Forum Archive Index - April 2002

["tennyson@caverock.net.nz" <tennyson@caverock.net.nz>]

Hi donkeyb1, 


>
>
>her management of tel has been awful. 
>
>she bought aapt for cash when you got a over-valued share price that
>subsequently goes from $9 going to $5. 
>
>
>she should have used script.
>
>


She *was* following the script, as to how telecommunications 
companies should behave at the time.  Build on a vision of expansion.

Or perhaps you mean scrip?   In other words, issue Telecom shares to 
purchase AAPT  I notice that in the 2001 Annual report 
chairman Rod Deane raised the issue of a 24.9% holding in the hands 
of one United States investor that would make any pro-rata rights 
issue complicated costly and protracted.  I wonder if they would have 
allowed new scrip to be issued to the extent needed to buy AAPT?

I wonder if the shareholders of AAPT would have accepted a scrip bid?

I think your wisdom, donkeyb1, is coming with the benefit of a lot of 
assumptions and hindsight.

>
>
>unless of course she believed the stock was worth more - just like
>xtra was to be worth $2b 
>
>


When Telecom shares were trading at $9 the market capitalisation of 
Telecom was around $15billion.  $2billion is quite a modest proprtion 
of that.  In the circumstances of the time I don't think $2billion 
for Xtra is too far out of line.


>
>
>forgive while i laugh to death. if she
>believed that she cant have ever understood her basic business. the
>strategy in australia depends on there being limited competition for
>second tier customers. but why would everyone stop bidding for
>customers once the top tier are accounted 
>
>


Please rephrase.  I cannot understand what you are saying or what 
your point is.


>
>
>the mobile thing is a mess - vodaphone filled them in on basic 
>mobile and sms, and now has forced them to develop the 2g services 
>market, - so they can switch on their 2g option once the market is 
>operational. once again tel is strategically deficient.
>
>


So you are saying that Telecom should not be a leader in the mobile 
market?  It should be a follower?


>
>
>ruling over this series of f*** ups - is ms Gattung, believing for 
>all the world that a womens weekly endorsement is real, while the
>investment world laughs at her.
>
>

What Woman's Weekly endorsement?   I don't recall her ever mentioning 
it.  And I don't read the Woman's Weekly.

>
>
>her response to "why will tel be in 5 years" is the most telling
>...a big laugh (she is a cherry woman) and the answer "i dont have a 
>clue"
>
>

'she is a cherry woman?'   What kind of talk is that?  Her answer to 
the question "why will tel be in 5 years"(sic)  seems about as 
sensible as anyone could come up with. 

SNOOPY





 
-----------------------------------------------
Message posted by Harry Tennyson
 using Pegasus Mail 2.55
I have Word 97 to read attachments
------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To remove yourself from this list, please use the form at
http://www.sharechat.co.nz/chat/forum/