expect earnings to increase by 11 percent. And even though
Sprint Nextel trades at a premium of 16 times 2006 estimates, it also
looks like a better bet than AT&T since its profits are expected to
increase by nearly 14 percent next year.
Given its prospects, the new Ma Bell looks an awful lot like the old
Ma Bell. And that's not a good thing.
Analysts quoted in this story do not own shares of the companies
mentioned. Wachovia has done banking for AT&T, BellSouth and Qwest The
other firms do not have investment banking ties to the companies.
Copyright 2005 CNN Money.
NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the
daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/more-news.html . Hundreds of new
*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without
profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the
understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic
issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I
believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish
to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner, in this instance, CNN Money.
For more information go to:
To discuss this with other readers, go to our forum area: