Will VM be short for Vodafone Media?

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Horizon

But that would be all the other major shareholders as well as the 20% of votes on free float on the stock market. The likely hood that would happen is zero, especially if Murdoch made it clear it was against his wishes. I am not sure on this, but I think Murdoch still holds the majority of seats (4??)on the Sky board, so no motion can be put to the Sky board without his explicit consent. No consent, no vote.

Shareholders can replace the board. That's what happens with hostile takeovers - the hostile party acquires enough shares to replace the board with one more amenable to the deal.

Originally Posted by Horizon

The remaining old BSB shareholder's position has now been weakened further with the purchase of Murdoch fully controlled and owned Sky Italy and Sky Germany. I would expect Murdoch to now bid for the rest of the new Sky and take the company private.

No it hasn't. The deal was specifically structured to ensure that Fox's shareholding in the combined entity was not increased.

If Fox's shareholding increases they are obliged to make an offer for the rest of the shares as they hold over 30% of the company.

Where is Murdoch going to find the finance from to take the company private, and will the appetite be there for the inevitable regulatory investigations given events from last time?

Originally Posted by Horizon

For those interested in how the shareholdings in media companies can actually work in the real world, should look up about the Murdoch/Malone tussle over News Corp. If you don't know about it, its very interesting and almost ended Murdoch's empire!

Of course it's worth mentioning too the various poison pills set to make the company harder to perform a hostile takeover on, such as that all the company's debt fell due immediately upon a takeover. 30% of the voting share is considered effective control but it's not absolute control.

Whether Vodafone would have the appetite for such a hostile bid is quite different obviously. Whether Murdoch would be opposed if the right price were offered is likewise an interesting question.

I don't know and don't care to find out how well protected Sky is against hostile takeover.

[Pierre]

Well apparently VF have had a good look at VM via a global management consulting company. A very rapid audit of VM network assets was undertaken before Christmas.

No idea on the outcome as yet

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I would put the combinations as:
1) BT, EE (Would broadband market share be an issue?)
2) Sky, O2 (Would Sky really want a mobile operator? Can it afford to now after its European expansion? Would Telefonica want a stake in Sky and how would Fox view this?)
3) Three, TalkTalk (Both value-for-money operators)
4) Vodafone, Virgin Media (Vodafone sees the European global cable synergies. Would there be some competition issues? UK mobile? German fixed lines?)

It is entirely possible that Vodafone and Sky won't make any big acquistions, in which case Three might make acquire EE or O2 as a defensive move against BT. Time will tell.

Sky is apparently hiring Lazard as advisers.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/47050522-7...#axzz3KjVspKIv Registration required.)

Point 1) BT/EE will happen soon. The FT is now reporting today about point 2) a tie-up between Sky and O2. Experts are divided as to whether Sky could launch a mobile offering using O2's network or whether there will be a joint product offering or some form of merger.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3dc902c8-a...#axzz3PI7wWUHM (registration needed)

[qasdfdsaq]

http://www.mobiletoday.co.uk/news/in...-purchase.aspx

[Kushan]

And Three/Hutchinson are rumoured to be in talks as well. O2 is definitely being sold, the question is to whom. Virgin already has an MVNO so I suppose Sky has the most to gain from that.

[GrimUpNorth]

I know this probably is irrelevant but we're with Virgin Media Business for our telephone lines and mobile (3G). The mobiles are all on O2, so it appears VM don't just have a relationship with EE.

Cheers

Grim

[qasdfdsaq]

That's very strange, they specifically claim to be using EE only on their business mobile webpage:

http://www.virginmediabusiness.co.uk...usinessMobile/

Plus their coverage maps exactly match EE's coverage maps and don't include any O2 coverage.

[muppetman11]

Three owner Li Ka-shing in exclusive talks to buy O2 for £10bn

Link

[denphone]

Not sure that's going to be good news for us consumers though.

[qasdfdsaq]

I'm sure it would be.

[Kushan]

I don't really see the issue. That still leaves 3 major competitors in the mobile sector. On a simple level, your contracts aren't likely to change any time soon but if you're on O2 or Three, you'll benefit from much improved coverage.

Normally I'd say more competition is better but given the limited spectrum going around, I think 3 competitors might be the sweet spot.

Time will tell, though. I'll go where the best value is that suits my needs.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by denphone

Not sure that's going to be good news for us consumers though.

Shares in both BT and Vodafone have risen as city analysts see the merger reducing competition pressure in the market. So potentially not good news for consumers. In particular, Three currently offers some very competitive deals to get market share. And O2's GiffGaff value brand has been fighting back. Will this continue in the long term once Three and O2 are both under the same ownershup?

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by Kushan

if you're on O2 or Three, you'll benefit from much improved coverage.

Normally I'd say more competition is better but given the limited spectrum going around, I think 3 competitors might be the sweet spot.

This.

I'm not a desperate cheapskate so if costs goes up but so does coverage and performance, I'd be happy to pay more.

Paying the utter minimum humanly possible isn't the only criteria which can "benefit consumers"

[1andrew1]

The Financial Times has an interesting article explaining how prices could rise if Three and O2 merge, but it also states there could be benefits in terms of network quality.
On the downside, it points out how Three has challenged the big players by packaging 4G superfast mobile in “all you can eat” data bundles. Three has also campaigned to cut roaming costs for consumers, and to lower the cost of connecting calls with the larger groups. This is likely to end with an O2 merger.

The paper points out that where mergers have happened tariffs rise. It cites Austria where the move to increase the cost of mobile tariffs was almost immediate It reports Ovum analysts as concluding "that “the biggest concern now will be what happens to consumers, particularly at the lower end of the market, which Three catered very well to”.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5b937fea-a...#axzz3PgrLLIVT

[alanbjames]

I wouldnt say that 3 is a major compeditor here in South Wales as there are a lot of no service areas that 3 claim to cover.