|
|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
ShinCorp/ShinSat
Shinee, Dtac and iTV join hands for I-News service
SIRIPHAN PONGTHANEE staff writer Shinee, a website owned by Shin, Total Access Communication Plc (Dtac), and iTV, a subsidiary of Shin and Siam Commercial Bank Plc, join hands in launching the ‘I-News’ service which offers Dtac’s customers more media access choices, with the expectation of a 50 percent increase in existing customers’ subscriptions by the end of this year. (Source: Business Day, September 17 2003). FYI: Shinee and iTV are both owned by PM Thaksin Shinawarta's Shin Corp. which also owns AIS - DTac's biggest competitor. |
|
Sponsors |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Shin Corp Issues
So after months of speculation, it looks like this will become official very soon.
From my understanding, under SET rules, Temasek will have to tender for the remaining shares of Shin and AIS. But I thought the telecoms law only allows up to 49% of foreign ownership for cell phone companies. Also, I thought that there were foreign ownership restrictions on Shin Satellite and ITV. Any idea on how these issues will be resolved? Also, I wonder what Shin's relationship with SingTel is going to be. The latter is 60% owned by Temasek, but under the US-S'pore FTA, Temasek will have to eventually sell off its majority stake in SingTel. Anyone have any clue? Bravo to Thaksin though. He should have done this five years ago, before the market value of his holdings tripled under his regime. But better late than never. I suggest that he put the cash he gets from this deal into a blind trust, putting an end to any more potential conflicts of interest (similar to what Theresa Heinz Kerry did with her fortune). Somehow I doubt he'd ever contemplate this, but I'm open to being pleasantly surprised. http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006..._19704296.html Quote:
Last edited by Tettyan; 20-01-06 at 04:49 PM.. |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
@samat
It'll be interesting to see if he invests some of it in 'At Samat' Corp.
|
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Temasek holds 49% of Shin Corps Stocks while the rest would becovered by
Crown Property Bureau - investment Manager for Royal Family ![]() |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
!!!
Quote:
|
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
OK, i see now
Quote:
This Reuters article certainly sheds a little more light than earlier reports, and their analysis seems to make a lot of sense. Much info at this stage is still speculation though - wonder how to seperate facts from all the rumors? http://in.today.reuters.com/news/new...archived=False Quote:
Last edited by Tettyan; 20-01-06 at 04:39 PM.. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
This won't do anything positive for business confidence: -
Quote:
|
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
If anyone thought that doing business with Thaksin was free of political risk, they were fools. Any risk has downside, and this is the downside. All that's changed is perception - the risk was always there.
"Business sentiment" can be pretty stupid, and often is. It's scary that so much is dependent on it. |
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/busine...036414899.html It'll be interesting to watch how this blows over if (when?) the deal is formally cancelled. |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Temasek was being advised by Goldman Sachs, and given Goldman's reputation, they must have thought they were getting decent advice. Yet it's easy to see that the best minds of the best multinationals aren't usually in Southeast Asia, and the Thai contingent is usually several steps below the Singaporean contingent. It makes sense - you don't climb the corporate ladder through Thailand. If you want to make a splash in Asia, you go to Japan, China or India - and perhaps Taiwan or Korea, but Thailand? Naah.
You see people running around with fancy business cards in Thailand, yet the quality of the peoples' skills is such that they'd have a tough time in a bigger market with greater competition. So it is with Goldman's Thai staff. First, they barely have any Thai staff - just a "representative office" in Bangkok staffed by "relationship managers" whose main purpose is to stay friendly with all major powers and decision-makers. In ordinary times, this is a fine situation. When the brains in Hong Kong come up with some idea, the local flunky can put then in front of key people; and when key people here need brains, the flunky can call Hong Kong. It works out fine - Goldman took stakes in the Dusit Thani Hotel and the Regent (now the Four Seasons) after the crash and did very well; as did its Bangkok Capital Alliance JV with GE Capital. But you can't count on "relationship" guys to make any decent analysis - all they know is what they hear from their contacts, and if they're spending all their time with TRT cronies, they're not exactly getting decent information. Temasek clearly got crap advice from Goldman's Thai team, and now it's going to cost them. But what does Goldman care? They've gotten their cut and now its time for the cigars. If they had any self-respect they'd hang their Thai team up to dry, but don't count on it. Scuba22 PS = thanks for the article, very interesting! |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
Shin Corp-Profits 60% down
Thaksin got out while he was still ahead, and while he still had enough assets to weather the current storm. So if he had the foresight and advisors to figure the right time to quit, why didn't he have the political savvy to deal with the waiverers in a more constructive manner? That surely is the mark of a truly-inspired politician?: -
Quote:
|
|
Sponsors |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
He must have had his advisors, but I wouldn't place a lot of value on his "foresight". I mean, consider the buyer; Temasek created Singapore Airlines, SingTel, the Port of Singapore, and DBS - all highly competitive businesses in global markets with strong players, and in some cases, industry leaders. Not to mention the job that Singapore has done in developing its own country - the public housing system, mass transit, infrastructure, airport, education etc. (Singapore's PM, remember, is Temasek's head's husband; and the country was built by the PM's dad)
Now, consider Thaksin's track record in every single one of these areas - is there anything anywhere that might lead anyone to believe that Thaksin could possibly be more business savvy and astute than Temasek and the Singapore government? To belive that Thaksin has such amazing foresight, you must believe that Temsek is full of fools, and the empirical evidence is firmly against that. IMHO, this points to two conclusions. First, Thaksin defrauded Temasek. Shin Corp values were artificially inflated through preferencial policy treatment that Thaksin knew could not be sustained once he didn't direct that policy (I suppose you could call that "foresight", insofar as knowing what you're going to do next is foresight). Second, Temasek was advised by idiots who couldn't figure any of this out. Goldman Sachs may have bright folks in major markets, but they clearly have no clue what's going on in Thailand. Of course I can't prove any of this, but it's far more sensible than the idea that Thaksin is somehow a far better business strategist than Temasek - that's just absurd. Cheers, Scuba |
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
This almost looks like part of an attempt to create distance with Thaksin as well: -
Quote:
|
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Last edited by GWR; 28-10-06 at 06:27 PM.. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|