PT’s shareholders approved last Friday (with the opposition of the Group’s Union) the “spin off” of PT Multimedia, the legal entity presently owning the cable network, agreeing to a trade of 4 PT Multimédia’s shares for each 25 shares of PT.
This decision, opening the field for a wider competition in the fixed voice telephony, television and broadband markets, is part of a plan to counter the recently failed Sonaecom’s PT takeover proposal. A Sonaecom Board Member has meanwhile referred to the press (“Sol”) that the “spin off” is not enough and that “vertical separation is also necessary as well as equal access to contents”, considering fundamental that both companies have “different commercial strategies and shareholder structures”.
This operation will be, foreseeable, concluded not later than December and, probably, before next October. If at the date of the “spin off” the shareholders participation remains the same as today, both the companies would have thirteen major shareholders in common. Notwithstanding, PT’s President has publicly dismissed, as a “fantasy”, the idea that the reference shareholders of both companies would be common.
As for the workers that are presently connected to both the companies (which, according to a PT’s Workers’ Commission source, round up to 150 in a total of circa 500 PT Multimédia workers), PT’s President stated that each case would be dealt with individually.
In relation to the regulatory outcome, the PT’s President position (conveyed to the “Jornal de Negócios”) is that PT Multimédia’s network, "should not be regulated, nor PT’s network; there can not be regulatory discrimination”.
Meanwhile, the Chairman of ICP-ANACOM (which has no power of approval in this separation) reiterated (in an interview to the “Público”) that an increase in competition is dependent upon the creation of two really separated entities (whose verification is not compatible with overlapping shareholder structures).
ICP-ANACOM’s Chairman has also stated that depending of the “spin off” model to be adopted, the NRA will “study the markets, analyse the situations and draw consequences”, especially in terms of concluding if the resulting companies are continuing to hold significant market power or not.
This decision, opening the field for a wider competition in the fixed voice telephony, television and broadband markets, is part of a plan to counter the recently failed Sonaecom’s PT takeover proposal. A Sonaecom Board Member has meanwhile referred to the press (“Sol”) that the “spin off” is not enough and that “vertical separation is also necessary as well as equal access to contents”, considering fundamental that both companies have “different commercial strategies and shareholder structures”.
This operation will be, foreseeable, concluded not later than December and, probably, before next October. If at the date of the “spin off” the shareholders participation remains the same as today, both the companies would have thirteen major shareholders in common. Notwithstanding, PT’s President has publicly dismissed, as a “fantasy”, the idea that the reference shareholders of both companies would be common.
As for the workers that are presently connected to both the companies (which, according to a PT’s Workers’ Commission source, round up to 150 in a total of circa 500 PT Multimédia workers), PT’s President stated that each case would be dealt with individually.
In relation to the regulatory outcome, the PT’s President position (conveyed to the “Jornal de Negócios”) is that PT Multimédia’s network, "should not be regulated, nor PT’s network; there can not be regulatory discrimination”.
Meanwhile, the Chairman of ICP-ANACOM (which has no power of approval in this separation) reiterated (in an interview to the “Público”) that an increase in competition is dependent upon the creation of two really separated entities (whose verification is not compatible with overlapping shareholder structures).
ICP-ANACOM’s Chairman has also stated that depending of the “spin off” model to be adopted, the NRA will “study the markets, analyse the situations and draw consequences”, especially in terms of concluding if the resulting companies are continuing to hold significant market power or not.
No comments:
Post a Comment