Ah the dinosaurs of telecom aligning with each other. But bigger companies are rarely better companies. Cisco has always had much higher revenue per employee, and companies like Alcatel and Lucent are seeing shrinking revenue from big iron telecom equipment.

And then there are companies like Huawei who seem to be able to do everything they do, but for half the price.

Perhaps the big telecom companies are just facing extinction, and I'm willing to put money on the fact that any merger will result in restructuring with massive job loss.

cost-cutting might be a big part of this M&A theme.....

Everyone reiterates how NT isn't an attractive target. I think this is an understatement. A merger with Cisco is also redundant and wearing thin. Seimens already dismisses past rumours as just that, albeit this will indeed be a consolidating sector as there simply is not enough business to go around. As it takes off, prices and margins will furter deteriorate and only the strong will survive, let alone Nortel inundated with all its woes. If it wasn't so expensive to switch suppliers, NT's core buisiness would have gone the same route as everyone else like BT who used anyone else but NT.

This company recently ranking 4th largest fraud payout next to Enron, Worldcom, and Cendant. Who the heck wants them. They still overstate delayed and changed financials they thought they'd never revisit but exposed due to shareholders concessions a settlement they tripped over their feet to avoid U.S. courts and crippling the company. They never did provide that R&D plan they promised in a week several weeks ago, instead they changed their tune to this being developed on the fly over years as they progress from ground zero still directionless. Strange how the entire $1.9B most expensive and least productive R&D they boasted cutting for months was now quoted in full while claiming to cut product groups, then announced merging carrier and enterprise just before the Alcatel/Lucent news hit the fan to provide even greater competition. Thier R&D plan came no sooner than repairing internal controls in 18 months they claimed a year ago, as this will take years too now they say. No sooner than ever getting paid for their sold manufacturing from Flextronics. No sooner than Neptune became operational or the Putian ambitions transpired and we see how BSNL turned out with losses spilling into 2006. It is almost to the point every single word they claim can not be trusted with so many endless contradicityons, even the SEV who will fine them with criminal results looming, inhibits their forecasts. This company is in terrible shape, aside from overstating income and fraud, there is no income, they dilute more than they earn to exsist (100M shares a year). Yet still pay themselves and get to keep bonuses that account for the 4th largest fraud on record. Amazing stuff.

With a declining cash, and considering restating a restated restatement yet again, from $3.9B in 2003 to 3.4 to 3. to 2.4 to 1.3B (operational cash requiring 1B frozen for debt for only 12 months to look solvent) while hiring people with close relationships from GE now... sorta like da ju vous all over again.

Who in their right mind would remotely consider this poor excuse for an equity and uncredible company that when even the most expensive SAP's software would remain unreliable if the numbers they were feeding it were innacurate. Perhaps they should spare themselves the data entry costs and shreholders/taxpayers/emplyees/customers/creditors all the ongoing grief and just fold and restructure under bankruptcy protection with a new name. But with the same people there, curently remaining silent under their councel's advice, forget it... they'll pay a premium to buy losing earnings revenues like PEC or a first time passed by CEO who defrauds/settles MOT from day one as they strugle to regain credibility.

Remember, it was Cutler who passed this restated restatement SOLEY on revenue recognition as it was all auditor condemned as unreliable, one where earnings are adjusted from 750M to 450M to now 350M and no guarantees it won't happen again under weak controls with the benefit of keeping bonuses and still payinging themselves under safe harbour.

Who would remotely consider merging with a company who's culture is untransparent, can not be trusted, and has a nightmare outlook to boot... they may as well wait post insolvency to buy assets at a discount from the trustee at this rate =)

The real question: is the lucent alcatel merger good because they are going to get synergies and get bigger, or is it good because it eliminates one vendor? Probably more the latter than the former. There is virtually no overlap in products, so no r&d or supply chain synergies, little overlap in terms of customer focus, none there, and where else do you get synergies in this business?