KPNQwest Files for Bankruptcy 189
ives writes "Today KPNQwest filed for bankruptcy. KPNQwest owns the most important fibre backbone in Europe. Apparently they are not planning on switching off their network, but without maintenance it will probably slowly degrade. The official press release can be found here."
no backbone? (Score:2, Funny)
bah-dum ching!
Sigh.. onomatopoeia is a dying art (Score:2)
I'm not sure that's such a great plan (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I'm not sure that's such a great plan (Score:4, Funny)
Re:I'm not sure that's such a great plan (Score:4, Funny)
-l
US Buyout? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:US Buyout? (Score:1)
Re:US Buyout? (Score:3, Funny)
"All your wireless-base belong to U.S."
OK, it was lame. Just don't throw any lutefisk.
Re:US Buyout? (Score:2)
i.e. Europe's major backbone shouldn't be held by an american company...
Re:US Buyout? (Score:2, Informative)
A Euopean company just bought America's second largest beer brewing and distributing company?
In a Free Market, you should be able to buy whatever you want as long as you meet the terms the Regulators establish.
In a case of an American company buying a European backbone, they would have to meet the terms of both the EU and the US FCC and FTC.
Re:US Buyout? (Score:2)
I believe that South African Breweries Plc is a South African company. Their stock may trade in London, but this doesn't make them European!
Re:US Buyout? (Score:2)
Re:US Buyout? (Score:2)
Of course, IANAAccountant, but I seem to remember seeing at least one or two stories on this, and I believe AOL was mentioned. FWIW.
J
Hacker might have hostile takeover :) (Score:1)
BTW, when is it going to be an unmanned backbone? That's when the crazyness will start...
br
Re:US Buyout? (Score:1)
To buy a bankrupt company, you must for all intents and puropses buy its debt.
You also won't see anyone be able to buy up the fiber at a bargain price, because the shareholders will want to get as much money out of it as possible. (Remember the @HOME fiasco?)
Re:US Buyout? (Score:1, Informative)
Re:US Buyout? - full story here (Score:2, Informative)
Re:US Buyout? (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is, they're losing money on the backbone. According to several articles I've read, they're far from using its full capacity. That's why they ran out of money, after all. KPNQwest probably already did look for new investors, and obviously didn't find any. (Yes, it probably is cheaper to buy the network in a few weeks instead of investing now, but on the other hand in a few weeks the customers will already be operating via other providers, so the KPNQwest network will be even less profitable by then.)
Parts of the network may be valueable to companies that already have an infrastructure in Europe and are looking to expand certain parts of it, but I very much doubt that any company will buy the whole backbone.
Re:US Buyout? (Score:1)
Re:US Buyout? (Score:2)
Uh.., I forgot
Some one will pick it up for them (Score:1)
Shit (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Shit (Score:2)
No maintenance? (Score:4, Interesting)
Hacker paradise!
Re:No maintenance? (Score:1)
Re:No maintenance? (Score:1)
Who is next. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Who is next. (Score:2)
KPN/Quest is/was the largest and fastest fibre network in europe, and is/was owned by KPN Telecom (NL/Europe) and Quest (Mainly US), both of which are very big cable -)
Don't forget... (Score:2)
The cost of lighting-up that same extra fibre is _not_ incremental but geometric. Each strand requires significant (and expensive) kit at either end, as well as an increasing the local copper-cable volume... which is why there is so much "excess" capacity the world over, not just Canada.
Obvious answor (Score:4, Funny)
graspee
Re:Obvious answor (Score:1)
According to some information [www.ix.de] at the german news service Heise [www.ix.de], the operational costs for the ring are at about 1millionUSD per day.
You probably want to reconsider your bid?:-)
As mentioned in previous posts, Heise [www.ix.de] has in depth coverage of the story, mostly german, but there is always a (...) fish [altavista.com].
Re:Obvious answor (Score:1)
Re:Obvious answer (Score:1)
$10!
Goddamit, I'm not letting some AC beat me to 0wning a huge network!
graspee
Re:Obvious answor (Score:2)
Re:Obvious answor (Score:1)
It belongs to me ! (Score:1)
Well, that's really a bargain.
The Register story (Score:2, Interesting)
backbones going bust (Score:2, Funny)
The new Dark Fiber problem.... (Score:2)
Now if only they would take Qwest with them!
Re:The new Dark Fiber problem.... (Score:5, Funny)
Chris Mattern
Re:The new Dark Fiber problem.... (Score:1)
Re:The new Dark Fiber problem.... (Score:1)
dumbass question (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:dumbass question (Score:4, Informative)
Re:dumbass question (Score:1)
Being smaller than two other companies normally excludes you from "monopoly" status.
Just a thought..
Re:dumbass question (Score:1)
Re:dumbass question (Score:1)
When did it _have_ maintenance? (Score:2, Interesting)
i think (Score:2, Informative)
Re:i think (Score:2)
//Phizzy
Hrmm... (Score:1)
Re:Hrmm... (Score:1)
oh... I wouldn't say that. (Score:1)
More coverage (Score:5, Informative)
There's also a brief article on The Register [theregister.co.uk] available here [theregister.co.uk].
Just thought I'd add a few tidbits since the news post doesn't actually link to any objective press coverage, company press releases are usually not the best way to inform oneself.
The CNN story (Score:2, Informative)
Logical / Idiocy (Score:1)
Re:Craziness (Score:1)
WHAT! (Score:2)
It'll make money like crazy!
That company didn't have a good marketing plan. See, my company is going to make money off of the internet with "web banners" because that's where the real money is!
What? noone looks at banners???
oh shit.
Too bad ./ can't buy it (Score:1)
Perhaps all the european
They probably *will* switch off the network (Score:4, Informative)
Where did you get that quote from about them not planning to switch it off? Here's a quote from the press release:
Since this is from their own press release, of course they don't just write "we'll stop operating," but that's pretty much what the above quote says they're expecting to happen.
If you look for some more neutral information than their own press release, you might be interested in this heise online article [heise.de] (yes, it's an English article).
Re:They probably *will* switch off the network (Score:2, Informative)
Shutting down the core is the stupidest thing they could as that would mean the network becomes worthless. (after all selling part of the business as a going concern brings in more cash than an asset sale).
However you need to be responsible and be honest, and it's now that we can't offer any guarantees about the core. SLAs are out of the window, which is what a lot of the guarantees are about.
Even the subsidiaries (those that are self-funded or still have money (like the one I work for)) were told to put contingency plans in place in case the core goes dark.
KPNQwest (KQIPQ) relationship to Qwest? (Q) (Score:1)
Re:KPNQwest (KQIPQ) relationship to Qwest? (Q) (Score:2)
In short, KPNQ was a joint venture between KPN and Qwest. Each of them owns a substantial minority share in the company. Don't know about KPN, but Qwest is a vastly bigger concern than KPNQ is.
Corporate bankruptcy in a nutshell (Score:5, Informative)
Some people have posted asking about how they're going to pay for keeping their network up, but that most likely isn't an issue, since you don't have to be *out* of money to file for bankruptcy. What they're trying to do by declaring bankruptcy is buy some time to find additional buyers. I'm not sure whether the rules in the EU are the same, but here's how it works in the US:
In the US, the two most common bankruptcy options are to file under Chapter 11 or Chapter 7 of the US bankruptcy code. Chapter 7 filings are what you do when you realize you've irrevocably screwed the pooch, and there's just no way you are ever going to make it. Ch. 7 means you've cashed your check, game over - your assets will be liquidated (sold) to scrounge up whatever cash possible for the companies you owe money to. Everybody goes home, then the earth is sown with salt under your company headquarters.
Chapter 11, however - this is what I presume they're using the European equivalent of - means you think you can turn things around, but you can't do it just yet or you can't do it because your existing debts are too big. You can declare a Ch. 11 bankruptcy when you've still got lots of cash - that's to keep things up and running while you work out a plan to pay back your existing debts.
There's a good side and a bad side for companies filing Ch. 11 - the good side is you get to keep on going, and you don't have to pay back any debts you ran up before you filed! Most of the time, courts will rule that the companies that provide you with critical services (like power, fiber, leases, etc.) can't shut you off during your bankruptcy, even though you've just (potentially) stiffed them for zillions of dollars. This is likely what KPN is doing.
The down side is that you no longer control your company - the courts do. And they pay lots of attention to what your creditors (those folks you stiffed) ask for. Your job is to come up with a plan to pay those creditors back over time for a reasonable amount (anywhere from 10% to 80% of your orginal debt, most likely). If your creditors don't like the plan, or think that they'd get more money back by shutting you down and liquidating assets than allowing you to live and try to pay them back, they can get the courts to probably shut you down. Also, don't forget that your credit is now hosed.
So ... I wouldn't worry about KPN's lights going off anytime soon. They probably filed the EU equivalent of Ch. 11 while they had plenty of cash in the bank to keep it running while they look for someone to buy their assets (probably the only chance they have of satisfying their creditors).
Re:Corporate bankruptcy in a nutshell (Score:2)
Because of accounting and laws though, this healthy company was legally compelled to file for bankruptcy and submit to reorganization.
Bankruptcy isn't necessarily a terrible thing, and as the parent post says, there is a good side. I imagine KPNQwest will weather this handily.
Re:Corporate bankruptcy in a nutshell (Score:1)
Re:Corporate bankruptcy in a nutshell (Score:2)
nope, they did that last week already. today they filed for bankruptcy.
Re:Corporate bankruptcy in a nutshell (Score:2)
Re:Corporate bankruptcy in a nutshell (Score:2)
I've already seen a few dutchmen reply about the KPNQWEST situation, so let me just give you the theoretical background on your great post.
Under dutch law, the equivalent of Chapter 11 is called 'surseance van betaling' (delayed payment), which means that the court will grant a company a delay in paying off the creditors, so that it can get its finances in order. As in the US, this is usually bad news and may lead to the next worse condition.
This next condition, the dutch equivalent of Chapter 7, is called 'failliet'. It occurs when 2 or more creditors ask for immediate payment and the debtor can't pay. The creditors can then ask for the court to declare the company bankrupt. A court-appointed curator will then divide up the companies assets among the creditors. It is possible (wat KPNQ did) to enter banktrupcy voluntarily.
Although I know only about dutch banktrupcy law, AFAIK the rest of Europe is more or less the same. I may not be a lawyer, but I did take two years of law school, and I work in securities, so I ought to have this right.
Mart
Re:Corporate bankruptcy in a nutshell (Score:2)
Yesterday morning they filed for and were declared bancrupt. Since then the curators are trying two things, keep the value of the assets as high as possible and try to find buyers.
I heard one of the curators in a radio interview and he said they'd keep on most of the personnel to continue maintenance.
He said the "burning rate" of the company is about 7 million Euro per week, nothing compared to the total dept.(Between 1800 and 2200 million Euro)
US: Covad (Score:2)
In the process, they were able to restructure their debt into equity for the most part, and reduce their operating costs.
letting it explode (Score:4, Interesting)
So the plan might be to just let it explode, buy the remaining assets, and start a new company.
That's a likely scenario here in Holland.
It is what happened to DAF (trucks) and other companies.
They go broke, and in the same time they start a new company with the bought assets of the old one.
Your debts are cleared, and the tax accountants aren't wanting money from you anymore.
Still I expect it would cost money to buy the assets, so if they really do not want to invest anything in that network anymore, it makes my story just a wild guess.
It's logical (Score:2)
Now why would this be? Let's see:
Qwest simply saw its European spam hosting plans go down the drain and called it a day... Hey, maybe those spamsupporters were right after all about the guideline being bad for the economy and all *g*
Network going out at 16:30 UTC. (Score:3, Interesting)
In article, they also mention that the KPN's British offices will be/was shut down around midday. I'm not sure on whether this means today (Friday) or tomorrow (Saturday). Probably today, which meant that the network went down like four hours ago..
Re:Network going out at 16:30 UTC. (Score:4, Informative)
Europe's largest fibre optic network operator, KPNQwest, is set to shut down its entire operations at 17.30 (BST) today after the collapse of rescue talks with potential buyers and banks.
The source said that employees in the UK office have been informed they will not be receiving any redundancy packages and are currently being instructed on how to appeal to the government to reclaim what they are owed.
A second source close to the situation confirmed the details. At 11:55 (BST), the source told silicon.com: "Try ringing any phone in the office in five minutes and you won't get an answer."
However, the article later states that
A spokesman from KPNQwest denied the allegation. He said: "That (network shutdown) is not happening today. The holding company KPNQwest NV has filed for bankruptcy as have five subsidiaries in the Netherlands. A number of other divisions of the company including the UK have filed for protection from creditors.
So, I probably should have tried to find the source article a bit more vigorously before posting...
They're still up (Score:1)
Here's a fragment from a traceroute done at 22:43GMT:
10 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms nl-ams-ri-03-pos-4-0.chellonetwork.com [213.46.161.62]
11 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms Asd-nr19.NL.kpnqwest.net [193.148.15.97]
12 20 ms 20 ms 10 ms nllei5101-tc-g1-2-1.12.kpnqwest.net [134.222.96.81]
13 20 ms 20 ms 20 ms deham5101-tc-p0-1-0.0.kpnqwest.net [134.222.230.18]
14 20 ms 30 ms 20 ms debln5201-tc-p0-1-0.0.kpnqwest.net [134.222.230.37]
15 30 ms 40 ms * czpra5101-tc-p2-0-0.0.kpnqwest.net [134.222.230.46]
16 40 ms 40 ms 30 ms UNKNOWN.KPNQwest.net [134.222.110.250]
17 50 ms 50 ms 60 ms cz.pl1.pl.geant.net [62.40.96.46]
18 60 ms 50 ms 50 ms pol-34-gw.pl1.pl.geant.net [62.40.103.110]
19 70 ms * 60 ms 212.191.224.250
20 100 ms 71 ms 70 ms task-pg-rtr.task.gda.pl [153.19.252.33]
21 70 ms 60 ms 60 ms pg-ci2-rtr.task.gda.pl [153.19.252.30]
Re:Network going out at 16:30 UTC. (Score:2, Interesting)
We're not going dark, we're pretty much guaranteeing the core will stay lit till monday morning when the administrator will start in Brussels, even then we're not saying it will go dark. What will happen on monday depends on the administrator.
Re:Network going out at 16:30 UTC. (Score:2)
KPNQwest *is* down. My host, which turns out to buy its bandwidth from KPNQwest, was forced to move all of their servers to a different farm in another part of NL last night.
good riddance (Score:2, Interesting)
too bad for the employees, tho.
... not only the fibre network is affected. (Score:1, Informative)
KPNQwest also operates a couple of data centres - and one of them is providing all technical facilities for hosting about a third of germany's web sites for Strato [strato.de].
Strato is considering [heise.de] to either buy the affected data centre or to plan an alliance with Cisco, IBM, Microsoft and Cable&Wireless to provide new technical facilities for their hosting business.
Strato received quite some bad press when one of their storage units unexpectedly shut down last year and it took almost a week [heise.de] to have their websites up and running (breaking their 99% uptime guarantee) - so right now, competitors are ligning up to take their customers as it isn't clear if KPNQwest's network will be working over the weekend and what plans have been made to ensure the availability of the Strato-websites.
I don't understand it. (Score:1)
Can't they just raise prices if they cannot operate at the current levels? If their services are vital, people will pay (or switch to another carrier, but this is another matter)
(ok, i don't understand economy very well, but could someone please explain it?)
Old news... (Score:1)
Underground ... (Score:1)
How Does This Relate To Recent Slashdot Articles? (Score:3, Interesting)
Global Crossing [thedigest.com], PSINet [convergedigest.com], and STAR [thedigest.com] all bankrupt while WorldCom [usatoday.com], in trouble and Qwest taking a several hundred million dollar loss [usatoday.com] it looks like the number of telecommunications companies is shrinking fast and it is unclear what will happen to their networks.
Not to be a contrarian, but this just goes to show that things aren't really black and white when it comes to the cost of broadband and in fact we may be getting it cheaply considering how much was spent building the networks.
Re:How Does This Relate To Recent Slashdot Article (Score:1)
Only Dutch KPNQwest (Score:2)
Investment Insight (Score:5, Funny)
If you bought 1000 euro of Nortel Networks stock last year, today you'd have 59 euro.
If you bought 1000 euro of KPNQwest stock in January 2000, today you'd have 12.50 euro.
If you bought 1000 euro of Alcatel stock in January 2000, today you'd have 170 euro.
If you bought 1000 euro of L & H stock in January 2000, today you'd have 170 euro CENTS.
But if you spent 1000 euro last year on full crates of Heineken, and drank it all, today you'd have 380 euro of (bottle) deposit money.
Moral of the story: the most economically responsible solution is to sit on the couch all day watching soccer on TV with a beer in your hand.
I hope your math is off! (Score:2)
Your gov't adds over 50% of the value of a beer in DEPOSIT fees? Holy crap, I thought $.10 was a little much!
Re:I hope your math is off! (Score:2)
No, it's not that bad. It's the deposit on the crate that is the biggest part of the total deposit.
A crate of beer sells for about €10,-. The deposit on the crate is about €2,25 and the deposit on the bottles is about €0,07. There are 24 bottles to a crate, you do the math yourself.
I don't know the exact prices, as I am usually not in charge of the beer purchases among my friends. I will know for sure this afternoon, as I need to buy some for my birthday party.
MartWhat do you expect? Qwest is involved! (Score:1)
AT&T eyes KPNQwest's assets (Score:2)
Re:How to Make Money (Score:2)
Perhaps that's why/how they're keeping the network up. ;-)
Re:How to Make Money (Score:2)
Re:Sounds like time for a Government bailout to me (Score:1)
Re:Not a big surprise (Score:1)
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Re:Not a big surprise (Score:1)
1) They're not homosexual orgies
2) They're not in the bathroom
Speaking of which, it's Friday, so a reminder to everyone, the weekly VoyNetworks orgy starts tonight, and will be going on through Monday afternoon. $5 admission. Complementary condoms are available (now in designer colors)
Re:The most interesting thing I found ... (Score:1)
Re:The most interesting thing I found ... (Score:1)
Re:Cost of Bandwidth? (Score:2)
> bandwidth costs so much?
I'll take a stab at explaining it.
To produce bandwidth you must design and install a physical plant. The cabling, the routers, the HARDWARE. This physical plant is the initial investment and the assets of the company.
Bandwidth is the capacity of the pipe and is an intangible asset to be sold. Bandwidth is then divided up by the number of users or traffic on the pipe. Unused bandwidth is wasted intangible assets.
Say you've just installed a big fat fibre-optic pipe with lots of Bandwidth. Now to sell this bandwidth. With just a few users, the remaining bandwidth is wasted - why not let the current users have lots of bandwidth then? This becomes a selling point that is not guaranteed but is nevertheless valuable to get the service going.
As more users are added to the pipe, you can then scale back each user's bandwidth by capping it and begin to charge for levels of service. The original user's may be miffed but that's the way it is.
The key is to generate revenue... you have a saleable product. Create demand and then use standard business principles to determine the cost to the user based on the users desire/demand for the product. Price too high you will lose users... price too low you will not make payroll heh.
@HOME evidently did not understand this and it seems that this company Quest doesn't either.
Time will tell...
Re:Cost of Bandwidth? (Score:3, Interesting)
Since you mention capping and volume limits, I'll assume you're talking about the last-mile provider. The cable and cable-modem business is the one I know the most about, so I'll do some back-of-the-envelope calculations for that. Assume for the moment that the data business has to bear all of the costs.
The first major component of the monthly bill is the cost to construct the network. Hybrid-fiber-coax, the architecture required to operate two-way services, costs about $40,000 per mile for materials and installation. A mile of plant passes surprisingly few houses on average-- call it 100 for ease of calculation. Assume 20% of houses passed subscribe to the data service, and the construction cost per subscriber is $2,000. If the company wants to get its construction costs back in five years (we'll ignore issues of interest and risk for the moment), the monthly revenue needed is $33.33. There's some head-end equipment (a cable-modem termination system costs about $30,000) but those are spread over a lot more subscribers. Call it $35/month to pay for the network itself.
Now consider other recurring monthly expenses. There's the billing system that generates monthly bills for millions of subscribers. There's the customer-care systems. There's the salaries for the people who maintain the equipment and answer the phones. There's the rent/electric/sewer/etc for the space where those people work. There are indirect costs associated with those employees-- if you have 5,000 employees who operate the network and take care of the customers, you need a personnel office, a finance office, etc. This type of cost can easily run to $20/month per subscriber.
You need connections to the larger Internet. An OC-12 (600 Mbps) connected to somebody's backbone costs about $120,000/month, and you need one of those for approximately every 60,000 subscribers. That's another $2/month per subscriber. There are a bunch of "little" costs like that, let's guess that they add up to $5/month per subscriber.
When you set out to do this on a large scale and in a short period of time, you have to borrow an enormous amount of money. The people who loan it to you want interest. Comcast is buying AT&T Broadband, with 16M subscribers (counting video and telephony subs as well as cable-modem subs) and assuming $20B in debt. With an average interest rate of 7.5%, the monthly interest payment works out to around $7.80/month per subscriber. Add all that up and you have a total of about $67.80/month.
To be honest, not all of the network construction costs should be charged to the data service, and the billing system and personnel are spread across other services as well. Even so, an allocated cost of $40/month for data service is not a bad estimate, and that doesn't include anything for profit.