Customers are served outside an Airtel shop in Mombasa. FILE PHOTO | NMG
I just don’t think the government has thought through a clear
strategy on how to guide consolidation of the telecommunications sector
into a few strong players, especially in the wake of the impending
merger of Telkom Kenya and Airtel.
I say so because
when you look at the proposal on the table, what is being planned is a
merger of dwarfs. It is structured as a mere financial engineering
transaction characterised by asset stripping, hiving off of
subsidiaries- but without a major plan for capital injection by the
shareholders.
How is the transaction structured? Here is a brief explanation of the steps that the parties plan to follow.
First,
it is proposed that all infrastructure assets, mainly towers, be placed
into a new company owned on a 60:40 basis by the current owners of
Telkom Kenya — Helios and the Government of Kenya.
Secondly, hive off all real estate assets owned by Telkom Kenya
and place them into a new real estate company owned by Helios and the
government.
Thirdly, create a third company that will be purely a mobile network operator owned by Helios and the government.
Once
these three firms have been separated, merge the Telkom Kenya mobile
operator business with the entire Airtel business owned on a 50:50 basis
between Helios and the government on the one hand- and Airtel’s
existing shareholders on the other.
Apparently, a valuation conducted on both companies put the value of Airtel at 15 per cent higher than Telkom Kenya.
Since
Airtel is contributing its entire business to the merged entity, an
arrangement has been that the extra value it is contributing to the
combined entity will be extended to the merged entity in the form of a
shareholder loan repayable in four years.
If in four years the government and Helios will not have repaid the loan, Airtel will take control of the combined entity.
In
a snapshot, two weak companies are merging virtual businesses and
entities that have no assets. The very assets they need in the merged
entity to compete with Safaricom are being hived off to independent
entities that can be sold to third parties.
I have
always maintained that the taxpayer did not get value for money in the
Telkom Kenya privatisation. We sold 51 per cent of Telkom Kenya to
France Telecom for $390 million in 2007.
What we forget
is that -in preparing Telkom Kenya for privatisation, the taxpayer
spent much more money. The government wrote off billions of shillings in
taxes that Telkom Kenya owed to the Kenya Revenue Authority and in
hundreds of millions it paid in fees to transaction advisers.
After
the privatisation, the government had to sink in more billions in
shareholder loans that it extended to the company while it was under the
management of France Telecom.
More significantly, the
privatisation of Telkom came at a high social cost to the country
because 15,000 former employees of Telkom Kenya had to be sent to the
streets.
We
must vigorously prosecute national interest and make sure that the
ownership and control of the company which comes out of the Telkom Kenya
and Airtel merger goes to a group with deep enough pockets and new
capital to invest in the business.
Some of the national
interest considerations that should guide the government in deciding
whether to support the merger are the following:
First, we must not forget that the government still owns 40 per cent of Telkom Kenya.
First, we must not forget that the government still owns 40 per cent of Telkom Kenya.
Secondly,
Telkom Kenya, despite its financial problems, is still a strategic
commercial enterprise for our country, owning and running the largest
fixed line telephone infrastructure in the country.
Thirdly, it runs and operates, on behalf of the government, the national fibre-optic backbone.
Fourthly,
it is interlinked and shares legacy assets with two other strategic
commercial enterprises — the Postal Corporation of Kenya (Posta) and the
Post Office Savings Bank (Postbank).
Granted, state-owned enterprises such as Posta and Postbank no longer feature highly on the list of the government’s priorities.
Indeed, these companies have been more or less ignored, left to suffer chronic under-capitalisation.
We
forget that in countries like Australia, it is the post office that
issues driving licences and passports. In South Africa, the post office
issues digital addresses.
No comments :
Post a Comment