dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
4902
share rss forum feed

HeadSpinning
MNSi Internet

join:2005-05-29
Windsor, ON
kudos:5
reply to stufried

Re: Wind Mobile wants CRTC hearing over Telus ownership

said by stufried:

*House (supposedly set in New Jersey);

From Wikipedia:

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_(TV_series)

The pilot episode was filmed in Canada; primary photography for all subsequent episodes has been shot on the Fox lot in Century City.[35] Bryan Singer chose the hospital near his hometown, West Windsor, New Jersey, as the show's fictional setting.[12] Princeton University's Frist Campus Center[a] is the source of the aerial views of PrincetonPlainsboro Teaching Hospital seen in the series.[67] Some filming took place at the University of Southern California for the season three episode "Half-Wit", which guest-starred Dave Matthews and Kurtwood Smith.[68] Part of House's sixth season was filmed at the abandoned Greystone Park Psychiatric Hospital, in Parsippany-Troy Hills, New Jersey, as the fictional Mayfield Psychiatric Hospital.[69]
--
MNSi Internet - »www.mnsi.net

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4
reply to El Quintron
said by El Quintron:

WIND's pockets are pretty deep, I would assume that's why they brought this up in the first place.

Wind's pockets are only as deep as Vimpelcom is willing to fund.


El Quintron
Resident Mouth Breather
Premium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL
said by MaynardKrebs:

said by El Quintron:

WIND's pockets are pretty deep, I would assume that's why they brought this up in the first place.

Wind's pockets are only as deep as Vimpelcom is willing to fund.

Vipelcom is halfway into the market as we speak, and the Canadian market is fairly lucrative for an established player, assuming I were Vipelcom, I'd be digging in my heels right about now.
--
Support Bacteria -- It's the Only Culture Some People Have


Ott_Cable

@teksavvy.com
reply to El Quintron
By casting doubt on the "Canadianess" on Telus would basically limit Telus to only use "Canadian" sourced funding for their bids at least until the hearing (if there is one) is settled. On the other hand, WIND is no longer limited to where they raise their money. That's what I think WIND is up to instead of a revenge. Winning a bid have much more long term effects on capturing the mobile market than a one time suing for damages.

These bids are only part of the what needed to increase coverage. There are a lot of money needed for investments that are need to get the infrastructures etc built/deployed.

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4
Telus wouldn't have any problem floating a bond issue (or preferred shares) in Canada.


El Quintron
Resident Mouth Breather
Premium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to Ott_Cable
said by Ott_Cable :

By casting doubt on the "Canadianess" on Telus would basically limit Telus to only use "Canadian" sourced funding for their bids at least until the hearing (if there is one) is settled.

We can only speculate at this point, but that's a pretty good guess too.
--
Support Bacteria -- It's the Only Culture Some People Have

HeadSpinning
MNSi Internet

join:2005-05-29
Windsor, ON
kudos:5
reply to elwoodblues
I wonder why Bell seems interested in keeping the proceedings private? Is there something in Telus' ownership and control structure that would be in Bell's interest to keep away from prying eyes?
--
MNSi Internet - »www.mnsi.net


elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in
kudos:2
Putting on my tinfoil hat

BCE has too large stake in Telus, via a wholly owned US subsidiary, contravening the telecommunications act.

They can't be BELLUS directly, so they'll be BELLUS indirectly.

HeadSpinning
MNSi Internet

join:2005-05-29
Windsor, ON
kudos:5
said by elwoodblues:

BCE has too large stake in Telus, via a wholly owned US subsidiary, contravening the telecommunications act.

Wouldn't that be awesome. Hmm.. maybe that isn't a tinfoil hat you're wearing afterall....
--
MNSi Internet - »www.mnsi.net


Ott_Cable

@teksavvy.com
reply to HeadSpinning
Why would a publicly traded company need to be secretive about its ownership and control structure?

HeadSpinning
MNSi Internet

join:2005-05-29
Windsor, ON
kudos:5
Good question. Why does Bell seem to think it necessary to conduct these hearings in private?
--
MNSi Internet - »www.mnsi.net


elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in
kudos:2
Reviews:
·VMedia

1 edit
reply to Ott_Cable
said by Ott_Cable :

Why would a publicly traded company need to be secretive about its ownership and control structure?

Because they aren't supposed to own it?
It's off the books, hidden in some obscure US holding company, which is the mistake they made, they bought too much.

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4
said by elwoodblues:

said by Ott_Cable :

Why would a publicly traded company need to be secretive about its ownership and control structure?

Because they aren't supposed to own it?
It's off the books, hidden in some obscure US holding company, which is the mistake they made, they bought too much.

Without knowing any details, ... IF the alleged rumour about Bell owning some of Telus either directly, via an affiliated company(ies), or perhaps even via the Bell pension fund totals more than some number, it might be that Bell could be afoul of securities laws - in effect conducting an undisclosed takeover. Again this is hypothetical.

Hypothetically, I wonder what the remedy to that would be since they'd be prohibited from actually taking Telus over.......... maybe they'd have to pay each Telus shareholder a premium (in cash) but not actually take ownership of their shares, and then Bell might be forced to sell their own stake in Telus. In other words, billions out the door for ownership of absolutely nothing.

But all this is hypothetical as there is no clear understanding of exactly what Bell's (subsidiaries & affiiliates included) position vis-a-vis Telus actually is.

Vomio

join:2008-04-01
Reviews:
·odynet
With the joint development of their newfangled cellular network, I would imagine that various opportunities for cross financing of components might have occurred, possibly mutually beneficial.

It might be possible that they have slid into each other's embrace without that being the intent.

Kinda like waking up in a strange bed after a lost night of heavy drinking.


yikes

@videotron.ca
said by Vomio:

Kinda like waking up in a strange bed after a lost night of heavy drinking.

It was all fun and games... till that fateful night when Telnet_Bill rolled over and said, "Rocky? That you"?


Kardinal
Dei Gratia Regina
Premium,Mod
join:2001-02-04
N of 49th
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·Bell Sympatico
reply to 25139889
said by 25139889:

SBC IS Southern Bell. They changed their name to SBC prior to Ameritech/SNET/PacBell merger/buyout. SBC stands for Southern Bell Communications.

My mistake -- BellSouth, not Southern Bell, was the RBOC they bought in 2006.

See, that's what a *helpful* addition to a thread looks like.
--
All of us get lost in the darkness, dreamers learn to steer by the stars
All of us do time in the gutter, dreamers turn to look at the cars

- Peart / Lifeson / Lee
Join Team Helix


Ott_Cable

@teksavvy.com
reply to elwoodblues
While there might be a lot of bed side stories for "The Company" BJ party, it seems to be a round about and inefficient way for WIND to bring that into light by questioning Telus "Canadianess". If there is indeed something funny between them, WIND should bring that up to whatever department that is responsible. It is not like CRTC is the most hard working department.

They might go as far as determining that some percentage of Telus shares are owned by some XYZ corporation which might or might not be Canadian in origin. There is no reasons for the investigators to go beyond to finding out if XYZ is owned by a couple of layers of shell companies under BCE. Even then, if those shares were indirectly owned by BCE, the matter of "Canadianess" would be concluded with Telus in the clear.

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4
reply to Vomio
said by Vomio:

Kinda like waking up in a strange bed after a lost night of heavy drinking.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.


elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in
kudos:2
reply to Ott_Cable
Except any BCE ownership of Telus has not been approved.


Davesnothere
No-BHELL-ity DOES have its Advantages
Premium
join:2009-06-15
START Today!
kudos:7
reply to elwoodblues
said by elwoodblues:

If Bell is too foreign owned, I'm wondering why they want it behind closed doors, would that would unwind MLSE, Astral, maybe CTV....

THAT would be fun to watch !

 
I'm drooling just THINKING about it !

And if CTV (for example) got unwound, the CRTC or Competition Bureau might also feel the need to unwind some OTHER vertical integrations of the recent past, such as whichever TV stations were bought by Rogers, Shaw, etc.

Could become quite the CAN 'o WORMS !

--

We have only 2 things about which to worry :
(1) That things may never get back to normal
(2) That they already HAVE !


elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in
kudos:2
Are you kidding me, they'll spend every last nickel fighting any decision to do so.


Davesnothere
No-BHELL-ity DOES have its Advantages
Premium
join:2009-06-15
START Today!
kudos:7
said by elwoodblues:

Are you kidding me, they'll spend every last nickel fighting any decision to do so.

 
If you are talking about B$ELL fighting (you did not quote which part of my post you meant), it would (as you first said) be fun to watch (them spend every last nickel).

And I'd buy the popcorn !