[TelstraClear] Singtel to takeover TelstraClear?

Forums › One New Zealand (including Vodafone, WxC, Farmside) › [TelstraClear] Singtel to takeover TelstraClear?

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79253 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#16863 31-Oct-2007 23:11

Crazy rumour I heard today (not the first time): until about March (or May?) TelstraClear was working on rebranding itself into Telstra and change its ISP operations (Paradise and Clear) into its Australian brand, Bigpond.

But then things changed, and the rumour goes on to say that Singtel (Singapore Telecom, Optus) showed interest in taking over the TelstraClear operation, which halted the rebranding efforts.

The logic of the person relaying this was "why rebrand into Telstra and Bigpond if the company could be sold at any moment?"

Did anyone else hear this?

1 | 2

173 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

#93249 1-Nov-2007 01:28

oooooo! That would be interesting. Could be a good move for Singtel given they own Optus in Australia, and buying Telstra Clear would give them a presence on both sides of the Tasman (and by selling it - Telstra would have no NZ operation). That would give Optus the chance to go after the big transtasman corporates - which are all the banks (ANZ, Westpac, CBA, etc). Would make it kind of interesting on the board of Southern Cross given that Telecom and Singtel (via Optus) are part owners. Singtel is huge - employ about 18-19,000 people worldwide and made 3 billion plus profit after tax last year.

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#93256 1-Nov-2007 07:54

That rumor has been around for years.

The question it poses however is what gains Telstra would get from selling out? Sure they wouldn't have the burden of a loss making subsidary but the reasons for Telstra wanting to stay in NZ are also compelling and exactly the same reason Singtel could be interested - joint Trans Tasman contracts.

TinyTim

1042 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#93267 1-Nov-2007 09:15

We do know that Telstra isn't very interested in its overseas investments at the moment. If they sold TCL they could open a branch office to deal with their trans Tasman customers. Perhaps a deal with Telecom, who could then ditch AAPT?

chiefie

I iz your trusted friend
5877 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#93268 1-Nov-2007 09:20

If SingTel do actually bought TCL in NZ, then we all can hope for better cable services, and perhaps a detachment/reliance on Sky for digital tv feeds?

Internet is my backyard...

«Geekzone blog: Tech 'n Chips Takeaway» «Personal blog: And then...»

Please read the Geekzone's FUG

stu28

273 posts

Ultimate Geek

#93562 3-Nov-2007 00:22

If SingTel do actually bought TCL in NZ, would they take another look at laying cable in Auckland?

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#93575 3-Nov-2007 09:03

stu28: If SingTel do actually bought TCL in NZ, would they take another look at laying cable in Auckland?

Would the councils let them? One of the main reasons TCL cable isn't in Auckland was because of a concerted campaign against TCL by various organisations and councils to stop TCL running any overhead cables due to the visual pollution they believed it caused. Had they not introduced laws to stop TCL easily deploying a network I'm sure Aucklanders would have currently been enjoying a fantastic HFC network like those of us in Wellington and Christchurch.

old3eyes

9119 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#93756 5-Nov-2007 08:41

sbiddle:
stu28: If SingTel do actually bought TCL in NZ, would they take another look at laying cable in Auckland?

Would the councils let them? One of the main reasons TCL cable isn't in Auckland was because of a concerted campaign against TCL by various organisations and councils to stop TCL running any overhead cables due to the visual pollution they believed it caused. Had they not introduced laws to stop TCL easily deploying a network I'm sure Aucklanders would have currently been enjoying a fantastic HFC network like those of us in Wellington and Christchurch.

I somehow doubt it. TCL would have only run this cable in the "affluent" areas of Auckland not the greater Auckland. There was nothing to stop TCL from putting down cable but they wouldn't

Regards,

Old3eyes

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79253 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#93757 5-Nov-2007 08:46

TCL did not deploy in Auckland because they were not allowed.

As for "where", just look at Wellington's deployment and you will see they are present in a big part of the city, and in many suburbs - including some you probably would not classify as "affluent".

allstarnz

1719 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#93760 5-Nov-2007 09:02

freitasm:
Crazy rumour I heard today (not the first time): until about March (or May?) TelstraClear was working on rebranding itself into Telstra and change its ISP operations (Paradise and Clear) into its Australian brand, Bigpond.
...

Please no. Despite it now being owned by TCL, Paradise still has a good reputation. For some strange reason, I imagine that Telstra's ISP didn't earn the nickname BigTurd for no reason

TinyTim

1042 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#93770 5-Nov-2007 10:51

freitasm:
As for "where", just look at Wellington's deployment and you will see they are present in a big part of the city, and in many suburbs - including some you probably would not classify as "affluent".

In fact, the "non-affluent" areas are very important to a pay TV operator because those areas spend a lot on pay TV.

old3eyes

9119 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#93785 5-Nov-2007 12:45

freitasm: TCL did not deploy in Auckland because they were not allowed.

As for "where", just look at Wellington's deployment and you will see they are present in a big part of the city, and in many suburbs - including some you probably would not classify as "affluent".

No. They were not allowed to deploy overhead cable. There was nothing to stop them deploying underground cable.

Regards,

Old3eyes

antoniosk

2358 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#93792 5-Nov-2007 14:20

old3eyes:
freitasm: TCL did not deploy in Auckland because they were not allowed.

As for "where", just look at Wellington's deployment and you will see they are present in a big part of the city, and in many suburbs - including some you probably would not classify as "affluent".
No. They were not allowed to deploy overhead cable. There was nothing to stop them deploying underground cable.

The volcanic rock that is under most of auckland might have a hand in the economics of digging up street - ie it's not economic! Overhead is cheaper in this respect.

________

Antoniosk

destined

45 posts

Geek

#93793 5-Nov-2007 14:43

TinyTim:
freitasm:
As for "where", just look at Wellington's deployment and you will see they are present in a big part of the city, and in many suburbs - including some you probably would not classify as "affluent".

In fact, the "non-affluent" areas are very important to a pay TV operator because those areas spend a lot on pay TV.

And if you look at the TCL Cable roll out in Christchurch, you will see that it is in most of the non-affluent suburbs, and not in the affluent ones (Merivale, Fendalton etc)!

old3eyes

9119 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#93892 6-Nov-2007 08:56

antoniosk:
old3eyes:
freitasm: TCL did not deploy in Auckland because they were not allowed.

As for "where", just look at Wellington's deployment and you will see they are present in a big part of the city, and in many suburbs - including some you probably would not classify as "affluent".
No. They were not allowed to deploy overhead cable. There was nothing to stop them deploying underground cable.

The volcanic rock that is under most of auckland might have a hand in the economics of digging up street - ie it's not economic! Overhead is cheaper in this respect.

Then pray tell me why then do Telecom, Clear, Power companies, Gas companies put their services under ground idf it's not economic. Sure there's lots of power and fone stuff still on polls here in Auckland usually in areas that the councils don't require to be put under ground. My powerr and fone are still fed from polls..

Regards,

Old3eyes

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#93895 6-Nov-2007 09:17

old3eyes:
Then pray tell me why then do Telecom, Clear, Power companies, Gas companies put their services under ground idf it's not economic. Sure there's lots of power and fone stuff still on polls here in Auckland usually in areas that the councils don't require to be put under ground. My powerr and fone are still fed from polls..

And that's the arguement. There is existing legacy infrastructure in place that TCL weren't allowed to use due to the due to the council effectively stopping TCL from doing so. There only option was to run cable underground everywhere which would have cost far more.

1 | 2