Editor’s note: Following are five charts ranking major players in the wireless telecommunications industry according to revenues, net incomes, percent change in revenue from 1994 to 1995, percent change in net income from 1994 to 1995 and two-year total return on investment to shareholders.
Nordby International Inc. of Boulder, Colo., compiled the information for these charts. Nordby used data from the previous available four quarters. Nordby only supplied data for companies that already are listed on RCR’s weekly StockWatch.
Data for all the companies was compiled using total figures, even though some companies only derive a portion of their revenues from wireless operations. Nordby’s was not able to get financial data for manufacturer Nokia Corp.
This feature is in no way intended to be an endorsement for any of the companies listed.Long-distance carriers, equipment manufacturers and regional Bell operating companies-all with significant interests in the wireless telecommunications industry-made up the top tier of major industry players for sheer volume of revenue generated in 1995.
Leading the pack was AT&T Corp., although its pending split into three separate companies renders its top-of-the-chart status somewhat of an anomaly. Two leading equipment vendors, NEC Corp. and Motorola Inc., were neck-and-neck, ranking second and third respectively. L.M. Ericsson ranked sixth, while Northern Telecom Ltd. ranked 13th.
Not surprisingly, AT&T, British Telecommunications, NEC and Motorola also placed high when measuring net income. AT&T led the pack with net income totaling more than $4 billion.
However, more companies come into play when measuring percent changes in revenue from 1994 to 1995. InterDigital Communications Inc., based in King of Prussia, Pa., topped this chart with a 660 percent increase in revenue in 1995.
Teletouch Communications Inc. also fared well, noting a 550 percent increase in revenues when comparing figures from 1994 with the those from 1995. Teletouch cited its purchase of Dial-A-Page’s paging properties in the second half of 1995 as a reason the company saw a dramatic increase in revenues for the year.
Concerning percent changes in net income rankings, United States Cellular Corp. topped that category with an increase in net income that approached 2,000 percent.
“We’ve grown dramatically, substantially due to two factors,” said Kenneth Meyers, chief financial officer. “We disposed of some nonstrategic markets that don’t fit in with our overall clustering strategy, and this produced substantial gains. Even with those gains excluded, there has been a dramatic increase in income due to the company’s conservative financial structure and strong operating results and increasing penetration in markets we have retained.”
Bell Atlantic, benefiting substantially from its 1995 inauguration of Bell Atlantic Nynex Mobile, and AT&T, which has experienced strong growth in its Wireless Services division, also placed in the top five.
In contrast, BellSouth, which ranked along with Bell Atlantic and AT&T among top players for 1995 revenues, saw its net income drop by nearly 141 percent. This reflected two huge, one-time adjustments, according to Kevin Doyle, assistant director of media relations. “We took a $2.7 billion write-down on the value of our equipment in summer when we moved from regulatory accounting principals to generally accepted accounting principals,” he said. “We posted an adjustment of more than $1 billion in the fourth quarter to reflect the actual cost of work force reductions announced last May.”
WinStar Communications Inc., which holds licenses at 38 GHz offering point-to-point digital services, ranked first when comparing two-year return on investment.
Paging equipment manufacturer Glenayre Technologies Inc. followed with a 221 percent return on two-year investment.
“During 1995, the company expanded its international presence, introduced a new NPCS [narrowband personal communications services] system, among other products, and made an important strategic acquisition. Also, the board of directors declared two 3-for-2 stock splits,” Glenayre noted.
