The Lemon Fool

Inmarsat plc reports Third Quarter Results 2015
Growth continuing and on track for GX global commercial service by year-end
London, UK: 6 November 2015. Inmarsat plc (LSE: ISAT.L), the leading provider of global mobile satellite communications services, today provided the following information for the three months ended 30 September 2015.
Third Quarter Financial Headlines
 Total revenues $323.1m (2014: $300.6m)
o Maritime up $2.6m to $150.2m (+1.8%)
o Government up $0.9m to $77.2m (+1.2%) o Enterprise down $1.2m to $39.7m (-2.9%) o Aviation up $11.9m to $32.6m (+57.5%)
o $17.9m from LightSquared (2014: $9.8m)[i]
On my watch list: shares up 10% yesterday.
Hi Lemon Fool!

ap, I doubt you have missed the train with Inmarsat, just look at a 1 year share price chart for context


My first post in my new home! thanks Stooz & Co

I have had the misfortune to have substantial business dealings with Inmarsat over the last few years. They are a mess, they have very high turnover of staff, and their internal communication is appalling.

Their structure is dominated by engineering, which I think is one reason for the high turnover is customer facing roles. They have to keep explaining why channels have been taken down, without warning, satellites move with little notice, etc. The engineering teams seem to be able to do what ever they want, without thinking of the consequences for paying customers.

I suppose they get away with it to an extent because their aren't that many satellite providers, and once signed up and bought equipment to work on their channels it is not so easy to move.

I have looked at the company as an investment in the past, but can't see past the obvious issues they have.

"I suppose they get away with it to an extent because their aren't that many satellite providers, and once signed up and bought equipment to work on their channels it is not so easy to move"

It is therefore this position of market strength that makes for a sustainable business despite the failings you mention. Thanks for the insight Ben

(Apologies I have not yet figured out how to reply with quotes)

fireblade909 wrote:
(Apologies I have not yet figured out how to reply with quotes)

Yes, it's all a bit new and mysterious. If you press the quote " symbol on the right hand side, you will find the message you are quoting pops up in the reply box as above. You can then edit it.

Arb.

A business based on fragile electronics shot into space by an unreliable giant firework, never really seemed to me an HYP candidate.

V8

ben328 wrote:I have had the misfortune to have substantial business dealings with Inmarsat over the last few years. They are a mess, they have very high turnover of staff, and their internal communication is appalling.

Their structure is dominated by engineering, which I think is one reason for the high turnover is customer facing roles. They have to keep explaining why channels have been taken down, without warning, satellites move with little notice, etc. The engineering teams seem to be able to do what ever they want, without thinking of the consequences for paying customers.

I suppose they get away with it to an extent because their aren't that many satellite providers, and once signed up and bought equipment to work on their channels it is not so easy to move.

I have looked at the company as an investment in the past, but can't see past the obvious issues they have.

I can read that more than one way.

If they're a pain to do business with, that's bad (doubly so if you're paying them money, as opposed to vice versa). But a high-tech company has to have a strong focus on engineering. A company dominated by Suits will tend to drive competent engineers away in frustration, and will then stagnate. Those are the kind of companies who get the government IT contracts (because the Suits can sell to the civil servants), but don't stand a hope in hell of delivering for many millions what a competent student could do in a three-month project.

It's possible to tread a path between the two extremes, but among UK companies I've worked with or for, only the tiddlers (under 100 employees) have been remotely acceptable. Silicon Valley does a much better job.

I hold ISAT. Not about to sell, nor top up.