MTN R8.1 billion BEE transaction

will somebody please clarify what 'bottom-up allocation process' is supposed to mean?
 
phenom said:
will somebody please clarify what 'bottom-up allocation process' is supposed to mean?
Click to expand...

Bottom-up probably means they will allocate shares to people with the lowest investments first (I'm guessing to benefit the less well-off individuals).

If you read the comments on this article, the deal doesn't sound as good as the article makes it out to be if what "whips excite me" said is correct. But then he does say it could be after 6 years. *is confused*
 
Last edited:
FaTaL said:
Bottom-up probably means they will allocate shares to people with the lowest investments first (I'm guessing to benefit the less well-off individuals).

If you read the comments on this article, the deal doesn't sound as good as the article makes it out to be if what "whips excite me" said is correct. But then he does say it could be after 6 years. *is confused*
Click to expand...

So if i buy 100k, will only those who bought under 91k get their shares, and i won't? MTN deals roulette too? Or is it that If I have bought 100k, i will only get 91k?

Why not make it that i will also only get 91 k, just as the guy who invested 500k will only get 91k. this seems far more appropriate than to let the 'big ones' walk the plank and jump off.



he did add the word 'process', so what does this mean?
 
Last edited:
racer said:
aah yes, trying to uplift a section of our population who mostly live in shacks is racist.. nice.
Click to expand...

And how many of those people living in shacks do you think will actually get the shares? Its more for the fat cats that are already rich.
 
Is this a game of roulette? will some people be 'kicked', or will it be more of a 'cap' system?
 
racer said:
aah yes, trying to uplift a section of our population who mostly live in shacks is racist.. nice.
Click to expand...
.. communism. but no, not in most cases, although it is essential that we get as meny right as we can.

BBEEE has no right to be a economics/racist communist act, rather only an accurate 'corrective' one.

Other solutions exist to curb/and in most cases prevent poverty. racist communism is not one of them.
 
Last edited:
phenom said:
So if i buy 100k, will only those who bought under 91k get their shares, and i won't? MTN deals roulette too? Or is it that If I have bought 100k, i will only get 91k?

Why not make it that i will also only get 91 k, just as the guy who invested 500k will only get 91k. this seems far more appropriate than to let the 'big ones' walk the plank and jump off.



he did add the word 'process', so what does this mean?
Click to expand...

Let me rephrase what I initially meant. My interpretation of bottom-up means is this:

If they get more applications for shares than they are selling, then they will order the shares from lowest investment to highest investment and grant them in that order. IE all the R2000 investments first (because thats the lowest allowable), all the way up until there are no more shares left.
 
FaTaL said:
Let me rephrase what I initially meant. My interpretation of bottom-up means is this:

If they get more applications for shares than they are selling, then they will order the shares from lowest investment to highest investment and grant them in that order. IE all the R2000 investments first (because thats the lowest allowable), all the way up until there are no more shares left.
Click to expand...
So if i buy R100k worth of shares, and there are 'no more' when they came to he 82561h share holder they could fit in who bought R91k, the guy who waned R91k will get his shares and i won't, my time wasted as i was too 'greedy'? Is this how it works???

Is it like a 'the rejected my purchase altogether as i "wanted too many"? Just seems a bit funny if it was this way from granny MTN.

Or is it that they will simply give the rest of the people the last amount they could fit, say 65k, to all of those, whether you wanted 600k or weather you wanted 100k?
 
Last edited:
gregmcc said:
And how many of those people living in shacks do you think will actually get the shares?
Click to expand...

you'd be surprised. not many can afford to buy 100 shares, but get together with family and put in R100 each, and there you go...
 
I reckon we need a new law that says "Nobody earning >250k gets BEE shares". Tada. Broad based empowerment achieved with 1 simple change & the whole BEE fatcat culture is dead in the water & a lot of white people would be more chill about it. But that won't happen of course since the people making the laws are the BEE fatcats/BEE fatcat hopefuls. Fck that.

racer said:
you'd be surprised. not many can afford to buy 100 shares, but get together with family and put in R100 each, and there you go...
Click to expand...
Your missing his point entirely. He was not suggesting that it is impossible for shack dwellers to buy these share but rather that the majority of the benefit in these deals tends to go to BEE fatcats that neither require nor deserve the benefit.
 
Is BEE some kind of socialist act or is it an act to correct previous wrongs?

Who says who is and who isn't a 'fat' cat? Karl Marx?
 
phenom said:
Is BEE some kind of socialist act or is it an act to correct previous wrongs?
Click to expand...
You tell me.

phenom said:
Who says who is and who isn't a 'fat' cat? Karl Marx?
Click to expand...
Ag bull man. You know exactly what I'm talking about. Patrice Motsepe, Tokyo Sexwale and Cyril Ramaphosa etc. Call them BEE heavyweights if you don't like fatcats. The effect & meaning is the same. Nothing against those people...they saw an opportunity & took it. Good for them, but we don't need to continue supporting it.

Only fools think that we are somehow fixing past wrongs by throwing more cash at the same group of ~50 people over & over. I'm pleased to see though that this particular move is fairly open, unlike the usual consortium BS.
 
HavocXphere said:
You tell me.


Ag bull man. You know exactly what I'm talking about. Patrice Motsepe, Tokyo Sexwale and Cyril Ramaphosa etc. Call them BEE heavyweights if you don't like fatcats. The effect & meaning is the same. Nothing against those people...they saw an opportunity & took it. Good for them, but we don't need to continue supporting it.

Only fools think that we are somehow fixing past wrongs by throwing more cash at the same group of ~50 people over & over. I'm pleased to see though that this particular move is fairly open, unlike the usual consortium BS.
Click to expand...
It is somehow a 'crime', to be wealthy, hardworking and successful? Should we refer back to Russia or Cuba?

No, what is happening here is that BEE should restore the nation to where it would have been had there be no apartheid. Meaning that it is the environment that needs to be restored and people restored to the environment had there been no apartheid. So yes, if Tokyo would have been a successful business man in during the apartheid time had there been no apartheid, then what he could have done should be restored back to him in this time. Consider the contray, it's many millions being STOLEN from you, as if there was no such system you could do, achieve and contribute what you could.
 
It's interesting to see that white people are suddenly concerned about a section of the population (poor black people or shack dwellers) now that they are not benefiting from certain activities such as this MTN share scheme, but where not at all concerned about a large majority of South Africans during the oppressive years of Apartheid. I think you guys should just get over yourselves, these ANC fat cats will benefit while the people who are supposed to benefit will not, i.e poor black people, so you shouldn't worry, poor black people were never your concern then and shouldn't be your concern now. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer, the same concept applies to BEE fat cats versus shack dwellers. I think we all know how the world works, the powerful always want more power and money and they get it while the poor continue to suffer. So it also applies to already rich black people who will use the BBBEE mambo jambo to get what they want. I think we all know that this BEE and BBBEE are BS and only benefit a few, but don't come here with your "concerns" about the disadvantaged black population just because you feel victimised by this MTN share scheme, would you even be moaning and complaining if it benefited only you? I don't think so, you wouldn't care so don't pretend to care now.
 
this is nothing but reverse Apartheid, bye, bye MTN I don't need your cell phone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X