Sprint predictions anyone???

TheDude · Post by **TheDude** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 4:13 pm

"theres no place like home, theres no place like home, theres no place like home"--you know who from you know what

Ok all, time to lay some bets. Although I predicted this a few years ago, it seems as though the prediction is coming closer to reality: Sprint will be sold within the next 24 months and OP will be stuck with the biggest transitional housing project (for former Sprint employees) in the world. The clock tower will be demolished (as to prevent sniper fire, aka Texas A&M) and all jump zones located on the perimieter parking decks will be blocked off to prevent jumpers.

Reasons?

1. New board
2. New CEO with no ties to the KC area--his job is to turn get the machine lean and mean for the sales block.
3. Cuts in personnel (cube bees all the way up to upper management) 4. Offshoring
5. sprint is not a legacy product/service

these factors combined with several others ( to long to mention here w/out a discussion of acquisition and merger theory) demonstrates a classic case of a company positioning itself for sale. think things are bad in kc now? wait till that bomb drops.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 4:20 pm

that would suck, not just for OP, for the region....I'm not sure who could buy them and get it though the FTC.

GuyInLenexa · Post by **GuyInLenexa** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 5:32 pm

That is a possibility, but the rumor of mergers has been on and off at Sprint since the day I went to work for them in 1988.
The Sprint campus is set up to be leased out individually by building. Each building has separated for IT and utility functions and it could easily be broken apart.
Gary Forsee, the new CEO does have Kansas City ties. He was the president of the Long Distance Division for some time, at the old LDD Headquarters on Ward Parkway in KCMO. He went to BellSouth some time ago.
Most of the changes are due to a stagnant stock price and the lack of growth of our market share. We have spent too much time cutting costs since instead of growing revenue ever since the merger proposals with WorldCom.
Esrey, a native Kansas Citian would have had not problem leaving the KC area in disarray. He would have been out of here to his new home in Vail before the food riots broke out on the campus.
The 3.5 million plus square feet of office left would be eventually refilled. Like you said it would not be good for the entire region.
Sprint has been a company (if you count it’s origins as United Telephone) since 1899 with their roots from this region. Even if it merged, the campus would not necessarily be a headquarters, but I am sure it would remain as a major presence for what ever it become or merges with. Here on campus, there are not major rumors spread of a merger or takeover. This place is a sieve and such a thing would leak out way before it would be common knowledge. The WorldCom issue is an excellent example of that.
As far as the ugly tower, funny comment, they joke about that a lot here. One thing though, it was University of Texas at Austin, not A&M that the sniper incident occurred.
As far as 24 months. I would bet against you on that one. I agree it is a possibility, but I think most of the companies that we would expect to buy us out are not in that good of shape themselves.
Even our PCS group, our most visible product, is not doing all that well the cellular market share will soon gridlock like the long distance product did ten years ago.
When the lease signs do go up on the Sprint campus, I bet you that the “for lease” signs will surely read “Cohen-Esrey”.
I think in a longer term of time, you may be right, Dude.
It would be a blow to the region to lose a major, highly visible corporate headquarters. KC was not at all aware how close we were to losing it with the WorldCom merger issue.
One other thing should be considered, the merging company may move their headquarters here instead of a location that costs too much to run, or does not have a large and state of the art facility like there is here in KC.
Time will tell.
My prediction is that we will merge with someone within five years. There will have to be a major upturn in telecommunications. Sprint will layoff a large amount of people in the next two years and it will be able to operate all of the KC operations on a lot less.
It will remain in GKC (Greater KC) but it will never the major force, or have the reputation as a major force here.
KC needs to concentrate on snagging other companies here, not from each other but from other places. Moving a company from Downtown to Westwood does not bring in new jobs. We should be scouting all over California right now. Leave before their state starts to make major policies to keep their jobs from leaving.
I don’t care if it is TWA/American, Folgers, Sprint, or what ever jobs leave, the city and state governments on both sides need to bring in new blood. Not kowtow to them making offers and apeasments We should develop a certain facet of industry to concentrate on like engineering (I think KC mentioned that in another thread.)
We need to stop fretting over what we could be losing but attempting to find new things that were not here before.
In a nutshell, we need to be more competitive as a region, not have competition within the region.
So much as I close the week here at the Sprint Campus Monstrosity. I am still here!
As of now, there are no merger rumors here at Sprint. Just the reorg is a major issue. There will be a lot of changes by Christmas.

TheDude · Post by **TheDude** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 5:46 pm

HOLY MOLEY Batman! I stand corrected on several issues (Texas, not A&M) and I agree that there are several options that could happen to Sprint, some good some bad. I hate to see anyone lose a job, regardless if its Sprint, Gateway, Butler Mfct, Farmland, etc. Maybe we are witnessing a paradigm shift in economic theory which will someday be explained in Econ 101??

You are so right about scouting for CA companies; time is right. If we don't take a regionalist approach to our woes, we will continue to get passed up. Thanks for the insight.

Keep the Faith!

QueSi2Opie · Post by **QueSi2Opie** » Sat Nov 01, 2003 9:10 am

I don't wanna even think about Sprint folding; the wifey would be out of a job and we'd have to be forced to leave KC and move to Las Vegas. My wife was close friends with three families that already lost their jobs with Sprint. One family, from Belton, has relocated to Cincinatti for a job offer...and another family, from Olathe, has relocated to Atlanta for a job offer. The third family, from KCMO, has filed for a divorce because of the money issue, losing a house, etc., and the husband is goin' back home to Dallas for a job. For my wife, it's sad to see her friends go.

Post by **dangerboy** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 12:17 am

Sprint's most likely merger partner after MCI/Worldcom has always been Bell South. However with Bell South's recently proposed purchase of AT&T, any merger with Sprint would be unlikely. My bet is the company breaks up. The long distance business would probably be carved up by the Baby Bells, and the wireless business would be bought by Verizon, which has a compatible CDMA network.

Sprint had a really good opportunity to create a fully integrated telecom company in the 1990s, but squandered that chance and left themselves vulnerable to the recession.

GuyInLenexa · Post by **GuyInLenexa** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 10:34 am

I think that too many questions would come up if we merged with BellSouth, especially since Forsee came from here, to there, and back again.
Telecommunications companies are in such poor shape that none of them are in the condition to buy one of the other out.
Compared to other companies, Sprint is doing satisfactory. Low debt, etc. like our sister companies though, we have had our stocks dramatically deflated.
My director told us to be bolstered for a large amount of layoffs before Christmas (Ho Ho Ho).
I think the merger rumors will come back around in a few years. If I were to choose a likely suitor for Sprint, I would guess Verizon. There have been some rumors of Sprint buying QWest. I, personally, do not se that being likely. If it happened. The headquarters would remain here In Greater KC.
I could see that all the people working for Sprint in KC will be on campus in a year, with a few exceptions. I could also see that number going from 16,000 to 11,000 in a year or two.
More of a reason that our city fathers and the powers that be should be searching for new companies.
We should have all sorts of marketing out there showing what a great place KC is to relocate your business.
We can't have all our eggs in one basket. Things change in this new global economy, they change very fast.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 10:43 am

agreed about all the eggs in one basket...historically that's why KC has done so well in economic downturns...we're not overly heavy in any one segment of the economy.

Good2Great · Post by **Good2Great** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 11:31 am

And what would happen to the clothing stores who sell all those polo shirts and Dockers to the Sprint employees?

Or the brewers of Natural Light who ostensibly give the Sprint employees the energy they need after a long day of working in cubicles? Won't they feel the pinch?

What about Mini-Cooper and Volkswakgen sales? Won't the female exec who thinks she's Avante Garde be rethinking her purchase of the ultimate chick machine?

For God's sake, has anyone considered the fraggled plight of the neurologists in the area who will undoubtedly see a decrease in clients once the nervous twitching and brain deformities that are a direct result from hours on the headset stop?

This possibility runs much deeper than Sprint....the effects on such critical ancillary operations would be tremendous.

How about the Pizza Delivery Guy who will be shafted once the notion of ordering pizza at Sprint is DOA? Currently, many Sprint employees feel they're being "wacky," "zany" or "out of the box" by ordeing pizza at work. Who's gonna shell out that $1.76 tip to the pizza guy now?

This is depressing...HOWVER a reuse for the facility was already determined before the campus was built. The architects had the sound mind and judgement to goa head and design the facility for its imminent and truly intended us....a MAXIMUM SECURITY PRISON.

KC0KEK · Post by **KC0KEK** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 12:00 pm

QueSi2Opie wrote:I don't wanna even think about Sprint folding; the wifey would be out of a job and we'd have to be forced to leave KC and move to Las Vegas. My wife was close friends with three families that already lost their jobs with Sprint. One family, from Belton, has relocated to Cincinatti for a job offer...and another family, from Olathe, has relocated to Atlanta for a job offer. The third family, from KCMO, has filed for a divorce because of the money issue, losing a house, etc., and the husband is goin' back home to Dallas for a job. For my wife, it's sad to see her friends go.

I don't think Sprint would ever fold. It will acquire or be acquired, but that change is more a reflection of the evolution of the telecom industry, which is consolidating.

This post also highlights a point argued in one of the arena/pro sports threads: People generally choose a city based on job opportunities or lack thereof, not because of the presence or absence of teams.

DanCa · Post by **DanCa** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 5:40 pm

Regarding CA companies moving out of state, I think that was over-hyped for the purpose of recalling Davis. I don't know of anyone who's lost a job because their company left California. And I've noticed here in Orange County that traffic to and from work is getting worse (more people going to work), local job postings are up, local stocks are up and my own company, after contracting a couple years ago, is expanding and doing quite well. However, the Bay Area may be a different story. The tech bust and recession affected the area much more than down here.

QueSi2Opie · Post by **QueSi2Opie** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 6:52 pm

KC0KEK wrote:This post also highlights a point argued in one of the arena/pro sports threads: People generally choose a city based on job opportunities or lack thereof, not because of the presence or absence of teams.

You can bet that young peeps from Omaha, Des Moines and Wichita that choose KC now, might choose Minneapolis, St. Louis or Dallas in the future if we lost our pro teams. I know plenty of young people that have moved to a larger city from a smaller city for arts, sports, more entertainment, etc. They had decent jobs back at home, but they became bored. Maybe our population won't decrease by much, but it certainly won't increase by much either. Have some pride, man! Geeez! The stadiums belong to the city, let's fix'em up a bit for our teams! Jus' think about how excited people at your work get on game day, almost gives them a extra boost or desire to wake up in the morning. Pro-sports are a part of life. Maybe not yours, but definitely the majority. People and businesses DO consider them when relocating to a new city!

GuyInLenexa · Post by **GuyInLenexa** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 10:44 am

[You can bet that young peeps from Omaha, Des Moines and Wichita that choose KC now, might choose Minneapolis, St. Louis or Dallas in the future if we lost our pro teams. quote]

Sports teams are one major factor. But it has not kept young people from moving to cities like Austin, Fort Worth, and Las Vegas. as well as many other cities that have grown and developed well over the last twenty years.

Most people move and remain fans to their original teams. I am still a Cowboy and Stars fan. Although I am excited about The Chiefs.

[/quote]

TheDude · Post by **TheDude** » Mon Nov 24, 2003 1:09 pm

who's your daddy??

Sprint will lay off about 2,000 total, 400 in KC area
Charlie Anderson
Staff Writer
Sprint Corp. said Monday that it will lay off about 2,000 employees during the quarter as part of its reorganization and cost-control measures.
The layoffs will include about 400 workers in the Kansas City area, Sprint spokesman Mark Bonavia said. The layoffs should occur within the next few weeks, he said. Sprint has now laid off 21,000 people since October 2001. On Dec. 11, 2002 -- a day before it met with investors in New York -- the company laid off 2,100 people.

sinking ship my friends...

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Mon Nov 24, 2003 1:15 pm

Dude...do you actually take joy in these announcements? If KC is so doomed why are you sticking around?

TheDude · Post by **TheDude** » Mon Nov 24, 2003 1:26 pm

cost of living is cheap and i make wayyyy too much money here to try to find another job anywhere else. but seriously, it is frustrating to see our city put on pause due to a lack of a regionalism and intergovernmental cooperation. our metro area is doomed unless we can take a more regionalist approach to our future--and i am talking action not words.
see article below (i was at this discussion):

All for One Idea, Meet Tit for Tat
By STEVE KRASKE
Columnist

More and more, you hear the talk:

If the Kansas City area is going to move ahead, it'll have to adopt a
regional approach to doing business. The idea is to get both sides of the state line involved in financing the amenities of a metropolitan area that wants to remain a major American community.

It's one for all, and all for one. Let's move together as a unit instead of
fracturing into myriad directions. Denver and Pittsburgh have pulled it off. Now Kansas City wants to hop aboard the same fast train to success.

The idea of regional alliances is the mantra of Karen Pletz, the new board
chairwoman of the Greater Kansas City Chamber of Commerce. "There is serious interest in moving forward in a way that hasn't been done before," Pletz recently told The Kansas City Star . A sound concept. But, boy, does she have her work cut out.

I recently moderated a discussion among a group of mayors from both sides of the state line. The session was off the record. So I'm duty-bound not to identify the participants or quote any of them directly. But what I heard in more than an hour of give and take was enough to understand exactly how tough Pletz's life is about to become.

Regionalism? Several of the mayors asked. Sounds great. But how does that help me?

One problem the mayors addressed was the continuing economic development border war between Missouri and Kansas. October's news that Datacore Marketing was relocating from downtown Kansas City to Westwood was only the latest example.

Datacore hopped the border for the same reason other companies took the leap. In this case, it was economic development incentives from Kansas. Missouri, meanwhile, is trying to lure Waddell & Reed from Overland Park to downtown Kansas City through the same type of incentives.

The regional approach calls for a truce to such skirmishing. Have the area
operate as one unit so that those precious eco-devo dollars aren't wasted in the constant tug-of-war between the two states. Use them, instead, to lure businesses from farther away. The resulting employment and tax revenue would benefit the entire area.

But what did I hear?

The states that provide most of the business incentives need to be reined
in, the mayors said. And, well, that's not going to happen because big
bureaucracies are going to do what they're going to do. Their job is to lure
businesses to Missouri and Kansas. End of story.

Never mind the truce idea.

A second way to bridge the two-state gap is a second bistate tax. But stick
that sucker in the DOA category. The mayors said they had been told nothing about the idea. They hadn't been drawn into talks. And furthermore, their
people weren't the least inclined to go for higher taxes in a down economy.

Even then, they said the idea of outlying cities agreeing to help pay for,
say, the new downtown performing arts center was a pipe dream. Sure, we'll help downtown Kansas City out, one mayor said. In turn, we want help financing our own performing arts center.

Tit for tat. That concept, of course, isn't exactly at the core of the
regionalism concept.

Bottom line: Regionalism is a great concept. But for now, that's probably
all it's ever going to be in the metro.

GRID · Post by **GRID** » Mon Nov 24, 2003 1:37 pm

Well, KC, he is right. KC is no longer riding the wave of telecommunications it did in the 90's and the metro is already seeing signs of stagnatation like net population growth, KCI traffic etc.

Metro kc has to fix its major regional propblems in a hurry like Downtown, transit, image, roads etc or the metro will quickly go from being a top growth city in the midwest to a stagnent metro that will not change much in the next few decades.

I know a lot is being done, but it's still at a snails pace.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Mon Nov 24, 2003 1:38 pm

I think we can all agree on that. I just get sick of hearing all the negativity...hell if it's so bad, get out.

GRID · Post by **GRID** » Mon Nov 24, 2003 1:42 pm

KC wrote:I think we can all agree on that. I just get sick of hearing all the negativity...hell if it's so bad, get out.

true.

Good2Great · Post by **Good2Great** » Mon Nov 24, 2003 2:38 pm

After the shakedown, telecom in KC will be limited to whoever still has a can of beans and a very long string.