Orange builds out security credentials with SecureData acquisition

Orange has announced the acquisition of SecureData, building out the increasingly extensive cybersecurity operations at the telco.

The Orange Cyberdefense Division is another one of Orange’s ventures into the world of differentiation. Like banking and smart home services, this is not a segment which is necessarily core for the telco, but with a close enough link to connectivity it’s a low risk approach to diversification. With annual sales approaching €300 million, over 1,300 employees and a presence in 160 markets, it is also fast becoming more than just an ‘other bet’.

In SecureData, Orange has bought itself more of a presence in the UK, the largest Western European market for managed security services. SecureData’s existing Security Operations Centre (SOC) in Maidstone will add to the existing 9 Cyber SOC’s and 4 CERT’s around the world. The footprint is steadily increasing, gradually making the Orange security business more appealing to both national and international customers.

“SecureData, just like Orange Cyberdefense, has successfully made the transition toward Managed Security Services, and shares the same passion for Cyber,” said Hugues Foulon, Executive Director of Strategy and Cybersecurity activities at Orange.

“Cybersecurity has become a critical element for both large and small companies as they evolve in an increasing digital-reliant world. We are convinced that the combined expertise of Orange Cyberdefense and SecureData will provide a powerful resource for our customers in ensuring the protection of their valuable data.”

While Orange has not necessarily been spraying the cash everywhere, it has steadily been building its cybersecurity credentials. Aside from this purchase, Atheos and Lexsi are two other examples, with the services now being extended to 160 different countries.

These two acquisitions do date back a few years, though in cybersecurity Orange has once again proved it can think ahead of the game. This is a segment which is only starting to get the attention it rightly, and responsibly, deserves but it has been an ambition for Orange for years.

A recent survey from Tripwire claims 60% of respondents were more concerned about IoT security in 2019 compared to the previous year. IoT is a blossoming segment, an opportunity many companies will want to take advantage of for both new revenues and operational efficiency, but few know how to keep themselves secure. The perimeter of the network is about to vastly expand, but right now it is nothing more than a risk. Security needs to radically rise up the agenda.

Like getting ahead of the fibre trends across Europe, Orange looks like it onto a winner with a focus on cybersecurity. With tighter regulations on data protection and privacy, combined with increased public backlash with recent breaches and leaks, as well as new business models, security is becoming more of a priority for companies. The low-risk, long-thinking approach from Orange definitely looks to be paying off.

Who’s got the stones to buy Netflix?

Apple, Disney, Microsoft or Apple; one of the biggest questions which has circled the technology industry over the last couple of years is who could possibly acquire Netflix?

The streaming giant, Wall Street’s darling, has almost constantly been talked up as an acquisition target. However, another year has passed and it’s another year where no-one managed to capture the content beast. You have to start to wonder whether it will ever happen, but here we’re going to have a look at who might be in the running.

Netflix numbersWith subscriptions totalling more than 148 million, 2018 revenues exceeding $15.7 billion and operating income up to $1.6 billion, Netflix would certainly be a useful addition to any company. However, with market capitalisation now roughly $143 billion and debt which would make your eyes water, an acquisition would be a scary prospect for almost everyone.

First and foremost, let’s have a look at some of the players who might have been in the equation, but alas, no more.

Disney has been a rumoured acquirer for almost as long as Netflix existed. This is an incredibly successful company, but no-one is immune to the shift tides of the global economy and consumer behaviour. Getting in on the internet craze is something which should be considered critical to Disney, and Netflix would have given them a direct-to-consumer channel. However, there was always a feeling Disney would develop its own proposition organically and this turned out to be the case.

AT&T is another company which might have been in the fray, but its Time Warner acquisition satisfied the content needs of the business. All telcos are searching to get in on the content cash, developing converged offerings, and AT&T is a company which certainly has a big bank account. As mentioned above, the acquisition of Time Warner completes rules this business out.

There are of course others who might have been interested in acquiring the streaming giant, but for various reasons they would not be considered today. Either it would be way too expensive, wouldn’t fit into the company’s objectives or there is already a streaming service present. But now onto the interesting stuff, who could be in the running.

Microsoft logo

Microsoft

From doom to gloom, CEO Satya Nadella has certainly turned fortunes around at Microsoft. Only a few years ago, Microsoft was a shadow of its former self as the declining PC industry hit home hard. A disastrous venture into the world of smartphones was a slight detour but under the cloud-orientated leadership of Nadella, Microsoft is back as a lean, mean tech heavyweight.

Alongside the cloud computing business, Microsoft has also successfully lead the Xbox brand into the digital era. Not only is the platform increasingly evolving into an online gaming landscape, but it also lends itself well to sit alongside the Netflix business. If Microsoft wants to compete with Amazon across the entire digital ecosystem, both consumer and enterprise, it will need to expand the business into more consumer channels.

For Netflix, this might be an interesting tie up as well. Netflix is a business which operates through a single revenue stream at the moment, entertainment, and might be keen to look at new avenues. Gaming and eSports are two segments which align well with Netflix, opening up some interesting synergies with Microsoft’s consumer business.

“Microsoft is at a crossroads,” said independent telco, media and tech analyst Paolo Pescatore. “Its rivals have made big moves in video and it needs to follow suit. The acquisition addresses this and complements its efforts with Xbox. The move also strengthens its growing aspirations in the cloud with Azure, firmly positioning itself against Amazon with AWS and Prime video.”

However, while this is a company which could potentially afford to buy Netflix, you have to wonder whether it actually will. The Netflix culture does not necessarily align with Microsoft, and while diversification into new channels is always attractive, it might be considered too much of a distraction from the cloud computing mission. Nadella has already stated he is targeting the edge computing and AI segments, and considering the bounties on offer there, why bother entertaining an expensive distraction.

Apple Store on 5th Avenue, New York City

Apple

Apple is another company which has billions floating in free cash and assets which could be used to leverage any transaction. It is also a company which has struggled to make any effective mark on the content world, excluding iTunes success. With Netflix, Apple could purchase a very successful brand, broadening the horizons of the business.

The last couple of months have shown Apple is not immune to the dampened smartphone trends. Sales are not roaring the same way they were during yesteryear, perhaps because there has been so little innovation in the segment for years. The last genuine disruption for devices probably came from Apple a decade ago when it ditched the keyboard. Arguably everything else has just been incremental change, while prices are sky-rocketing; the consumer feels abused.

To compensate for the slowdown, CEO Tim Cook has been talking up the software and services business unit. While this has been successful, it seems not enough for investors. Netflix would offer a perfect opportunity for Apple to diversify and tap into the recurring revenues pot which everyone wants to grab.

However, Netflix is a service for anyone and everyone. Apple has traditionally tied services into Apple devices. At CES, we saw the firm expand into openness with new partnerships, but this might be a step too far. Another condemning argument is Apple generally likes to build business organically, or at least acquire to bolster existing products. This would stomp all over this concept.

Alibaba Logo

Alibaba

A Chinese company which has been tearing up trees in the domestic market but struggled to impose itself on the international space, Alibaba has been hoping to replicate the Huawei playbook to dominate the world, but no-where near as successfully.

Perhaps an internationally renowned business is exactly what Alibaba needs to establish itself on the international space. But what is worth noting is this relationship could head the other direction as well; Netflix wouldn’t mind capitalising on the Chinese market.

As with any international business a local business partner is needed to trade in China. Alibaba, with its broad reach across the vast country, could prove to be a very interesting playmate. With Netflix’s Eastern ambitions and Alibaba’s Western dreams, there certainly is dovetail potential.

However, it is very difficult to believe the current US political administration would entertain this idea. Aside from aggression and antagonistic actions, the White House has form in blocking acquisitions which would benefit China, see Broadcom’s attempted acquisition of Qualcomm. This is a completely different argument and segment but considering the escalating trade war between the US and China, it is hard to see any tie up between these two internet giants.

Google Logo

Google

If you’re going to talk about a monstrous acquisition in Silicon Valley, it’s difficult not to mention Google. This is one of the most influential and successful businesses on the planet with cash to burn. And there might just be interest in acquiring Netflix.

Time and time again, Google has shown it is not scared of spending money, a prime example of this is the acquisition of YouTube for $1.65 billion. This might seem like pocket change today, but back in 2006 this was big cash. It seemed like a ridiculous bet for years, but who is laughing now?

The issue with YouTube is the business model. Its advertiser led, open to all and recently there have been some PR blunders with the advert/content alignment. Some content companies have actively avoided the platform, while attempts to create a subscription business have been unsuccessful. This is where Netflix could fit in.

“Google has made numerous failed attempts to crack the paid online video landscape,” said Pescatore. “Content and media owners no longer want to devalue their prized assets by giving it away on YouTube. Acquiring Netflix gives Google a sizeable subscriber base and greater credibility with content and media owners.”

Where there is an opportunity to make money, Google is not scared about big cash outlays. Yes, Netflix is a massive purchase, and there is a lot of debt to consider, but Google is an adventurous and bold enough company to make this work.

However, you have to question whether the US competition authorities would allow two of the largest content platforms to be owned by the same company. There might not necessarily be any direct overlap, but this is a lot of influence to have in one place. Authorities don’t generally like this idea.

Verizon Logo

Verizon

Could Verizon borrow a page from the AT&T playbook and go big on a content acquisition? Perhaps it will struggle to justify the expense to investors, but this one might make sense.

Verizon has been attempting to force its way into the diversification game and so far, it has been a disaster. While AT&T bought Game of Thrones, Verizon went after Yahoo to challenge the likes of Google and Facebook for advertising dollars. A couple of data breaches later, the content and media vision looks like a shambles. Hindsight is always 20/20 but this was a terrible decision.

However, with a 5G rollout to consider, fixed broadband ambitions and burnt fingers from the last content acquisition, you have to wonder whether the team has the stomach to take on such a massive task. Verizon as a business is nothing like Netflix and despite the attractive recurring revenues and value-add opportunities, the integration would be a nightmare. The headache might not be worth the reward.

You also have to wonder whether the telco would be scared off by some of the bold decisions made from a content perspective. Telcos on the whole are quite risk-adverse organizations, something which Netflix certainly isn’t. How many people would have taken a risk and funded content like Stranger Things? And with the release of Bandersnatch, Netflix is entering the new domain of interactive content. You have to be brave and accept considerable risk to make such bets work; we can’t see Verizon adopting this mentality.

Softbank Logo

Softbank Vision Fund

Another with telco heritage, but this is a completely different story.

A couple of years back, Softbank CEO Masayoshi Son had a ridiculous idea which was mocked by many. The creation of a $100 billion investment fund which he would manage seemed unimaginable, but he found the backers, made it profitable and then started up a second-one.

Son is a man to knows how to make money and has the right connections to raise funds for future wonderful ideas. Buying Netflix might sound like an absurd idea, but this is one place we could really see it working.

However, the issue here is the business itself. While Son might be interested in digital ventures which are capable of making profits, the aim of the funds have mainly been directed towards artificial intelligence. Even if Son and his team have bought into other business segments, they are more enterprise orientated. There are smaller bets which have been directed towards the consumer market, but would require an investment on another level.

Tencent Logo

Tencent

Another Chinese company which has big ambitions on the global stage.

This is a business which has been incredibly successful in the Chinese market and used assets effectively in the international markets as well. The purchase of both Epic Games and Supercell have spread the influence of the business further across the world and numerous quarterly results have shown just how strong Tencent’s credentials are in the digital economy.

Tencent would most likely be able to raise the funds to purchase the monster Netflix, while the gaming and entertainment portfolio would work well alongside the streaming brand. Cross selling would be an option, as would embedding more varied content on different platforms. It could be a match made in heaven.

However, you have to bear in mind this is a Chinese company and the political climate is not necessarily in the frame to consider such as transaction. Like Alibaba, Tencent might be viewed as too close to the Chinese government.

No-one

This is an option which is looking increasingly likely. Not only will the business cost a huge amount of money, perhaps a 30-40% premium on market capitalisation, the acquirer will also have to swallow all the debt built-up over the years. There will also have to be enough cash to fuel the content ambitions of Netflix, it reportedly spend $7.5 billion on content last year.

Finally, the acquirer would also have to convince Netflix CEO Reed Hastings, as well as the shareholders, that selling up is the best option.

“If I was a shareholder or Reed Hastings, I’d be wondering whether it is better to be owned by someone else or just carry on what we’re doing now,” said Ed Barton, Practise Lead at Ovum.

“These guys are going down in business school history for what they have done with Netflix already, do they need to sell out to someone else?”

Netflix is growing very quickly and now bringing in some notable profits. The most interesting thing about this business is the potential as well. The US market might be highly saturated, but the international potential is massive. Many countries around the world, most notably in Asia, are just beginning to experience the Netflix euphoria meaning the growth ceiling is still years away.

What this international potential offers Netflix is time, time to explore new opportunities, convergence and diversification. Any business with a single revenue stream, Netflix is solely reliant on subscriptions, sits in a precarious position, but with international growth filling the coffers the team have time to organically create new business streams.

Ultimately, Hastings and his management team have to ask themselves a simple question; is it better to control our own fate or answer to someone else for a bumper payday? We suspect Hastings’ bank account is already bursting and this is a man who is driven by ambition, the need to be the biggest and best, breaking boundaries and creating the unthinkable.

Most of these suitors will probably be thinking they should have acquired Netflix years ago, when the price was a bit more palatable, but would they have been able to drive the same success as Hastings has done flying solo? We suspect not.

Cybersecurity investments on the up but not sustainable – study

Research from Strategic Cyber Ventures points to an increased appetite for cyber security investments, but the euphoria sweeping the segment forward is not sustainable.

On numerous occasions we have commented security is the ugly duckling of the technology world. It is critical to ensure the industry, and digital society on the whole, functions appropriately, though more often than not it is ignored. There will be numerous reasons for this, perhaps because security is a thankless and often impossible task, but the data suggests 2018 might have been a watershed year.

Not only did 2018 see $5.3 billion in global venture capital funding, 81% more than 2016, M&A activity increased as did private equity investments. On the M&A side of things, Cisco made a bang with a $2.4 billion acquisition of Duo Security, while Blackberry acquired Cylance for $1.4 billion. These are two of the larger deals, though there was increased activity in the segment across the period.

In terms of private equity, Barracuda Networks was acquired for $1.6 billion by Thoma Bravo, Bomgar by Francisco Partners for $739 million, while Blackrock spent $400 million on Cofense. Elsewhere in the more complicated financial world, Skyhigh Networks acquired McAfee with assistance from its financial sponsors Thoma Bravo and TPG Capital.

Cybersecurity one

Overall, the trends for the security segments are heading in the right direction. Perhaps now this is an area which will be taken more seriously by the industry, with adequate investments heading into security department.

That said, Strategic Cyber Ventures has warned the trends from a funding perspective are not exactly the most favourable. The amount of cash being invested is increasing, though it does not appear the rewards are reflecting this. Some of these companies have raised funds through big rounds, but growth has slowed, perhaps due to vendor fatigue or increased competition. The risk here is firms cannot raise additional funds at increased valuations from prior rounds, meaning they will have to lean on existing investors. Eventually these parties will grow tired of keeping them alive for minimal rewards.

The issue here is the need and hype around security. Its critical to secure the expanding perimeter of the digital economy, creating the need for the segment, while executives constantly talk about security being a number one priority of firms, creating the hype. This would seem to be the perfect recipe for investment in security companies and start-ups. However, the segment hasn’t taken off, perhaps due to the preference of customers investing in technologies which will make the company money as opposed to more secure?

This is maybe the most accurate assumption on why the security segment has faltered continuously over the years. Companies have limited spending power with executives choosing to invest in areas which will make the company more profitable, such is the pressure from investors and shareholders. However, consumer attitudes might be changing.

While many would have ignored the security risks of the digital economy in years gone, today’s consumer is more educated. Privacy scandals have demonstrated the power of data forcing the consumer to consider security more critically. This might have an impact on future buying decisions.

According to research by Onbuy.com 60% of US and 44% of UK consumers believe there is a risk to personal safety in the sharing economy, while 58% of all the respondents believed the risks outweigh the benefits in the sharing economy. Such attitudes will force companies to consider their security credentials as there is now a direct link back to the bottom line.

What this means for VC funding and investments from around the ecosystem remains to be seen, though the tides are turning in favour of the security segment. As Strategic Cyber Ventures notes, the current levels of investment are unsustainable, but there certainly are rewards.

German regulator effectively confirms IBM/T-Systems talks

As it does from time-to-time, German regulator Bundeskartellamt has published a list of mergers and acquisitions which is evaluating. IBM and T-Systems are lucky enough to make the list.

Reports of the discussions emerged over the weekend, with IBM rumoured to be considering taking the mainframe service business unit off the hands of the struggling T-Systems. Although the specifics of the deal are not completely clear right now, it would hardly be a surprise to learn T-Systems is attempting to slim the business down.

On the Bundeskartellamt website, there is a page which lists some of the main transactions which the regulator is considering in its role as merger overseer. These are mainly deals which are in the ‘first phase’ and usually passed unless there are any competition concerns. Although the description is not detailed, it lists IBM will be acquiring certain assets from T-Systems.

The news was initially broken by German-language newspaper Handelsblatt, quoting an internal email which suggested 400 employees would be transferred to the IBM business in May. Subsequently IT-Zoom has suggested IBM will be paying €860 million for the business unit.

The origins of such a deal can only lead back to one place; the office of T-Systems CEO Adel Al-Saleh. Al-Saleh was initially brought to the firm, having previously worked at IBM for almost two decades, to trim costs and salvage a business unit which, recently, has been nothing but bad news for parent company Deutsche Telekom. Aside from this saga, job cuts of roughly 10,000 have been announced since Al-Saleh’s appointment.

Confirmed back in June, the 10,000 job cuts were a result of a long-time losing battle to the more agile and innovative players such as AWS and Microsoft. Al-Saleh’s objective was to trim the fat, focusing on the more lucrative contracts, as well as more profitable, emerging segments of the IT and telco world.

While T-Systems and IBM do already have an established relationship, it seems options are running thin to make this business work effectively. With headcount going down from 37,000 to 27,000, its footprint dropping from 100 cities to 10 and this deal working through the cogs as we speak, Deutsche Telekom employees will hope this is the last of the bad news. Whether Al-Saleh feels this is enough restructuring to make the business work remains to be seen.

Bharti Airtel exploring acquisition of Telkom Kenya – report

Indian telco Bharti Airtel is reportedly in discussions to expand its presence in the Kenyan market through the acquisition of Telkom Kenya.

According to Reuters, the under-pressure Indian telco is meeting with Telkom Kenya executives to acquire the business, merging the number two (its own brand Airtel) and three players in the country. This is not the first time such a transaction has been discussed, though it is claimed London-based Helios Investment, which owns 60% of the business, is attempting to cash-out of the market.

While agriculture still remains the leading sector across the country, Kenya’s growth has been steady and diversifying in recent years. The country is the economic, financial, and transport hub of East Africa, and real GDP growth has averaged over 5% for the last decade, according to statistics from the CIA World Factbook. Mobile growth in the country is growing quickly, while the economy is increasingly looking mobile-first. This could be a very useful acquisition for Bharti Airtel.

In terms of market share, this is a country which is heading the right direction for Bharti Airtel. Safaricom is the market leader with a 67% share but declining, according to Ovum’s WCIS, Airtel has 23% market share and increasing while Telkom Kenya currently has 9% but is also increasing, albeit at a slower rate than Airtel. Supplementing the gathering Airtel momentum in Kenya with the Telkom Kenya footprint would certainly be a sensible business strategy to tackle the dominant Safaricom.

Another interesting factor to this deal would be the fixed line business. As it stands, Airtel does not have a fixed line offering in Kenya while Telkom Kenya does, and this is a segment which has been targeted for growth by the government. The National Broadband Strategy intends to deliver reliable fixed line broadband to as many as 30% of the Kenyan population, though you should always remember this is a mobile-first country. Fixed line might be a useful addition, but with mobile money dominating the economy (48% of Kenya’s GDP was processed over M-PESA between July 2016 and July 2017), this is very much a mobile-first society.

For Bharti Airtel, the team needs a win to report back to investors before too long. The emergence, and continued success, of Reliance Jio has been a nightmare for the former market leader, while an end to the misery seems unforeseeable right now. Profits at the firm have been impacted, subscriptions are going south, and the newly-merged Vodafone Idea business might cause more upset as it readies its own attempt at market disruption. Bharti doesn’t seem to have done much to combat the threat at home, though it does have a successful African business to bolster the numbers.

Looking at the most recent financial results, revenues across the group grew by a miserly 0.5%, though the revenue decline in India (which accounts for roughly 66% of the group total) was 3.6%. Africa on the other hand contributed 10.8% revenue growth and almost three million net additions in subscribers. The consolidated East Africa region brought in an additional 1.2 million customers over the period, while revenues in both voice and data have been steadily increasing over the last year. This is a stark contrast to the failures at home.

Bharti Airtel has lost the number one spot in India thanks to the Vodafone Idea merger, and should trends continue, it won’t hold onto number two for very long either. Catalysing the promising African market is certainly a sensible way forward, but onlookers should not be distracted from the chaos in Bharti’s domestic market.

T-Mobile/Sprint merger heads towards final two hurdles

With the CFIUS giving a green light on the $26 billion merger of TMUS and Sprint, attention can now be turned to the final hurdles presented by the Department of Justice (JoJ) and FCC.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the CFIUS (Committee on Foreign Investment in the US), which has been assessing the security implications of the deal, has given the go ahead. There has been no official statement made just yet, the CFIUS has abruptly pointed out it has no legal requirement to do so, though attention has most likely be focused on the last two potential problem areas for some time.

What is worth noting is that while there are opportunities for failure at every turn in the road, the CFIUS was unlikely ever to be a massive problem for T-Mobile or Sprint.

As a bit of background, the CFIUS is a multi-agency committee which assesses the impact of foreign investment on a number of different factors, most notably national security. Although a relatively unknown council, the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act (passed in August) vastly expanded the powers and influence of CFIUS, meaning it could probe into a wider variety of acquisitions, allow it to take longer and finally, charge for the pleasure of doing so.

Thankfully for T-Mobile and Sprint, the national security threat was low risk here. Firstly, you have to consider there isn’t any Huawei or ZTE kit in the pair’s networks right now, secondly, the Defense Authorization Act prohibits the use of any of their equipment or software in the future, and finally, the pair’s parent companies have said they would back away from Huawei for future investments.

It seems the direct threat to US national security, if you are in the camp of believing there is a genuine one, was minimal. The confirmation from non-domestic private businesses that they would pander to political paranoia looks like it was enough to ensure the CFIUS have no objections. All ties to Huawei and ZTE have been severed so it seems its mission accomplished for Trump.

Now it’s onto the tough jobs; the Department of Justice and the FCC.

The FCC is digging its heels in for the moment, extending the 180-day shot clock for approval, as it searches for justification for the deal. This is where the issue may lie for T-Mobile and Sprint, as while the FCC is looking to determine whether a proposed transaction will serve the public interest, convenience and necessity, the evidence and support seems to be stacking up against the pair.

The Department of Justice on the other hand will be looking to assess whether the proposed merger would have a material impact on competition. Too much of a sway in the negative and this deal will head straight to the bin. The four to three operators shift could create monopolies in certain localities which will not be viewed favourably.

The finish line is now in sight, but it is still unclear which direction this will go. While the signs have been positive, the FCC has proven to be a surprise package while there are certainly warranted competition concerns for the DoJ to ponder.

T-Mobile/Sprint edge towards finish line following Huawei snub

T-Mobile US and Sprint are reportedly rubbing regulators the right way, in the continued effort to get the prolonged merger approved, by overtly shunning Chinese kit vendor Huawei.

The statement should be viewed as more symbolic than anything else, as considering the clauses which have been inserted into the Defense Authorization Act during August, it would have been highly unlikely the pair would have considered Huawei for any meaningful work in US networks. What this could be viewed as is a PR move from the pair, allowing the US to demonstrate to the world how serious it is about the espionage claims.

According to Reuters, Deutsche Telekom and Softbank, parent companies of T-Mobile US and Sprint respectively, have confirmed they will not be working with Huawei moving forward. Neither US telco currently has any Huawei kit in its network, though it is hoped this statement from the international telcos will have the bureaucrats hand edging closer to the green button for the $26 billion merger.

For the US government, this is somewhat of a PR win. The Trump administration has been incredibly aggressive in making moves against the Chinese, and this could be viewed as a medal credited to the crusade. Not only can the US government effect change in its own telcos and other governments around the world, it can also influence non-domestic private firms. The long arm of the Oval Office is tickling opinion in places it really shouldn’t be able to.

Unfortunately for the US, each incremental step taken in the trade war against China seems to question how dearly the White House holds principles and values. All of these individual circumstances are starting to look like pawns in President Trump’s game of chess against Beijing. Trump is living up to his reputation as a deal-maker, with the promise of aiding the battle against the Chinese enough for the President to make concessions elsewhere.

The evidence being stacked up against the T-Mobile/Sprint merger was starting to climb pretty high, though perhaps this might be enough of a ‘concession’ to twist the White House’s perspective on the transaction. Trump has already shown he is capable of looking at the big picture, with the recent arrest of Huawei’s CFO another excellent example.

Having been arrested in Canada while in transit back to China, Trump promised to intervene in the court case should it help his pursuit of a more favourable trade relationship with China. This statement from Trump makes somewhat of a mockery of the whole arrest and demonstrates how little he thinks of the Canadian judicial system. If there is a benefit to the US economy, Trump can talk to the right people and make the whole saga disappear. It questions the validity of the arrest in the first place, but also the credibility of the Canadian courts; why does Trump believe they can be convinced to drop the case so easily?

Trump is starting to show his heritage; anything for the deal. This is a businessman in control of the White House, and his ability to ignore small print give the impression of a wheeler-dealer.

T-Mobile’s Tele2 acquisition is not a sign of changing attitudes from Europe – Lawyer

While some might view European Commission’s decision for T-Mobile Netherlands acquisition of Tele2’s Dutch business as a softening approach to consolidation, White & Case, one of the law firms working on the deal, warned you shouldn’t get too excited.

With the European Commission historically taking an aggressive view against any acquisition which would take a market from four to three operators, T-Mobile Netherlands acquisition of Tele2 Netherlands looked doomed to failure. However, the European Commission has always stated there is no magic number, and each case would be considered on its own merit. Despite this stance, many believed the Commission secretly held the number four as sacred.

“Looking in the rear-view mirror, you could see that the tone seemed to have gotten harsher in terms of the Commission’s approach to four to three operators,” said Mark Powell, one of White & Case’s Partners who co-led the legal team on the deal.

Unfortunately for the European Commission’s claim of impartiality on market consolidation, the evidence has been stacked against it. In Austria, Ireland and Germany, consolidation was approved though there were increasingly stricter MVNO remedies placed on the deal. In Denmark, Telenor and TeliaSonera ditched their own deal just as the European Commission was set to block it. It did have to intervene in the UK with Three and O2, while in Italy consolidation was approved under the condition spectrum was released to create a fourth player, resulting in Iliad’s entry. As time progressed, the attitude towards consolidation seemed to become more vehemently opposed.

With this in mind, the approval of the deal in the Netherlands might have come as a surprise.

“Things are very different in this case,” said Powell. “If the Commission was prepared to look at the very specific conditions, we felt we would have a favourable decision.”

However, what telcos around Europe should bear in mind is the Netherlands is a unique market. This should not be taken as changing attitudes of the European Commission, or a new era where a free-for-all consolidation battle begins. So what were the favourable conditions in the Netherlands?

Firstly, the combined market share of the newly merged business would only be 25%, keeping it in third place. Tele2’s Dutch business was a relatively minor player, only controlling around 5% market share, but is also a pureplay 4G telco. The Commission did not have to worry about 2G or 3G. Another consideration is the aggressive MVNO segment in the country, perhaps compensating for any reduction in competition.

“You could say common sense prevailed, but the fact pattern was recognised by the Commission, so they should be credited for standing by what they say when they said they would look at specific cases and make a decision accordingly,” said Powell.

Another underlying point for the successful merger was the attitude of the regulator. The Dutch regulator was generally receptive to the idea of consolidation, which was perhaps taken into consideration by the Commission. In many of the cases which have gone against consolidation, the regulator has been against the deal. This was certainly the case in the UK Three/O2 merger, where the UK watchdog was publicly hostile to consolidation, as Powell put it.

The final point which Powell believes contributed to the success was the fact the case was heard verbally in court over the course of a single day. These are scenarios which are very fact intensive, resulting in a lot of paper. Simple sending opinions and evidence back and forth creates a mountain of information, perhaps confusing and convoluting opinions. By hearing the case verbally, the court was able to consider and crystallise a decision more effectively.

“At the end of the day, this confirms that if you think you have a strong case, then there is,” said Powell.

This is what should be taken away from this deal. This is not a changing of policy from the European Commission, but conveniently proving it will consider market consolidation in the right circumstances. There isn’t another market in Europe which mirrors the conditions here, but there are markets which could be successful in the same way T-Mobile Netherlands has been here in acquiring Tele2 Netherlands.

Interestingly enough, 5G did not factor into the equation much here. The Dutch 5G auction has not taken place yet, therefore the European Commission was taking into consideration the evidence which was put in front of it. Whether market consolidation is necessary in the 5G world still remains a valid question, and this decision should not be viewed as evidence for either side.

5G will require huge investment by the telcos, significantly more than previous generations, though how to ensure these investments are made in a timely fashion is an interesting question. Should consolidation be preventing to encourage competition and the fear of another eating a telcos lunch, or should it be allowed to ensure scale of customers and confidence in ROI? The debate rages on with pros and cons on either side.

While Powell warned against believing this is a sign the European Commission is softening its approach to market consolidation, it is evidence it can stick to its word that there is no magic number to make competition work.

DT/Tele2 tie up could smooth path to industry consolidation

For years the telco industry has condemned the EU’s approach to competition, though green-lighting DT’s acquisition of Tele2’s Dutch business could indicate a loosening grip on the idea of four operators.

According to the European Commission, each market should ideally have four operators to ensure the consumer has choice, though this has been challenged in recent years due to market economics. In short, the telcos do not feel they are making enough money to continue network investments and challenge the OTTs in capturing the digital economy fortunes. One way to balance the equation is consolidation, but regulators have consistently resisted. This might be changed according to reports in Reuters.

DT has been attempting to swallow up Tele2’s Dutch business to create a more competitive threat to the number one and two in the market, KPN and VodafoneZiggo. However, such an acquisition would decrease the number of national telcos from four to three, sacrilege in the eyes of the Brussels bureaucrats, though this vice-like persistence with four telcos might be loosening.

The decision is due on November 30, though rumours are circulating that a decision has been made and it will be in favour of the Germans. DT’s argument has been combined company would only have a 25% market share, still a way off KPN and VodafoneZiggo, therefore it would still have to challenge on price, and it seems the European Commission is buying the stance.

For rest of the telcos around Europe, executives are bound to be eagerly awaiting the official decision. Precedent is everything when it comes to regulations, competition and acquisitions. Merging these two players will give lawyers something to point to and ammunition to fight for market consolidation.

This has been a bugbear of the European telcos for some time; scale means investment. The larger the subscription bases of the telcos, the safer they will feel in terms of splashing the cash and upgrading networks. It might of course be nothing but a rouse to make more money and realise operational efficiencies, but when you look at the size of telcos on other continents you can see the argument; European telcos simply cannot compete with those in North America or Asia.

Of course what is worth noting is this is nothing more than a report for the moment. The official decision will emerge over the next few days, though the telco industry might finally be getting some ammunition to fight back against the OTTs.

Time Warner acquisition resistance could turn ugly for Trump

President Donald Trump’s administration certainly has been a different shade of politics for the Oval Office, though actions and alleged prejudice could come back to haunt the Commander in Chief.

Despite being proclaimed a resounding victory for the Republicans, the mid-term elections could have gone a hell of a lot better. With the House of Representatives swinging back into the hands of the Democrats, not only will Trump find passing his questionable legislation more difficult, but his actions over the first two years of the Presidency could be called into question.

In an interview with Axios, California Congressman Adam Schiff, who is also the Ranking Member of the House Intelligence Committee, suggested an investigation into the President would now be able to make a material impact because of the swing of power across the aisle. The President’s tax records will once again become a topic of conversation, though the appropriateness of his objections to AT&T’s acquisition of Time Warner will also come under scrutiny, as will his seemingly personal vendetta against Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos.

While the President’s actions have constantly been condemned by critics and political opponents, there has been little opportunity to do anything considering Trump’s political foundations. With majorities in both Houses of Congress, the Republican party have been able to block, or at least stifle, any investigations. However, with last week’s mid-term elections swinging the House of Representatives into a Democrat majority things might be about to change.

Trump’s opposition to the AT&T and Time Warner deal has been widely publicised, dating back to the Presidential campaign trail. Some have suggested his hatred for Time Warner owned CNN is the reasoning behind the probes and appeals against the acquisition, though this will come under question through the investigations.

“We don’t know, for example, whether the effort to hold up the merger of the parent of CNN was a concern over antitrust or whether this was an effort merely to punish CNN,” said Schiff.

While the deal has been greenlight by District Court for the District of Columbia Judge Richard Leon, the Department of Justice is appealing the decision, suggesting Judge Leon is ignorant to the facts and the economic implications of the deal. It has been reported the Trump administration has been pressuring the DoJ to pursue the appeal and attempt to derail the acquisition.

Looking at the spat with Jeff Bezos, this has been tackled on several fronts. Not only has President Trump constantly berated the excellent reporting by the Washington Post, privately owned by Bezos, Trump has been targeting the tax activities of Amazon. Back in March, Trump tweeted he would be tackling the tax set-up at Amazon, sending share price down 2%, while he has also been reportedly pressuring the Post Office to charge Amazon more, despite the eCommerce revolution seemingly saving the service with the vast increases in package delivery.

These are just two examples relevant to the telecoms and technology industry, but the Democrats are seemingly going for the throat. Tax records will be called into question, as well as reports the President blocked the FBI from moving its headquarters because it would negatively impact business as one of his hotels, located opposite the bureau’s offices.

For the moment, this seems to be nothing more than political posturing, as while the statements might appease those in opposition to Trump, they are nothing more than statements. The Democrats will not assume their majority in the House of Representatives for two months, a long-time in the lightly-principled world of politics. Much could change during this period.

What the change in political landscape could mean more than anything else is a bit more stability. President Trump has been praised by his supporters as a man of action, though actions are of questionable benefit to business executives who crave legislative, regulatory and policy consistency. Only with the promise of consistency can businesses made long-term strategies to conquer the world, but with Twitter a constant threat of change it is understandable some are nervous.

With the Democrats in control of the House of Representatives, Trump will find it much more difficult to force through any controversial or overly aggressive policies, though there is also the threat of legislative standstill. The US political landscape has certainly been an interesting one over the last two years, though it could become even more interesting over the next two for completely different reasons.