Boots owner to takeover Everything Everywhere?

[m419]

http://uk.breakingnews.com/item/ahZz...alks-over-an-8

[Telly_]

Looks like the guy that started Virginmobile is leading the bid which makes sense as its debt funded bid, meaning they will be around £8billion in debt from day 1. Maybe they will be renamed Virginmobile? Although being a private equity firm I expect they think they will re-sell for proft after the 4G auctions.

The owner of Boots and Pets at Home is in early-stage talks over an £8 billion takeover of Orange and T-Mobile group Everything Everywhere.

Private equity house KKR is in detailed discussions with Everything’s parent companies, Deutsche Telekom and France Telecom, in the hope of winning approval for its debt-backed bid, the Sunday Times and Sunday Telegraph reported.

Virgin Mobile founder Tom Alexander and former Vodafone chief executive Arun Sarin are understood to be leading KKR’s negotiations with Everything, which operates the mobile phones of 28 million in the UK. There is no guarantee that a deal will be secured.

Everything was formed in 2010 by merging Orange and T-Mobile, the British assets of the two European telecoms giants, delivering £3.5 billion of cost savings to its owners.

France Telecom’s finance director Gervais Pellissier last week told reporters the company would consider floating a stake in Everything.

Everything recently unveiled a £50 million investment plan in a new development academy which will train up to 12,000 staff, ensuring stores and call centres have experts dedicated to specific devices and their operating systems.

The company is also refreshing and modernising its high-street store estate. It has already announced it will start selling both T-Mobile and Orange products across all of its stores.

Everything is spending more than £1.5 billion over the next three years in bringing faster and more reliable coverage to its customers amid the boom in smartphones

[m419]

That was years ago, he wa CEO of Everything Everywhere last year. £8 billion is nothing, Telefonica has a £48 Billion debt mountain and may have to sell off some O2 assets, O2 Germany and czec operations are likely to go. Manx telecom and Pronto have already been sold off.

[Telly_]

Originally Posted by m419

That was years ago, he wa CEO of Everything Everywhere last year. £8 billion is nothing, Telefonica has a £48 Billion debt mountain and may have to sell off some O2 assets, O2 Germany and czec operations are likely to go. Manx telecom and Pronto have already been sold off.

I guess if Sky put in a bid for EverythingEverywhere or 3UK it will be debt funded. Although the spectrum EE have to sell off is only valued at £400million. Sky will 100% start/takeover/go virtual on a mobile network.

If Sky can raise £2.2billion for football rights I'm sure getting £billions for a mobile network will be easy enough.

[m419]

Yes but sky would then have to fund around £4 Billion plus the £400 Million for the spectrum and finally a few billion for 3, nearly £7 Billion is not worth it. They will never make up the amount they spent, sky's current income after tax is less than £1 Billion every year

---------- Post added at 16:18 ---------- Previous post was at 16:16 ----------

Originally Posted by Telly Bear

I guess if Sky put in a bid for EverythingEverywhere or 3UK it will be debt funded. Although the spectrum EE have to sell off is only valued at £400million. Sky will 100% start/takeover/go virtual on a mobile network.

If Sky can raise £2.2billion for football rights I'm sure getting £billions for a mobile network will be easy enough.

Your idea is about £7 Billion and don't forget all borrowed money includes interest

[Telly_]

Originally Posted by m419

Yes but sky would then have to fund around £4 Billion plus the £400 Million for the spectrum and finally a few billion for 3, nearly £7 Billion is not worth it. They will never make up the amount they spent, sky's current income after tax is less than £1 Billion every year

---------- Post added at 16:18 ---------- Previous post was at 16:16 ----------



Your idea is about £7 Billion and don't forget all borrowed money includes interest

Like you said, £8billion is nothing as some mobile firms have £48billion of debt, hell even Virginmedia have £6 billion. So looking at it that way Sky only needing £7billion makes me think its even more likely. But from I have read it will only take Sky an estimated £3-£4billion to launch a network using EE's sell off spectrum.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Telly Bear

If Sky can raise £2.2billion for football rights I'm sure getting £billions for a mobile network will be easy enough.

They can raise £2.2 billion for the football rights because they know that enough people will pay the subscription to see the premiere league clubs. Premiere League fans will not be able to see the matches sky has the rights to anywhere (legally) unless Sky gets at least some money for them watching it. This means Sky can pretty much charge what it wants.

The same cannot be said of mobile phones. The market is saturated. A saturated market means that prices have to be kept low. This is why Orange and TMobile merged in the first place. It was not viable to keep both.

Now, you could argue that the ISP market was saturated when Sky tookover Easynet. It was. However, Easynet cost about £210 million. Even all these years later, and with Sky's upgrades to the Easynet network, I'd be surprised if they've spent more than £1 billion on Sky Broadband.

I think that even if they had the will, they would have trouble raising several billion for a takeover of a mobile phone network.

[Telly_]

Originally Posted by Stuart

They can raise £2.2 billion for the football rights because they know that enough people will pay the subscription to see the premiere league clubs. Premiere League fans will not be able to see the matches sky has the rights to anywhere (legally) unless Sky gets at least some money for them watching it. This means Sky can pretty much charge what it wants.

The same cannot be said of mobile phones. The market is saturated. A saturated market means that prices have to be kept low. This is why Orange and TMobile merged in the first place. It was not viable to keep both.

Now, you could argue that the ISP market was saturated when Sky tookover Easynet. It was. However, Easynet cost about £210 million. Even all these years later, and with Sky's upgrades to the Easynet network, I'd be surprised if they've spent more than £1 billion on Sky Broadband.

I think that even if they had the will, they would have trouble raising several billion for a takeover of a mobile phone network.

I completely disagree, as I said in the other thread Sky has 10Million customers taking at least1 service and more tripple pay customers taking 3 serives than VM do.

Their is no reason not believea lot of the 10 million customers wouldn't move to Sky. If they can tempt customers from 100Mb BB to 8Mb ADSL lines then I'm sure they can win customers with an equal or better product than the customer already has.

If you were a Sky shareholder would you be happy to put money in to get a Sky mobile network? Or would you want Sky left behind having to rent or piggy back on a virtual network?

If it can raise some from share holders and some from banks it will be easy.

---------- Post added at 16:50 ---------- Previous post was at 16:40 ----------

ALSO**

If you type boots owner to buy everything everywhere into google(which lots will be doing as the day goes on and news spreads) cableforum.co.uk is googles top pick...Good for the site eh.

[m419]

If it had its own network, it would have to pay near enough the same amount as a virtual network on running costs and giving existing sky customers cheap deals won't make money for sky in terms in paying for the cost of building the network nor will it cover the cost of providing services or phones to customers,that is what happened with Cable and Wireless and One2One . Also, if they dip into funds from its tv business, content and quality will go down.

[Telly_]

Originally Posted by m419

If it had its own network, it would have to pay near enough the same amount as a virtual network on running costs and giving existing sky customers cheap deals won't make money for sky in terms in paying for the cost of building the network nor will it cover the cost of providing services or phones to customers,that is what happened with Cable and Wireless and One2One . Also, if they dip into funds from its tv business, content and quality will go down.

One2One bankrupted it self with stupid deals like unlimited calls for a fixed fee back in 1993 when calls were expensive. Cable and wireless had very bad management and lost money on poor decisions.

If Sky enter the mobile market they will have done research, looked in to predicted take, forecast incomes.

They will also make forcasts based on NOT having a mobile network they bought up Easynet and now have more fibre laid in the UK than Virginmedia and have the UK's only 100Gb fibre backbone.

Sky will have a mobile network of some kind which can feed onto their own network backbone.