For a country our size it makes a whole lot of sense 

From a VF and Spark's point of view it allows them to focus on the Services side of the business exclusively, rather than being an infrastructure business,    - with the intention that there are better margins in service provision....

Such a split exists in the Fibre space with neither Spark of VF being LFCs, but simply selling services so it can work, 

BUT I'm not sure the ComCom would entertain a single owner for both sets of towers without monopoly regulation akin to Fibre pricing...

Asset infrastructure is also attractive to long term investors like pension plans, but you probably need both to make it worth while...

Also VFs big shareholder is Infratil, who are always looking for ways to "unlock shareholder value"-  although such actions are also often described as "Asset stripping" :)

This is the release. I was going to post it later:

 

As signalled at a recent Infratil investor update, Vodafone NZ has been actively exploring the possibility of network capital release options as part of its ongoing transformation and growth strategy for some time, and has been preparing for potential separation and capital release of its passive mobile infrastructure tower assets.

 

A market engagement process has now commenced, with Barrenjoey and UBS engaged to advise Vodafone NZ.

 

The mobile network experience for Vodafone customers will benefit from a more focused investment on the active mobile network assets. Other benefits include more specialised passive infrastructure ownership and stronger incentives to co-locate on common tower assets, in turn driving better capital efficiency and reduced environmental impacts.

 

As the necessary infrastructure to support digital economies grows in importance, and as telecommunications companies look to unlock value that can be reinvested, separate ownership of passive mobile tower assets has become increasingly common.

 

Vodafone NZ has the largest tower portfolio in New Zealand, covering 98% of NZ’s population, with strong co-tenancy potential, currently comprising ~1487 wholly owned mobile towers spread across New Zealand. Vodafone is committed to building additional sites to maintain its relative coverage and capacity position in the future. The FY23 forecast EBITDA is $51m. EBITDA is shown on a cash basis and not adjusted for IFRS 16.

 

NB: Passive mobile infrastructure tower assets typically include; physical tower, masts and poles, foundations, fencing and access facilities, and any associated contractual rights to occupy the site area. They do not include; spectrum, core mobile network, radio network or back-haul.

 

Would have made a lot of sense 5-15 years ago if this was done before all those micro cell towers were built for the 3G rollout. But I guess at that point it was advantageous for Voda/Spark to block or at least stymie a third mobile market entrant. 

Seems like it's just financial reasons - it's a low return low risk part of the business that could more highly leveraged? From a practical point of view, I can't see this move by Voda/Spark making a big difference - they have a broadly similar footprint, in many cases with independent towers located within spitting distance of each other. Perhaps they will co-locate with each other in a limited number of cases when one of their towers comes up for significant renewal? It seems that RCG is being used as an avenue for sharing infrastructure to extend coverage, beyond just rural areas e.g. Transmission Gully.

Moving to a 5G world, we may need more infill sites, but as these get smaller and are literally just strapped to the side of an existing lamp post (rather than a dedicated tower replacing a lamp post), there may not be anything to share between providers (you might strap 3x antenna to one lamp post, but not 3 networks x 3 antenna to one lamp post)

Does this mean that all VF poles are a free for all for other operators? Or does VF still get priority? 

langi27:

 

Does this mean that all VF poles are a free for all for other operators? Or does VF still get priority? 

 

...Depends..... VF will structure the deal to its advantage,.... and will include some form of master service agreement for its continued use...

Whether this included an exclusivity clause, would be up to VF... but I'm guessing they would consider an open network operator at the right price..

I'm guessing MoRAN used by RCG and 2degrees to fill in all their coverage holes got Vodafone thinking

Good enough in Australia.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/telstra-and-tpg-team-up-to-share-spectrum-and-regional-network-access-for-a-decade/

RBI is technically 3 providers sharing towers

I think the big 3 should actually be forced to sell their towers and have a chorus type arrangement where the towers are owned by a mobile network operator and every retailer is a MVNO

nztim:

 

RBI is technically 3 providers sharing towers

 

 

 

I think the big 3 should actually be forced to sell their towers and have a chorus type arrangement where the towers are owned by a mobile network operator and every retailer is a MVNO

 

I'm guessing having RCG own every site/tower wouldn't sit well in the eyes on the Comcom?

DjShadow:

 

nztim:

 

RBI is technically 3 providers sharing towers

 

 

 

I think the big 3 should actually be forced to sell their towers and have a chorus type arrangement where the towers are owned by a mobile network operator and every retailer is a MVNO

 

 

I'm guessing having RCG own every site/tower wouldn't sit well in the eyes on the Comcom?

 

They don't seem to complain about the LFCs having exactly that arrangement. Would be interesting to see if Chorus et al end up to be some of the bidders for the towerco assets. Now that would raise some eyebrows.

nickb800:

 

Would have made a lot of sense 5-15 years ago if this was done before all those micro cell towers were built for the 3G rollout. But I guess at that point it was advantageous for Voda/Spark to block or at least stymie a third mobile market entrant. 

 

3G actually saw a reduction in microcells. Telecom/Vodafone back in the day had heaps of 2G mirocells dotted in and around Auckland/Wellington CBDs as well as in various high traffic spots. These days the vast majority of them have since been abandoned or upgraded to macro sites. Only a very small handful have survived. However 5G may well see the revival of microcells. Interesting times ahead.