M1 (formerly: MobileOne)

Hi all,

Wont the profits for the 3 telecos increase next year too? Considering they had increased their teleco monthly rates prior to Iphone 6 release, and with many mid gen and old gen ppl renewing willingly to get the iphone 6; it spells monthly revenue rise.

As for me, the telecos wont extract much from me. My phone plan is under corporate scheme and thus I am paying less than $30. And i get renewal voucher of $50 which I use to buy a $48 phone I am a Singtel user by the way. So M1 shareholders don't worry.

The debt level went up $37M. The cash dropped to $18M

If they keep the same debt / equity ratio, I wonder what is the impact?

Are they confident the increase in mobile charges will be enough to cut the loans?

(16-10-2014, 10:58 PM)CY09 Wrote: Hi all,

Wont the profits for the 3 telecos increase next year too? Considering they had increased their teleco monthly rates prior to Iphone 6 release, and with many mid gen and old gen ppl renewing willingly to get the iphone 6; it spells monthly revenue rise.

As for me, the telecos wont extract much from me. My phone plan is under corporate scheme and thus I am paying less than $30. And i get renewal voucher of $50 which I use to buy a $48 phone I am a Singtel user by the way. So M1 shareholders don't worry.

FYI Singtel has also revised their CIS plan package, which is without much discount. But you will not be affected as long as you don't do any recontracting.

(16-10-2014, 11:21 PM)Contrarian Wrote: The debt level went up $37M. The cash dropped to $18M

If they keep the same debt / equity ratio, I wonder what is the impact?

Are they confident the increase in mobile charges will be enough to cut the loans?

Yes, we should always look-out for debt.

For M1, the non-current debt i.e. $250 million is having fixed rate, unsecured at an effective interest rate of 1.59% per annum. The much smaller non-current part is having much lower rate i.e. <1%.

I am not too worry on the debt. I am happy that M1 is leveraging on low interest rate to maximize shareholder interest, without taking too much risk.

The drop of cash reserve, is due to the recent special dividend to return part of the retained earning to shareholder. This is a regular exercise of the company capital management.

(vested)

I chose to post the article here. The migration of current model of packaged cable TV model to direct retail model, is unstoppable. It is just a matter of time.

M1 is ready for the migration, and be part of the new distribution model. It is wise not to go into cable TV business, as regularly asked by shareholder in AGM previously.

(vested)

HBO standalone product risks alienating cable, satellite cos

NEW YORK - Time Warner Inc's decision to make its prized HBO channel available to people who don't subscribe to Pay TV may delight such "cord cutters" but will likely crank up tensions with cable and satellite TV service providers.

By going over-the-top - media lingo for being able to watch TV with only a broadband connection - HBO has paved the way for a rocky period of negotiations with cable and satellite companies - with issues of pricing and distribution likely to loom large.

Indeed, CBS Corp upped the ante when it announced on Thursday a digital product that provides content like "The Good Wife" without a cable subscription for $5.99 per month.

"Truth be told, there is no way to put a positive spin on this for the distributors," said Craig Moffett, senior research analyst at MoffettNathanson.
...
http://www.todayonline.com/business/hbo-...ellite-cos

Wah, they get 1.59% long term fixed rate? Do u know is it for 2 or 3 years? It's probably the cheapest long term rate for a corporate company.

The capex is up S$30M over last year. Does any shareholders know what the additional capex contributed towards?

I should have held on to my small stake and keep adding... :-(

(small vested)

(17-10-2014, 09:52 AM)Contrarian Wrote: Wah, they get 1.59% long term fixed rate? Do u know is it for 2 or 3 years? It's probably the cheapest long term rate for a corporate company.

The capex is up S$30M over last year. Does any shareholders know what the additional capex contributed towards?

I should have held on to my small stake and keep adding... :-(

(small vested)

Half of the $250 mil, $125 mil is having fixed interest rate of 2.6% for 2 year, renewed regularly since years back. The other half is floating but hedged with interest rate swap at a lower fixed rate. Thus overall effective rate is 1.59% as reported in AR2013 page 117

All telcos are having spectrum right renewal cycle, and M1 is one of them. Part of the capex is on 4G and advance 4G upgrade.

I chose to post the article here. The "revenue-sharing formula" is the one model telcos are seeking. As long as telcos own the infra, they are always a indispensable stake-holders.

BTW, Tembusu Partners is a boutique PE firm that I am observing...

First-of-its-kind service allows callers to connect via a personalised URL

SINGAPORE — Imagine asking someone you just met to call you without giving them your mobile phone number. Imagine calling home from overseas without having to pay IDD rates or key in a string of numbers. Imagine “calling” someone by simply clicking a Web address instead of punching in numbers on a phone. Now how about receiving that call on your mobile phone without having to download an external chat application or even have a 3G or Wi-Fi connection?

All of that is now possible with the world’s first personalised URL-based calling service unveiled yesterday by local start-up GNum, which has secured S$7 million in seed funding from private equity firm Tembusu Partners.

The deal is said to be one of the largest first-round investments in a Singapore start-up, said a joint statement by Tembusu and GNum yesterday.

Talks are also under way between GNum and the three telcos here for a revenue-sharing formula that will see the service become a value-added feature for them, as they continue to face stiff competition from “free-riding” over-the-top (OTT) offerings, such as WhatsApp and Skype.

Analysts TODAY spoke to said such a tie-up would benefit the telcos as it would allow them to enhance their offerings to customers while making money off the value-added service.
...
http://www.todayonline.com/tech/first-it...alised-url

Thanks CF for sharing, I am always amaze by how technology advance, and it is always a threat to businesses if they cannot adapt or change accordingly.

Ironically, telco wants to tie up with this new service so that they could squeeze out more money from their existing customers. OTHO, customers will likely want to switch to this service if it offers saving. So who win? How can telcos achieved more and at the same time its customers enjoys more saving? And a tie up with GNum will not be for free, so there is a cost impact to look out for.

The telcos are fighting against OTT providers because they are eating their lunches, and so if they can claim back their turf, or part of the turf, that is not bad. But you can bet that eventually these OTT providers will counter attack with something new. Facebook purchased WhatsApp for $22B. WeChat is owns by Tencent. These companies are worth multi billion dollars, much bigger than all the local three telcos combined. So they can and will protect their lunches. Just my 2 cents.

(21-10-2014, 10:51 AM)Ben Wrote: Thanks CF for sharing, I am always amaze by how technology advance, and it is always a threat to businesses if they cannot adapt or change accordingly.

Ironically, telco wants to tie up with this new service so that they could squeeze out more money from their existing customers. OTHO, customers will likely want to switch to this service if it offers saving. So who win? How can telcos achieved more and at the same time its customers enjoys more saving? And a tie up with GNum will not be for free, so there is a cost impact to look out for.

The telcos are fighting against OTT providers because they are eating their lunches, and so if they can claim back their turf, or part of the turf, that is not bad. But you can bet that eventually these OTT providers will counter attack with something new. Facebook purchased WhatsApp for $22B. WeChat is owns by Tencent. These companies are worth multi billion dollars, much bigger than all the local three telcos combined. So they can and will protect their lunches. Just my 2 cents.

No matter how powerful the OTT players are, eventually the OTT service has to be riding on an infra. It can't or expansive to go via alternative infra.

There are valid points from telco perspective. The infra need capex to build and maintain, and it has to be paid back somewhere. Without the infra, the OTT services are useless. OTT/Telco are partners in nature, but competitors, IMO. The key question how the interest should be shared, which have no reference so far. The issue isn't only occur locally, but globally.

Is the model of Gnum/Telco a good future reference for other OTT service providers? I am observing...

(vested in M1, thus might be biased)