sharetrader
Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 71
  1. #21
    On the doghouse
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    , , New Zealand.
    Posts
    9,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lizard View Post
    Fwiw, this company is not related to Macquarie Bank and never has been.
    Presumably Macquarie Bank floated MAQ originally as an autonomous entity, hence the name?

    Which is the Macquarie entity that has been trading Telecom NZ shares? SSH notice on 1st March indicates 'Macquarie Group' has sold down their holding to an 'unsubstantial' 4.93%. From memory they only disclosed themselves as substantial holders in the latter half of 2009. So it looks like it was a losing trade. I always assumed this was MAQ, but maybe not?

    SNOOPY
    Watch out for the most persistent and dangerous version of Covid-19: B.S.24/7

  2. #22
    Super Investor
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    1,303

    Default

    Me to. Can't assume anything in this market...lol
    h2

  3. #23
    Share Collector
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Porirua
    Posts
    3,509

    Default

    The Macquarie that was trading in TEL shares had nothing to do with MAQ - that was MQG - i.e the Macquarie Bank related entity. Macquarie Telecom was formed in 1992 - before Macquarie Bank was listed. I don't think they were ever related in any capacity - David Tudehope and related entity seemed to be majority owners when floated in 1999 from what I can find.

    Just to confuse you further, TEL actually has shares in MAQ - about 10% I think - held through PowerTel which held them prior to being acquired. So, indirectly Snoopy, you are already an investor in MAQ!

  4. #24
    On the doghouse
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    , , New Zealand.
    Posts
    9,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lizard View Post
    Just to confuse you further, TEL actually has shares in MAQ - about 10% I think - held through PowerTel which held them prior to being acquired. So, indirectly Snoopy, you are already an investor in MAQ!
    Thanks, I think! Perhaps I had better find out a bit more about my new indirect investment. Small telcos are tolerated by the larger ones, for as long as they exist there is the pretence of competition. However, if MAQ were to get a little to successful for their own good is there anything to stop Telstra and/or Optus simply squashing them like an unwanted parasitic ant?

    SNOOPY

    discl: indirect shareholder
    Watch out for the most persistent and dangerous version of Covid-19: B.S.24/7

  5. #25
    On the doghouse
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    , , New Zealand.
    Posts
    9,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KW View Post
    Small telcos succeed in areas where big telcos fail. On things like service, price, personal relationships, etc. So pretty difficult to put them down. But they can always buy them and then suffocate them slowly
    Agreed, except for the bit about one upmanship by price. If a small telco has to rent connectivity to a network, and if they want to offer something bigger than an intranet they will have to do just that, they can be crippled by the access price to the externally controlled outside loop at any time. I was wondering how MAQ overcomes this issue.

    Here in NZ, Telecom suffocated one of their privatised service companies to death by demanding lower and lower prices from them for their work. Could not Telstra/Optus just put the choker on MAQ if they were taking too much business away from them?

    SNOOPY
    Watch out for the most persistent and dangerous version of Covid-19: B.S.24/7

  6. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    202

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Snoopy View Post
    Thanks, I think! Perhaps I had better find out a bit more about my new indirect investment. Small telcos are tolerated by the larger ones, for as long as they exist there is the pretence of competition. However, if MAQ were to get a little to successful for their own good is there anything to stop Telstra and/or Optus simply squashing them like an unwanted parasitic ant?

    SNOOPY

    discl: indirect shareholder
    Whilst MAQ do provide standard "telco" services such as voice/mobile etc which competes with the likes of Telstra/Optus their focus is on hosting and managed IT services. That's where they are getting their growth and where their future lies.

    MAQ has way more in common with MLB than TLS

  7. #27
    Share Collector
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Porirua
    Posts
    3,509

    Default

    Well TEL have now sold their shares for a low $4.80 - Sydney Morning Herald says they gave away a bargain. Price now $5.40 and looking likely to hit new highs shortly, so they may be right. I'd certainly agree with the view expressed in the article that the share price should at least have an "8" in front of it.

    Article (dated 30 July)
    AAPT fire sale

    THE piecemeal break-up of AAPT by Telecom New Zealand kicked off yesterday, with the New Zealanders freeing up $10 million through the sale of a 10 per cent interest in Macquarie Telecom.

    With iiNet in a trading halt pending a material acquisition, a sale of the AAPT consumer business looks to be just days away.

    At this stage it smells like a fire sale. The handful of institutions and Bell Potter retail clients that put up their hands for the Macquarie stake have secured the telco bargain of the year.

    The shares were crossed at $4.80 yesterday morning, putting Macquarie on a multiple of just 1.6 times EBITDA guidance for the June 2010 year. Not bad for a business that's grown 22 per cent this year as the company builds momentum in its higher-margin hosting business.

    Why so cheap? While there are plenty of institutional investors that reckon Macquarie is worth as much as $8 a share, which would still only be about four times 2010 EBITDA, the path to unlocking full value may not be easy.

    For starters, companies with a large and lazy cash backing tend not to be fully valued by the market, and Macquarie holds more than $2.50 a share in cash, with no debt. If it started paying a dividend instead of hoarding cash, a rapid re-rating would be almost assured.

    There's also an issue that the free float is small and trading illiquid as Macquarie is 60 per cent owned by the Tudehope family.

    Still, Macquarie management has shown increased interest in improving the company's market profile in recent months, and the sell-down by Telecom New Zealand may encourage a few more investors to take a closer look.

    The only problem I see is that MAQ has never looked inclined to want to pay dividends, so it is possible directors will continue to frustrate analysts by stockpiling cash for future investment opportunities that seem slow to emerge.

  8. #28
    Advanced Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    1,473

    Default

    One happy holder, here.

  9. #29
    Share Collector
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Porirua
    Posts
    3,509

    Default

    Result out - quick look, all as forecast. 40cps div is a nice surprise though!

    Only caution on next year is that looks like being another investment-hungry year and, in the past, I think they've tended to expense what they can against operations in the investment process. But still forecasting continued growth. Will have a deeper look later.

  10. #30
    Share Collector
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Porirua
    Posts
    3,509

    Default

    AGM today and forecasting $15-$17m EBITDA for 1H - about $4m ahead of last agm forecast.

    Share price now at $8.70, so has been a good earner and, after making it to 10-bags, is now finally getting closer to "fair value" territory - though perhaps still another 30%+ on that front. Looks like the next-stage investment is going to be pretty significant, with $49m to be spent at North Ryde faciity (Intellicentre 2). Going to see some of that cash eroded by year end - maybe back to $36m ish? But will provide the much-needed base for growth in 2012.

    Expecting some consolidation soon, but maybe will run up into next All Ords re-jig in March? Presumably it has liquidity for that, though I don't think it can make ASX300 in December review.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •