SKT Sky Network Television Limited.

[Cadalac123]

Still waiting on 12c like someone on here posted .

[Paradox]

i am still anticipating 12-13c....sp has been trending down 25% in the last month.

Disc: hold some and hoping to buy more at 13c

[Ogg]

Just lol at you amateurs. Why would UBS sell you stock at 12. It's not gonna happen.

The traders are trying to flush out existing retail holders at this level, not to bring in more.

The strong close was pre programmed to set up a bullish trading pattern for next week.

Remember the SPH notices are 3 days old. The stock overhang has likely all been sold at a higher price. The algorithms have likely already switch to accumulation mode.

I suspect a return to TERP level on Monday, with more accumulation. Thus confirming the bullish trading pattern. You'll then likely get the updated broker reports, check for Forsyth Barr and Goldman. Should hit 20 by next Friday. That's when the offloading to retail will start up again.

[Ogg]

I've been doing more extensive "Michael Burry" type research on the relationship between Sky TV and Infratil. I've compiled a narrative what I believe is an undeniable case for an imminent take over of Sky TV and a long term commercial plan that could potentially net Infratil a billion dollar profit or more within 5 years.

BE HOLD MY STRONGEST CASE YET FOR AN INFRATIL TAKE OVER OF SKY TV:

Firstly, a bit of background information. One of Infratil's best investments was in Royal Dutch Shell. For background information on this investment read NBR's article:

https://www.nbr.co.nz/article/infrat...ment-bd-143411

Basically, Infratil bought the assets off Royal Dutch Shell and re-branded the new company into Z Energy. Infratil then subsequently floated the company on the NZX a few years later for a significant profit. The question is, why would Infratil re-brand "Shell", a well known brand in New Zealand, and change it to something different?

The answer is two fold. Firstly, and most importantly was because of financial reasons. It cost Infratil over $10m per year in intellectual property rights. This was one of the main reasons why they re-branded. See this source: http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post...o-be-renamed-Z

Secondly, it hindered the company's growth ability as it was restrained from the parent company who controlled the "rights" and direction of the brand. The use of the brand came with terms and conditions and therefore if Infratil wanted to float Shell on the NZX it needed to re-brand the company.

This brings me to Infratil's investment in Vodafone, a company that Infratil bought last year for EUR $2 billion, in a joint venture with global investment company Brooksfield Asset Management. The deal was finance with significant debt on both Infratil's and Vodafone's balance sheet. Stock analysts suspect that Infratil will float Vodafone in the near future, in a similar arrangement as Z Energy.

HOWEVER, Vodafone will have to be re-branded for an IPO to happen. So, the question is why haven't they re-branded yet? The answer, is that there are certain benefits for maintaining the brand, including support and shared commercial arrangements from the parent company. This is especially important in the first few years after it is sold, but eventually a re-branding will have to happen.

So the next question is, when they do decide to re-brand, what do they call the new company?... Z Phone, Red Mobile Company, Not The Spark Company? Yes folks, you read it here first, SKY TV WILL TAKE OVER VODAFONE!!! As nutty as that sounds, that's what will happen. The Vodafone brand will be gone in New Zealand and be another past relic, just like Bell South!

I suspect the two newly formed companies will be refloated on the NZX, sometime in the year 2024-2026. With the combined revenue, it will have a market capitalization near that of Spark. The profits for Infratil will be gigantic. And the best part is that it's all funded with debt.

I suspect Infratil will retain a holding after the IPO, and they will fully exit a few years later, just like they did with Z Energy.

I put a value of Sky today of 75c a share based on the above scenario playing out. But retail investors won't see any part of that as the company will be flogged off for a poultry 30c a share.

Just lol.

[RGR367]

Again, hope you're right. But maybe in a parallel world existing somewhere, your detective novel is just being written too

[Zaphod]

HOWEVER, Vodafone will have to be re-branded for an IPO to happen. So, the question is why haven't they re-branded yet? The answer, is that there are certain benefits for maintaining the brand, including support and shared commercial arrangements from the parent company. This is especially important in the first few years after it is sold, but eventually a re-branding will have to happen.
.

Any newly separated entity would ideally keep the existing relationship with VF intact in order to preserve interconnection agreements to maintain existing price rates for WAN, roaming etc. Presumably if a NZ domiciled company such as Spark can negotiate such rates, then they'd be able to as well, although perhaps not as favourable as is currently enjoyed which might undermine competitiveness slightly.

Rebranding could be a double-edged sword for them, depending upon how it's executed.

You're on to an interesting idea!

[airedale]

If that scenario becomes reality my paltry 100% profit on Sky should be re invested in Infratil.

[winner69]

More serious issues .....Martin getting all excited with his new stadium

Suppose it's fair enough he gets a buzz out of wasting our money on naming rights

@MartinStewartNZ
At last, we get to show off @SkyStadium with the ‘Canes at home to the Crusaders, kick off at 3.35pm, Sky Sport 1! A HUGE thanks to @ShaneHarmon & team for getting all in place for what promises to be a real battle on the pitch. @SuperRugbyNZ. https://t.co/4VxeQxkPaq

[percy]

Well at half time one team has deserved to get 19 points while the other team on 12 points only deserves 3 points.

Had the poor team led at half time I would have turned it off.

[Ogg]

Any newly separated entity would ideally keep the existing relationship with VF intact in order to preserve interconnection agreements to maintain existing price rates for WAN, roaming etc. Presumably if a NZ domiciled company such as Spark can negotiate such rates, then they'd be able to as well, although perhaps not as favourable as is currently enjoyed which might undermine competitiveness slightly.

Rebranding could be a double-edged sword for them, depending upon how it's executed.

You're on to an interesting idea!

Like you said, roaming rates with other international partners can be negotiated. Roaming is a high margin business. There's room for negotiation, so they could easily partner with other companies.

It's likely they're only getting a small discount anyway and with less international travel expected in the medium term, why bother staying with the parent company.

Also, check out this NZHearld article: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/...ectid=12334743

Paris said that, until its sale to the Infratil/Brookfield Asset Management consortium last May for $3.4 billion, Vodafone NZ had been effectively "held back" for the previous five years during which investment was constrained and it was executing to a Vodafone Group strategic template, 50 per cent of which was irrelevant to New Zealand.


"Under the consortium, we are focused 100 per cent on our New Zealand strategy, so we now have a massive opportunity to be more cloud-based and more agile."

It's obvious that there are more negatives than positives in maintaining the Vodafone brand in New Zealand. The brand will eventually be phased out.

Telecom was able to successfully re-brand as Spark.

Look at the naming rights to the Wellington Stadium. You don't see Vodafone on there!

In fact it's likely that Vodafone NZ are already pulling back on marketing expenses in New Zealand, getting ready for the re-brand in the next year or two.