dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
20
share rss forum feed

HeadSpinning
MNSi Internet

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

Re: Wind Mobile wants CRTC hearing over Telus ownership

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.


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
reply to elwoodblues
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

HeadSpinning
MNSi Internet

join:2005-05-29
Windsor, ON
kudos:5
reply to Ott_Cable
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"?

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.