Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 62850	2005-10-21 19:54:00	New Zealand still way down in rankings for broadband usage	manicminer (4219)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
398231	2005-10-26 00:51:00	As best I can recall, Bell Atlantic sold out in about 1998-99. Essentially they made a lot of money out of part ownership of Telecom and decided to cash in. Since then there have been various rumours of other companies wanting to take a stake - such as Telstra, British Telecom, Worldcom (an Enron type disaster) but really NZ Telecom is small stuff and not seen as sufficently profitable. No room to expand with only 4 million people.	Winston001 (3612)
398232	2005-10-26 03:25:00	So $900 000000 is see as small stuff?	Cicero (40)
398233	2005-10-27 00:16:00	So $900 000000 is see as small stuff? I'm not quite sure where you get that figure from Tom, but the cost to a buyer is the current price per share. About $6. To get control you'd need 51% which I'm guessing would be about $2 billion. The only reason to buy is for future income and growth. If another company saw Telecom as having good growth prospects and the current share price was cheap, then they'd buy. But with only 4 million people, other major competitors (Telstra, Vodaphone) in the market already, its hard to see where any growth could come from. That is why Telecom has made two (disasterous) attempts to get established in Australia. Bigger market, better prospects. The other reason to buy Telecom is the steady dividend yield. But this is only attractive to Mum and Dad and fund managers. They don't need or want control, merely a slice.	Winston001 (3612)
398234	2005-10-27 00:25:00	Just to continue with the above, you can sort of view Telecom as a vegetable garden with good soil but surrounded by concrete. It produces great veges consistantly but can't get any larger. The only way to get more production is genetically altered seed or a different type of crop. So Telecom has to find some clever technology which Telstra/Vodaphone don't have, to attract more customers in order to grow. $2 billion isn't chickenfeed but if the buyer is paying 9% interest on borrowed money, Telecom isn't worth it.	Winston001 (3612)
398235	2005-10-27 01:42:00	Correct me if I am wrong 001,but I was sure that 900 thou was the amount of profit last year. I will admit that I don't have an accountant's bone in my body,but I am sure in spite of your comments that Telecom could do better if profit wasn't their raison'd'etre. I am coming to the conclusion that certain necessities of life like water, power, communications etc should not be in private hands,where profit rules.	Cicero (40)
398236	2005-10-27 02:34:00	...... I am coming to the conclusion that certain necessities of life like water, power, communications etc should not be in private hands,where profit rules. I will remember that and hold you to account come the next election :thumbs:	Terry Porritt (14)
398237	2005-10-27 02:52:00	I will remember that and hold you to account come the next election :thumbs: I must be clear,that view only applies to essential services. ;)	Cicero (40)
398238	2005-10-27 08:13:00	Correct me if I am wrong 001,but I was sure that 900 thou was the amount of profit last year . I will admit that I don't have an accountant's bone in my body, but I am sure in spite of your comments that Telecom could do better if profit wasn't their raison'd'etre . I am coming to the conclusion that certain necessities of life like water, power, communications etc should not be in private hands,where profit rules . :stare: :stare: Tom - whats this? Are you not well? Been on a downhill stretch to Damascus? Maybe those mushrooms did some longterm damage . :confused: Telecom - profit to June 2005 was $806 million . A tidy sum . Represents about an 8% return on the value of the company . Inadequate but steady . I was a little astray above . To buy 51% of Telecom would cost NZ$6 billion . That would gain the buyer half the profits - which would barely pay for the interest on the purchase money . And you are of course correct - if Telecom didn't worry about trying to make a miserable 8% return, then they could distribute largess in all directions . But as we both know, business does not function that way . Telstra (largely owned by the Australian government) doesn't .	Winston001 (3612)
398239	2005-10-27 08:39:00	Originally Posted by Cicero ...... I am coming to the conclusion that certain necessities of life like water, power, communications etc should not be in private hands,where profit rules. I will remember that and hold you to account come the next election :thumbs: Copied for posterity Terry :thumbs: Welcome to the dark side Tom, it's a little warmer than you might have expected here, but the fringe benefits can be enormous.	Murray P (44)
398240	2005-10-27 18:50:00	I am beginning also,to have some sympathy with Saddam and his technique of dealing with those who questioned his ideas. :thumbs: :)	Cicero (40)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8