Massive cash injection for Cell C

I don't think its employees who present the FUD - they have no interest in the share price, and could get into hot water if caught ragging on the competition, also if you work in cellular you are always looking at the competition as a possible employee. I think we are seeing fanboys and people with an investment interest being stupid.

It is pretty clear that this is not a "bail out" - CellC is not in need of a business rescue nor does it have creditors knocking at its door. This is however much needed CAPEX money and says quite a lot about the predicament CellC is in which is a need to go big or go home - something their remarks about there only being space for 3 operators plays to. The fact that investment was secured means that CellC has managed to give confidence to investors and the banks but it doesn't mean that the overall proposition of CellC is any less risky.
 
Paul Hjul said:
I don't think its employees who present the FUD - they have no interest in the share price, and could get into hot water if caught ragging on the competition, also if you work in cellular you are always looking at the competition as a possible employee. I think we are seeing fanboys and people with an investment interest being stupid.
Click to expand...

Good point.Most likely the latter,and yes mybb has its fair share of fan boys if you look at the apple vs android threads as signs of the way things go.
 
Bern said:
Haldex - the point you are getting confused is what a bailout is. Look at SAA for a great example.

Cell C are not in a situation where they can't continue, rather they are getting funds to upgrade and expand, this is known as investment. Investment normally means you expect a future return, not an immediate return.
Click to expand...

Asked whether the cash injection would help Cell C fix the network problems users have been reporting,
Knott-Craig said, “Yes. Without investment we can’t address them.”
Click to expand...

Sure they can continue with no throughput and frustrated customers. But that would add pressure to their customer service, with no customer service and no network connections, time bomb waiting to explode, possible fines from ICASA etc etc etc
 
No they can continue by reducing their customer base or by selling off assets and moving entirely into the service rather than network business. There is not a shred of evidence that CellC is in financial straits hence no bailout. Vodacom will run out of capacity without further investment at point X, Telkom has said they don't need additional submarine capacity until Y, MTN can't support an extra T thousand subscribers in Gauteng. This is part and parcel of the businesses CellCs time frame for network capacity is just a lot shorter.
 
Paul Hjul said:
No they can continue by reducing their customer base or by selling off assets and moving entirely into the service rather than network business. There is not a shred of evidence that CellC is in financial straits hence no bailout. Vodacom will run out of capacity without further investment at point X, Telkom has said they don't need additional submarine capacity until Y, MTN can't support an extra T thousand subscribers in Gauteng. This is part and parcel of the businesses CellCs time frame for network capacity is just a lot shorter.
Click to expand...

Very good point this applies to Cell C also the only difference is they havent achieved critical mass to do this because they are a relatively new player.The years of sitting without 3g really hurt them back then and they only became a real competitor when lars went on that data rampage again so they are relatively new compared to Vodacom and MTN.

8ta will need tons of investment still, HALDEX will you call that a bailout also?:wtf:
 
well I think the big advantage VC and MTN have is that they can grow their capacity without needing to source investors or funding on current projects but didn't VC get a lot of cash in before doing the mass 3G rollout. TM needs to rely on the pockets of the whole group.
 
falcon786 said:
Are you going around spamming every cell c thread,geez how many vodacom employees visit mybb...there should be a poll out for this(Do you work for vodacom or something along those lines)!:D

At least Jannie is the only one honest about it,and I can respect a person like that, the rest of you are....:erm:
Click to expand...

As I always argue; base statements on facts and if you (not you specifically falcon - anyone) do not know, don't make factual statements. Guess, by all means, but make sure you highlight it as such.

Reality is only Cell C knows their financial state and if this is an investment or a "bailout" - whatever that means.

But whatwhat is also right, they do not publish financials. Last document I recall was a submission to ICASA on license fees, payable on profitability. Think it was published on myBB at some point.
 
Last edited:
JvC while we have you in the room:
is my guess that VC is able to fund their own expansions without needing to secure additional financing correct?
is my recollection of VC getting\looking for financing before mass rolling out 3G correct (really don't feel like googling it)?
 
I constantly type JvC and correct myself this time it slipped by. I hope its not Freudian though :D

Ag my general take is the CellC is in a generally precarious position (I've described it as much before) and need to be scrappy to survive in the market and this involves going big or going home. VC's dividends alone allows for network expansion but its a continuous balancing act. In the ICT sector 18 months is a long time.
 
falcon786 said:
Very good point this applies to Cell C also the only difference is they havent achieved critical mass to do this because they are a relatively new player.The years of sitting without 3g really hurt them back then and they only became a real competitor when lars went on that data rampage again so they are relatively new compared to Vodacom and MTN.

8ta will need tons of investment still, HALDEX will you call that a bailout also?:wtf:
Click to expand...

8ta is wholely owned by Telkom, hardly outside investment, more like a budget distribution.
8ta started with the sale of VC to Vodafone, they should have enough from the sale to advance their network.

The thing with cell c is that they built their new advanced 900mhz network which is newer tech to VC and MTN and can or supposedly able to handle more traffic on a lower frequency network. Akc only increased the base by 2 million subscribers and the network is dilapidating. It wasn't provisioned to handle 2 million extra subscribers? Very poor.
 
Last edited:
then your entire post is incoherent and blatantly idiotic. MickeyD's signature applies so strongly to you that it is becoming frustrating as all hell.
 
Haldex said:
The thing with cell c is that they built their new advanced 900mhz network which is newer tech to VC and MTN and can or supposedly able to handle more traffic on a lower frequency network.
Click to expand...
Really? Never knew this. :confused:

Can you please give details of how their network is better? What version of software are they running (vs. MTN and VC) and what % of their towers are on what spec? 21.1 / 42.2 / etc. How much fibre vs. the competition, etc?

Thanks!
 
jannievanzyl said:
Really? Never knew this. :confused:

Can you please give details of how their network is better? What version of software are they running (vs. MTN and VC) and what % of their towers are on what spec? 21.1 / 42.2 / etc. How much fibre vs. the competition, etc?

Thanks!
Click to expand...

I doubt that info gets published.
You would probably know more.

But im sure the 900mhz network using 2G and 3G is newer tech than the other networks only using 850-900 for 2G then re farming for LTE?
 
whatwhat said:
Suggest you look at their financials, which were public up until 2-3 years ago when they stopped showing them. They are a sinking ship.
Click to expand...
So you think they would get Billions of Rands worth of loan finance if they were imminently going under??? Really?


Haldex said:
Sure they can continue with no throughput and frustrated customers. But that would add pressure to their customer service, with no customer service and no network connections, time bomb waiting to explode, possible fines from ICASA etc etc etc
Click to expand...
Please take note of all Paul-Hjul's comments and rather just apologise for making so many silly comments and be done.
 
Haldex said:
8ta is wholely owned by Telkom, hardly outside investment, more like a budget distribution.
8ta started with the sale of VC to Vodafone, they should have enough from the sale to advance their network.
Click to expand...

Oger telecoms owns 75% of Cell C so whats your point exactly?If you don't own a small percentage of a company and you pump money into it then it becomes a bailout?

The thing with cell c is that they built their new advanced 900mhz network which is newer tech to VC and MTN and can or supposedly able to handle more traffic on a lower frequency network. Akc only increased the base by 2 million subscribers and the network is dilapidating. It wasn't provisioned to handle 2 million extra subscribers? Very poor.
Click to expand...

Are you taking into account that before LARS the Cell C network was edge only so its more like they built their 3G/HSDPA network to run an extra 11 million subscribers not 2 million.
 
Haldex said:
I doubt that info gets published.
You would probably know more.

But im sure the 900mhz network using 2G and 3G is newer tech than the other networks only using 850-900 for 2G then re farming for LTE?
Click to expand...


Your assumption is a good indicator how successful mrketing can be. Just because someone tells you their network is 'newer' does not make it so. (Remember the blue and black cars ad? And the ASA ruling that it was false?)

For example, we could do a software upgrade to LTE, allowig us to deploy LTE in weeks. Not seeing this on the other network, right?

On spectrum: the frequency on which a network works is completely independant of the technology used. You could deploy 2G, 3G or LTE on 900MHz. We do both 2G and 3G on 900 at the moment, 2G andd LTE on 1800 and 3G on 2100.

Think of the spectrum as the road - the lower the frequency, the deeper the road goes into the suburbs and the mount of spectrum you get as the lanes - and then of the technology as the car. You could drive both a Porsche or a Beetle on a one lane or a freeway. A beetle on the N1 is still going to be slower than a Porsche on a backroad.

(And yes, I intentionally used a car analogy! :))
 
Last edited:
^ isn't there also a case of continuous network revision at play. VC is surely replacing and upgrading equipment on a fairly continuous basis but I am sure you guys have some equipment that is older than when CellC came to the 43G party?

So if ICASA were to give BobMugabeTelecoms the relevant licences and they looted the relevant financing and installed a brand spanking new HSDPA+ network tomorrow, their network would be "newer" than VCs network but is based on older technologies (which could be marketed as "matured") but within a couple of years 60% of their network would be older.

Of greater interest to me is the benefits to the operator of newer installations and how effectively LTE (with ample spectrum etc ...) reduces the costs for the network to provide an equivalent amount/capacity of data. My guess on the subject is that CellC may be a more cost efficient operator because they entered the field once the gamble on HSDPA+ was over and equipment was cheaper (more manufacturers etc ..) etc ... but that they simply do not have enough traction - in part because they entered late. Whether having a marginal advantage is costs makes it a good idea to embark on a price war is a lot more complicated.


A newer unmaintained road still has more potholes than an old but maintained road.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X