Kirk Griffin on CWC
IN YOUR OWN WORDS
Former Acting CEO of Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) and newly-appointed advisor to the company Kirk Griffin offered his thoughts on Cable and Wireless Communications.
“I am fortunate to have been at BTC — at the executive level of the company — from the very beginning of the privatization process some 14 years ago. This has given me a unique perspective on the company, the industry and the necessity for BTC to be able to align itself with industry giants that can position BTC where it needs to be.
“I am not reluctant or shy to say that my team members and I at BTC are extremely proud of what we have been able to accomplish. We have consistently been profitable over the years as we have brought modern telecommunications throughout the length and breadth of The Bahamas. Our strengths and successess have been acknowledged by all reasonable observers, including our new colleagues at Cable and Wireless Communications. There can be no question that BTC has done well.
“However, by virtue of its small size, BTC is often disadvantaged because it cannot reach the economies of scale and command best prices from suppliers and vendors. At times, BTC even has difficulty attracting the attention of potential roaming partners as we seek to expand the connectivity of our very own customers across the globe.
“Further, as we all recognize the full liberalization of the telecommunications market is vital for the interests of Bahamian consumers and the vibrancy of the Bahamian economy, for BTC to compete in a fully liberalized market, up against the telecom giants of the world, it is critical that the company partners with a capable and competent global operator. CWC will help position BTC to effectively become and remain the provider of choice for consumers in The Bahamas, in a fully open and competitive marketplace.”
4/8/2011
thenassauguardian
A political blog about Bahamian politics in The Bahamas, Bahamian Politicans - and the entire Bahamas political lot. Bahamian Blogger Dennis Dames keeps you updated on the political news and views throughout the islands of The Bahamas without fear or favor. Bahamian Politicians and the Bahamian Political Arena: Updates one Post at a time on Bahamas Politics and Bahamas Politicans; and their local, regional and international policies and perspectives.
Showing posts with label BTC Privatization. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BTC Privatization. Show all posts
Sunday, April 10, 2011
Saturday, March 26, 2011
The House of Assembly Passed the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) Privatization Resolutions
House approves BTC sale
By KRYSTEL ROLLE
Guardian Staff Reporter
krystel@nasguard.com
PM accidentally voted against sale, then changed vote
The Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) privatization resolutions were passed in the House of Assembly yesterday with 22 MPs voting in support of the resolutions and 18 voting against. The process to sell 51 percent of BTC to Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) is now almost finished.
All members of the official opposition voted against the resolutions. Independent MP for Bamboo Town Branville McCartney also voted against the resolutions.
Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham initially made a mistake and he accidentally voted against the first privatization resolution. He was seemingly distracted, using his Blackberry phone, when his name was called to vote. Ingraham said, “No.”
When he realized the mistake, Ingraham quickly said, “Yes.”
His initial “no” vote led to loud cheers and laughter from opposition members.
When it came time to vote on the second resolution, Ingraham clearly said, “Yes.” This also led to laughter from the opposition, considering Ingraham’s initial mistake.
Both resolutions passed shortly after Ingraham wrapped up the debate yesterday evening.
“This is a historic day in the history of The Bahamas,” Ingraham said. “It is the culmination of a process that was started 14 years ago.”
In negotiating the BTC deal, he said the government was motivated by its desire to give Bahamians the best of what is available and to ensure that communications services are reliable and accessible.
Ingraham also accused the opposition of using the unions representing BTC employees as “pawns” in the fight against of sale of BTC to CWC.
Ingraham further criticized the leaders of the Bahamas Communications and Public Officers Union (BCPOU) and the Bahamas Communications and Public Managers Union (BCPMU) — the BTC unions — for leading their members down “the wrong path.”
The unions have led protests and legal action seeking to block the sale to CWC.
Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) MP for Fort Charlotte Alfred Sears took offense to Ingraham’s “pawns” statement. He said the unions are mature groups with responsible leaders who can make independent decisions.
The BCPOU and BCPMU were seeking an injunction to stop the government from selling BTC.
However, Supreme Court Justice Neville Adderley said the unions lacked the legal capacity to institute and maintain the action in their own names.
The unions appealed the decision, but lost that bid before the Court of Appeal Tuesday.
The unions will face significant legal bills as a result of the failed court action.
Ingraham encouraged the unions to engage with CWC.
“I appeal to the leadership, to the unions, to begin to engage in discussions with their new bosses. Because they are going to be the bosses in short order and it makes good sense for them to have discussions,” he said. “Do not allow anyone to mislead you into believing that we do not have your best interests at heart. In fact, had they listened to me they wouldn’t have been stuck with the thousands of dollars in court fees.”
The legislation associated with the BTC sale will next be debated in the Senate.
3/25/2011
thenassauguardian
By KRYSTEL ROLLE
Guardian Staff Reporter
krystel@nasguard.com
PM accidentally voted against sale, then changed vote
The Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) privatization resolutions were passed in the House of Assembly yesterday with 22 MPs voting in support of the resolutions and 18 voting against. The process to sell 51 percent of BTC to Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) is now almost finished.
All members of the official opposition voted against the resolutions. Independent MP for Bamboo Town Branville McCartney also voted against the resolutions.
Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham initially made a mistake and he accidentally voted against the first privatization resolution. He was seemingly distracted, using his Blackberry phone, when his name was called to vote. Ingraham said, “No.”
When he realized the mistake, Ingraham quickly said, “Yes.”
His initial “no” vote led to loud cheers and laughter from opposition members.
When it came time to vote on the second resolution, Ingraham clearly said, “Yes.” This also led to laughter from the opposition, considering Ingraham’s initial mistake.
Both resolutions passed shortly after Ingraham wrapped up the debate yesterday evening.
“This is a historic day in the history of The Bahamas,” Ingraham said. “It is the culmination of a process that was started 14 years ago.”
In negotiating the BTC deal, he said the government was motivated by its desire to give Bahamians the best of what is available and to ensure that communications services are reliable and accessible.
Ingraham also accused the opposition of using the unions representing BTC employees as “pawns” in the fight against of sale of BTC to CWC.
Ingraham further criticized the leaders of the Bahamas Communications and Public Officers Union (BCPOU) and the Bahamas Communications and Public Managers Union (BCPMU) — the BTC unions — for leading their members down “the wrong path.”
The unions have led protests and legal action seeking to block the sale to CWC.
Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) MP for Fort Charlotte Alfred Sears took offense to Ingraham’s “pawns” statement. He said the unions are mature groups with responsible leaders who can make independent decisions.
The BCPOU and BCPMU were seeking an injunction to stop the government from selling BTC.
However, Supreme Court Justice Neville Adderley said the unions lacked the legal capacity to institute and maintain the action in their own names.
The unions appealed the decision, but lost that bid before the Court of Appeal Tuesday.
The unions will face significant legal bills as a result of the failed court action.
Ingraham encouraged the unions to engage with CWC.
“I appeal to the leadership, to the unions, to begin to engage in discussions with their new bosses. Because they are going to be the bosses in short order and it makes good sense for them to have discussions,” he said. “Do not allow anyone to mislead you into believing that we do not have your best interests at heart. In fact, had they listened to me they wouldn’t have been stuck with the thousands of dollars in court fees.”
The legislation associated with the BTC sale will next be debated in the Senate.
3/25/2011
thenassauguardian
Monday, March 21, 2011
The Bluewater Ventures Limited / Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) Privatization deal that came close to reality
Bluewater Unveiled
By CANDIA DAMES
NG News Editor
candia@nasguard.com
A look at the BTC deal that almost was
The veil of secrecy surrounding the group that almost purchased 49 percent of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) under the Christie administration is being lifted.
According to a closely guarded document obtained by National Review, Bluewater is a privately held entity, which does not have audited statements or disclose financial statements publicly.
“However, at signing or immediately prior to signing the [letter of intent] we are prepared to disclose relevant financial information and give the relevant assurances on Bluewater’s acquisition vehicle, including its financial capacity to complete the transaction,” the company said in 2006.
The response came as part of the due diligence exercise carried out by the Privatization Committee under the Christie administration, which subsequently recommended to the government that negotiations should proceed with Bluewater.
Members of that committee included the financial secretary, the legal advisor to the Ministry of Finance, BTC union officials, private sector members and telecommunications consultants.
As the government gets closer to closing a deal with Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) to sell 51 percent of BTC, the Bluewater deal that almost came to be remains highly controversial.
Speaking at his party’s rally on Clifford Park Saturday night, Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham said if the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) had its way BTC would have been sold off to Bluewater, which “had no experience in telecommunications. The company wasn’t even traded on the stock market.”
Ingraham said, “We still aren’t exactly sure who had their hands in that Bluewater pot or who the real players were behind a deal that would have purchased BTC on credit…”
Details of the deal that almost came to be are likely to be discussed in greater details in the BTC privatization debate, which gets underway in the House of Assembly today.
Ingraham has already promised to have more to say about Bluewater and what the Christie administration had planned.
In 2006, the privatization committee posed a number of questions to Bluewater, which were answered in detailed form in a document to the committee dated September 13, 2006.
One revelation made in that document is that Bluewater was formed to invest in and manage companies in the telecom and media industries.
According to the document, there was no plan for any layoffs. Between 2006 and 2011, average salary at BTC was projected to rise from $43,332 to $48,780.
Bluewater said in 2006 it would negotiate contracts with the existing management team between signing the letter of intent and closing the transaction.
“We anticipate that as a part of their package executive management will receive equity participation in BTC,” Bluewater said.
“Bluewater also anticipates that all board members will receive industry standard board compensation packages.”
A PLAN FOR BTC
Bluewater outlined 25 key initiatives to target in the first two years of purchasing the BTC shares.
It committed to plugging revenue leakages; reducing discounts to prepaid vendors; reducing bad debt charges; charging for in-home wiring to recoup costs; tightening the pre-paid card distribution process; instituting a new sales incentive scheme; reducing fleet maintenance costs; reducing overtime expenses and reducing contract service costs by 20 percent.
The company said that in the first year of the BTC acquisition it expected $92.5 million to be spent in capital expenditure to focus on consumers and core networks.
Asked to provide the supporting details and data for Bluewater’s proposed debt to equity ratio and any plans for external financing, Bluewater said it “does not intend to leverage BTC, so the net debt to equity ratio does not change during our projections.”
It also said it expected “all free cash flow after capital expenditure to be dividended to shareholders. This excludes current cash on the balance sheet which will be left at the company for working capital purposes.”
Bluewater also advised that it expected the cost of management and consultant contracts to be covered by the employee costs and the consultant costs in the business plan.
“In addition, we anticipate setting aside 10 percent of the equity of BTC for employees,” said Bluewater in 2006.
Under current plans for BTC, which appear poised to go through, the government says it will, by the end of this year, sell nine percent or approximately $40 million of the shares in BTC to the Bahamian public.
Bluewater said in 2006 that it did not intend to transfer or sell any of BTC’s shares for three years or any longer period of time as agreed by the shareholders.
The Bluewater plan also called for an improvement of EBITDA margins from 26 percent in 2005 to 39 percent in 2008.
The company said the improvement in EBITDA would have been achieved through the streamlining of operations.
The 2006 document to the Privatization Committee added, “Bluewater also intends to offer better value to its customers through reductions in wireless and international long distance tariffs as laid out in our business plan.”
The company had planned to launch an IPTV offering in 2009.
This would have included more than 1,000 movies on-demand “available to watch exactly when you want”; interactive music channels; on-demand movies and TV that you can stop, rewind, pause or fast-forward.
IPTV revenues were projected to be more than $9 million by this year.
The deal that came close to reality also included a plan for improving telecommunication services on less developed Family Islands.
THE BLUEWATER PLAYERS
The Privatization Committee asked Bluewater to provide the propose management candidates for BTC.
Several board members were named.
One of them was Trinidad and Tobago native Roger Ames, who served as chairman and chief executive officer of Warner Music Group and president of Warner Music International between August 1999 and August 2004.
Carlos Espinal who in 2006 was CEO of TSTT, the national telephone company of Trinidad & Tobago, was named as another Bluewater executive.
Prior to joining TSTT in 2004, he spent eight years with Verizon as senior vice president international - Latin America.
During his time with Verizon, he worked as a turn-around specialist for Verizon’s Latin American and Caribbean businesses, Bluewater said.
John Gregg was listed in the document sent to the Privatization Committee as managing director of Bluewater. According to that 2006 document, he had 15 years of building companies in the media and telecom industry in Europe, the U.S. and Asia.
Another board member named was Andrew Sukawaty, who was named as the chairman and CEO of Inmarsat, which Bluewater said was the world leader in global satellite communications.
According to the document, Sukawaty served as president and CEO of Sprint PCS, one of America’s largest mobile phone providers. It said he grew Sprint from a start up to a company with 9.5 million subscribers and approximately $6.6 billion in revenue.
Bluewater also named several operational advisors, a finance team and a legal team.
The document said Bluewater’s principals intended to invest in BTC through a standalone Bahamian entity that would have been capitalized and controlled by Bluewater’s principals. It said Bluewater is an entity controlled by John Gregg.
DEFENDING THE DEAL
Today, Bluewater of course is a dead deal, but what the Christie administration had proposed continues to come up in the current privatization debate.
The Christie administration had agreed to sell a 49 percent stake in the national telecommunications provider for $260 million shortly before the May 2007 general election.
However, after the Free National Movement was returned to power, Ingraham vowed to review the deal, claiming that Christie and the former Cabinet were planning to sell BTC "on credit" and that Bluewater would enjoy too lengthy an exclusivity period as a monopoly in an industry that his administration was keen on liberalizing.
According to documents previously obtained by The Nassau Guardian, Bluewater had agreed to pay $220 million for BTC in cash at closing, $25 million at the end of the fifth year following closing and $15 million at the end of the sixth year.
Under the deal, Bluewater would have been granted mobile and landline licenses with five and six-year exclusive periods, respectively.
Speaking at a press conference at PLP headquarters on Farrington Road yesterday, Christie again defended the deal.
“By innuendos and suggestions he (Ingraham) started off immediately after he became prime minister to suggest that there was something crooked about our involvement in Bluewater,” Christie said.
“The Progressive Liberal Party structured an approach to privatization that relied on the integrity and leadership of the financial secretary (at the time) Mrs. Ruth Millar.
“To ensure that we were on safe grounds we placed the leaders of the management union of BTC and the workers, BCPOU (Bahamas Communications and Public Officers Union), as full members of the negotiating team.
“That team, including the union leaders, would come into Cabinet and brief Cabinet. We took a transparent and accountable approach to it.”
Referring to the prime minister, Christie said, “…If he really wants to look for something, tell the Bahamian people whether or not there are deals in this BTC sale to Cable and Wireless.
“That’s where he should be looking at. The Progressive Liberal Party lost the elections. We can explain the positions we took.”
3/21/2011
thenassauguardian
By CANDIA DAMES
NG News Editor
candia@nasguard.com
A look at the BTC deal that almost was
The veil of secrecy surrounding the group that almost purchased 49 percent of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) under the Christie administration is being lifted.
According to a closely guarded document obtained by National Review, Bluewater is a privately held entity, which does not have audited statements or disclose financial statements publicly.
“However, at signing or immediately prior to signing the [letter of intent] we are prepared to disclose relevant financial information and give the relevant assurances on Bluewater’s acquisition vehicle, including its financial capacity to complete the transaction,” the company said in 2006.
The response came as part of the due diligence exercise carried out by the Privatization Committee under the Christie administration, which subsequently recommended to the government that negotiations should proceed with Bluewater.
Members of that committee included the financial secretary, the legal advisor to the Ministry of Finance, BTC union officials, private sector members and telecommunications consultants.
As the government gets closer to closing a deal with Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) to sell 51 percent of BTC, the Bluewater deal that almost came to be remains highly controversial.
Speaking at his party’s rally on Clifford Park Saturday night, Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham said if the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) had its way BTC would have been sold off to Bluewater, which “had no experience in telecommunications. The company wasn’t even traded on the stock market.”
Ingraham said, “We still aren’t exactly sure who had their hands in that Bluewater pot or who the real players were behind a deal that would have purchased BTC on credit…”
Details of the deal that almost came to be are likely to be discussed in greater details in the BTC privatization debate, which gets underway in the House of Assembly today.
Ingraham has already promised to have more to say about Bluewater and what the Christie administration had planned.
In 2006, the privatization committee posed a number of questions to Bluewater, which were answered in detailed form in a document to the committee dated September 13, 2006.
One revelation made in that document is that Bluewater was formed to invest in and manage companies in the telecom and media industries.
According to the document, there was no plan for any layoffs. Between 2006 and 2011, average salary at BTC was projected to rise from $43,332 to $48,780.
Bluewater said in 2006 it would negotiate contracts with the existing management team between signing the letter of intent and closing the transaction.
“We anticipate that as a part of their package executive management will receive equity participation in BTC,” Bluewater said.
“Bluewater also anticipates that all board members will receive industry standard board compensation packages.”
A PLAN FOR BTC
Bluewater outlined 25 key initiatives to target in the first two years of purchasing the BTC shares.
It committed to plugging revenue leakages; reducing discounts to prepaid vendors; reducing bad debt charges; charging for in-home wiring to recoup costs; tightening the pre-paid card distribution process; instituting a new sales incentive scheme; reducing fleet maintenance costs; reducing overtime expenses and reducing contract service costs by 20 percent.
The company said that in the first year of the BTC acquisition it expected $92.5 million to be spent in capital expenditure to focus on consumers and core networks.
Asked to provide the supporting details and data for Bluewater’s proposed debt to equity ratio and any plans for external financing, Bluewater said it “does not intend to leverage BTC, so the net debt to equity ratio does not change during our projections.”
It also said it expected “all free cash flow after capital expenditure to be dividended to shareholders. This excludes current cash on the balance sheet which will be left at the company for working capital purposes.”
Bluewater also advised that it expected the cost of management and consultant contracts to be covered by the employee costs and the consultant costs in the business plan.
“In addition, we anticipate setting aside 10 percent of the equity of BTC for employees,” said Bluewater in 2006.
Under current plans for BTC, which appear poised to go through, the government says it will, by the end of this year, sell nine percent or approximately $40 million of the shares in BTC to the Bahamian public.
Bluewater said in 2006 that it did not intend to transfer or sell any of BTC’s shares for three years or any longer period of time as agreed by the shareholders.
The Bluewater plan also called for an improvement of EBITDA margins from 26 percent in 2005 to 39 percent in 2008.
The company said the improvement in EBITDA would have been achieved through the streamlining of operations.
The 2006 document to the Privatization Committee added, “Bluewater also intends to offer better value to its customers through reductions in wireless and international long distance tariffs as laid out in our business plan.”
The company had planned to launch an IPTV offering in 2009.
This would have included more than 1,000 movies on-demand “available to watch exactly when you want”; interactive music channels; on-demand movies and TV that you can stop, rewind, pause or fast-forward.
IPTV revenues were projected to be more than $9 million by this year.
The deal that came close to reality also included a plan for improving telecommunication services on less developed Family Islands.
THE BLUEWATER PLAYERS
The Privatization Committee asked Bluewater to provide the propose management candidates for BTC.
Several board members were named.
One of them was Trinidad and Tobago native Roger Ames, who served as chairman and chief executive officer of Warner Music Group and president of Warner Music International between August 1999 and August 2004.
Carlos Espinal who in 2006 was CEO of TSTT, the national telephone company of Trinidad & Tobago, was named as another Bluewater executive.
Prior to joining TSTT in 2004, he spent eight years with Verizon as senior vice president international - Latin America.
During his time with Verizon, he worked as a turn-around specialist for Verizon’s Latin American and Caribbean businesses, Bluewater said.
John Gregg was listed in the document sent to the Privatization Committee as managing director of Bluewater. According to that 2006 document, he had 15 years of building companies in the media and telecom industry in Europe, the U.S. and Asia.
Another board member named was Andrew Sukawaty, who was named as the chairman and CEO of Inmarsat, which Bluewater said was the world leader in global satellite communications.
According to the document, Sukawaty served as president and CEO of Sprint PCS, one of America’s largest mobile phone providers. It said he grew Sprint from a start up to a company with 9.5 million subscribers and approximately $6.6 billion in revenue.
Bluewater also named several operational advisors, a finance team and a legal team.
The document said Bluewater’s principals intended to invest in BTC through a standalone Bahamian entity that would have been capitalized and controlled by Bluewater’s principals. It said Bluewater is an entity controlled by John Gregg.
DEFENDING THE DEAL
Today, Bluewater of course is a dead deal, but what the Christie administration had proposed continues to come up in the current privatization debate.
The Christie administration had agreed to sell a 49 percent stake in the national telecommunications provider for $260 million shortly before the May 2007 general election.
However, after the Free National Movement was returned to power, Ingraham vowed to review the deal, claiming that Christie and the former Cabinet were planning to sell BTC "on credit" and that Bluewater would enjoy too lengthy an exclusivity period as a monopoly in an industry that his administration was keen on liberalizing.
According to documents previously obtained by The Nassau Guardian, Bluewater had agreed to pay $220 million for BTC in cash at closing, $25 million at the end of the fifth year following closing and $15 million at the end of the sixth year.
Under the deal, Bluewater would have been granted mobile and landline licenses with five and six-year exclusive periods, respectively.
Speaking at a press conference at PLP headquarters on Farrington Road yesterday, Christie again defended the deal.
“By innuendos and suggestions he (Ingraham) started off immediately after he became prime minister to suggest that there was something crooked about our involvement in Bluewater,” Christie said.
“The Progressive Liberal Party structured an approach to privatization that relied on the integrity and leadership of the financial secretary (at the time) Mrs. Ruth Millar.
“To ensure that we were on safe grounds we placed the leaders of the management union of BTC and the workers, BCPOU (Bahamas Communications and Public Officers Union), as full members of the negotiating team.
“That team, including the union leaders, would come into Cabinet and brief Cabinet. We took a transparent and accountable approach to it.”
Referring to the prime minister, Christie said, “…If he really wants to look for something, tell the Bahamian people whether or not there are deals in this BTC sale to Cable and Wireless.
“That’s where he should be looking at. The Progressive Liberal Party lost the elections. We can explain the positions we took.”
3/21/2011
thenassauguardian
Saturday, March 12, 2011
The agenda to derail the privatisation of Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) for political gain and to protect vested interests
Propaganda and the pending BTC privatisation
By LARRY SMITH
AND now class, today we are going to talk about propaganda. Does anyone know what the word means?
It derives from the Latin for propagate, which means to multiply, reproduce or transmit. In this case, we are talking about spreading information.
What kind of information? Well, that is often hard to say. The key point to remember is that the information being presented will have an agenda. And in order to judge the value and quality of the information, you need to determine what that agenda is.
In a nutshell, propaganda uses loaded messages to produce an emotional response in support of an often hidden objective. And ever since the 1930s (when German and Soviet propaganda promoted state-sponsored genocide) the term has acquired a strong negative meaning - for good reason.
Journalists are supposed to be trained to give their audiences a reasonably accurate background and analysis of the subject at hand. Advertisers use an overt form of propaganda to persuade people to buy their products or services. Public relations lies somewhere in between, often presenting itself as journalism in support of a proprietary theme, which is not necessarily nefarious.
What sets propaganda apart more than anything else is that it seeks to influence public opinion through deception and confusion, rather than by encouraging genuine understanding.
According to Nazi Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels, "The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over."
What points instantly spring to mind in the local context? No turning back (to white rule); stop, review and cancel (good economic initiatives); Hubert "the dictator" Ingraham; selling our birthright (to white foreigners), the plantation economy (enslaves blacks).
But it's not just about repetitive slander. As British wartime propagandist (and later cabinet minister) Richard Crossman said: "The art of propaganda is not telling lies, but rather selecting the truth you require and giving it mixed up with some truths the audience wants to hear."
This is what we are seeing today with the (currently) one-sided debate over the pending privatisation of BTC.
Let's look at the recent constructs of a massive conspiracy to corruptly engineer the sale of BTC against the interests and wishes of the Bahamian people. Evidence for this is said to rest on a series of conflicts of interest, and was recently given credence by retired Tribune journalist Nicky Kelly, who now writes a column for the Punch.
"One has to ask why the PM is so motivated to pursue a deal that is so suspect, and the machinations of its participants so obvious, that they exhaust credulity," Kelly wrote.
In this view, a small group of unrelated people began moving chess pieces years ago to achieve the present result - the sale of half of BTC to Cable & Wireless Communications, within a regulatory environment developed and controlled by former CWC employees.
The inference is that the plot was hatched by CWC, with the support of leading Bahamian politicians and technical advisors, to save its future Caribbean business prospects. Or maybe it was the other way round, and our top politicos and bureaucrats simply planned to enrich themselves from CWC. In either case, the full background to the story is largely ignored and a massive corrupt scheme is offered as the obvious reality. The clear agenda is to derail the privatisation of BTC, both for political gain and to protect vested interests.
The full background to the story includes the fact that there were no less than three public bodies responsible for decision-making - the cabinet, the privatisation advisory committee, and the privatisation working committee. There were also two sets of financial advisors - KPMG Bahamas and CITI, a major international bank - as well as two legal advisors - Charles Russell, a British firm specialising in communications law (which also advised the Christie administration on regulatory reform), and local law firm Higgs & Johnson.
In short, there were significant checks and balances. And with so many separate groups of advisors it would be very difficult for a specific conflict of interest to flow through to a final sale. It also has to be acknowledged that the goal of liberalising the communications sector and finding a major strategic partner for BTC has been the accepted policy of both major parties for years - even more so in the case of the FNM, which launched the process in 1998.
And what about those conflicts of interest that have been selectively ignored by the conspiracy theorists. Conflicts like the participation of some of the major antagonists in the current debate in the earlier sale that was agreed by the Christie administration with Bluewater Ventures - a foreign firm with uncertain ownership and no operating history.
It has been suggested that some of them were heavily involved when that deal went down - together with some of the leaders of the same unions that are now so critical of the current process. What chess pieces were these players moving?
The Christie administration cancelled the original privatisation process launched by the FNM after rejecting existing bids, and then proceeded to negotiate solely with Bluewater from 2005 until the general election in May 2007. How is this any different from the Ingraham administration rejecting bids received in the current process, and then talking to CWC?
And let's not forget to take into account the stark contrast between Bluewater, an unknown private equity firm, and CWC, a major international telecoms provider with a long and publicly reported background in the field.
In fact, almost all of the bidders for BTC throughout this long and complicated process were private financiers who saw an opportunity to make money. Digicell and CWC are the most obvious telecoms buyers in the region, but Digicell (which decided not to bid in the last auction) is purely a cellular operator. CWC is one of the few entities that does everything BTC does throughout the region and has a strategic reason to invest for the long-term. And since CWC has been interested in the Bahamas for the last 15 years, how can it suddenly be suspicious when they step up to the plate?
It is easy to research a large global business like Cable & Wireless, which may have problems in some areas but a very healthy balance sheet overall. In fact, CWC is a leader in all regional markets except Jamaica where they are second. It should also be noted that, although declining to participate in the most recent auction due to an internal reorganisation, CWC eventually went through the same entry process as all other bidders.
As for the terms of the CWC agreement, it is a fact that all the bidders required BTC's unfunded pension deficit to be covered by government - including Bluewater. How can this now be "repugnant" to the PLP, when they agreed to pay off the full deficit and close the pension plan entirely. I would suggest that there is no business in the world where employees make zero contributions to their own pensions while the employer pays 20 per cent of salaries into a fund. This obviously has a huge impact on BTC's value.
It is also true that all the bidders - including Bluewater - demanded a management fee in their plans, something which some commentators find egregious. The rationale for the fee that was eventually agreed is that CWC brings a lot of added value to BTC in terms of technology and intellectual property, which will significantly benefit the other shareholder. This is normal practice where a minority partner is involved, and industry benchmarks are used to set the fee scale.
Clearly, connecting the dots selectively amounts to spouting propaganda. It does nothing to help people reach a genuine understanding of the issues. This is known as pinpointing the enemy - simplifying a complex situation by presenting a specific group or person as the enemy in a clear-cut choice between right and wrong. And the better informed you are, the less susceptible you will be to this type of propaganda.
One of the worst allegations in this saga was made recently by PLP Chairman Bradley Roberts (who was the minister responsible for BTC in the Christie administration). He accused current BTC chairman Julian Francis of a corrupt conflict of interest in awarding to Providence Advisors (a financial services company which Francis also chairs) a lucrative contract to manage part of the BTC pension fund.
"As a result of this contract that Julian Francis awarded to himself, he positioned himself and Providence Advisors Ltd to be paid in excess of $400,000 per annum for the past 3 years," Roberts said. "The PLP calls for Julian Francis' immediate resignation and for the police to commence investigations..."
The facts are that efforts to place BTC pension funds with local investment managers began in 2006 under the Christie administration, when Greg Bethel was BTC chairman and also president of Fidelity Bank & Trust - one of the firms chasing the business. Providence, headed by Kenwood Kerr, was also invited to bid, and was eventually approved (along with Fidelity and CFAL) in a process guided by the accounting firm of Deloitte & Touche.
The actual contract was not executed until after the 2007 general election, and Francis (who is not a Providence shareholder) had nothing to do with choosing the investment managers. And Providence's fees over the past two and a half years were less than $350,000.
Statements from political operatives and unsupported extrapolations by sympathetic or thoughtless journalists are not the only forms of propaganda we must watch out for. There are also those entities which pose as legitimate news media. While party newspapers or radio broadcasts may be easily identified and their information taken with a grain of salt, some propaganda outlets try to disguise their true nature to fool an audience into believing they are presenting valid information.
The current prime example locally is the online propaganda outlet known as Bahamas Press, which refuses to even acknowledge that it is financed, owned and operated by real people, although it classifies itself as a "leading news website." An anonymous responder claimed the site is owned "by the people of the Bahamas."
As George Orwell wrote in his novel 1984, "the process (of mass-media deception) has to be conscious, or it would not be carried out with sufficient precision, but it also has to be unconscious, or it would bring with it a feeling of falsity and hence of guilt."
Of course, now that I have waded into the propaganda swamp, I must be part of the conspiracy, right? Well, now you can make the call.
What do you think?
Send comments to
larry@tribunemedia.net
Or visit www.bahamapundit.com
March 09, 2011
tribune242
By LARRY SMITH
AND now class, today we are going to talk about propaganda. Does anyone know what the word means?
It derives from the Latin for propagate, which means to multiply, reproduce or transmit. In this case, we are talking about spreading information.
What kind of information? Well, that is often hard to say. The key point to remember is that the information being presented will have an agenda. And in order to judge the value and quality of the information, you need to determine what that agenda is.
In a nutshell, propaganda uses loaded messages to produce an emotional response in support of an often hidden objective. And ever since the 1930s (when German and Soviet propaganda promoted state-sponsored genocide) the term has acquired a strong negative meaning - for good reason.
Journalists are supposed to be trained to give their audiences a reasonably accurate background and analysis of the subject at hand. Advertisers use an overt form of propaganda to persuade people to buy their products or services. Public relations lies somewhere in between, often presenting itself as journalism in support of a proprietary theme, which is not necessarily nefarious.
What sets propaganda apart more than anything else is that it seeks to influence public opinion through deception and confusion, rather than by encouraging genuine understanding.
According to Nazi Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels, "The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over."
What points instantly spring to mind in the local context? No turning back (to white rule); stop, review and cancel (good economic initiatives); Hubert "the dictator" Ingraham; selling our birthright (to white foreigners), the plantation economy (enslaves blacks).
But it's not just about repetitive slander. As British wartime propagandist (and later cabinet minister) Richard Crossman said: "The art of propaganda is not telling lies, but rather selecting the truth you require and giving it mixed up with some truths the audience wants to hear."
This is what we are seeing today with the (currently) one-sided debate over the pending privatisation of BTC.
Let's look at the recent constructs of a massive conspiracy to corruptly engineer the sale of BTC against the interests and wishes of the Bahamian people. Evidence for this is said to rest on a series of conflicts of interest, and was recently given credence by retired Tribune journalist Nicky Kelly, who now writes a column for the Punch.
"One has to ask why the PM is so motivated to pursue a deal that is so suspect, and the machinations of its participants so obvious, that they exhaust credulity," Kelly wrote.
In this view, a small group of unrelated people began moving chess pieces years ago to achieve the present result - the sale of half of BTC to Cable & Wireless Communications, within a regulatory environment developed and controlled by former CWC employees.
The inference is that the plot was hatched by CWC, with the support of leading Bahamian politicians and technical advisors, to save its future Caribbean business prospects. Or maybe it was the other way round, and our top politicos and bureaucrats simply planned to enrich themselves from CWC. In either case, the full background to the story is largely ignored and a massive corrupt scheme is offered as the obvious reality. The clear agenda is to derail the privatisation of BTC, both for political gain and to protect vested interests.
The full background to the story includes the fact that there were no less than three public bodies responsible for decision-making - the cabinet, the privatisation advisory committee, and the privatisation working committee. There were also two sets of financial advisors - KPMG Bahamas and CITI, a major international bank - as well as two legal advisors - Charles Russell, a British firm specialising in communications law (which also advised the Christie administration on regulatory reform), and local law firm Higgs & Johnson.
In short, there were significant checks and balances. And with so many separate groups of advisors it would be very difficult for a specific conflict of interest to flow through to a final sale. It also has to be acknowledged that the goal of liberalising the communications sector and finding a major strategic partner for BTC has been the accepted policy of both major parties for years - even more so in the case of the FNM, which launched the process in 1998.
And what about those conflicts of interest that have been selectively ignored by the conspiracy theorists. Conflicts like the participation of some of the major antagonists in the current debate in the earlier sale that was agreed by the Christie administration with Bluewater Ventures - a foreign firm with uncertain ownership and no operating history.
It has been suggested that some of them were heavily involved when that deal went down - together with some of the leaders of the same unions that are now so critical of the current process. What chess pieces were these players moving?
The Christie administration cancelled the original privatisation process launched by the FNM after rejecting existing bids, and then proceeded to negotiate solely with Bluewater from 2005 until the general election in May 2007. How is this any different from the Ingraham administration rejecting bids received in the current process, and then talking to CWC?
And let's not forget to take into account the stark contrast between Bluewater, an unknown private equity firm, and CWC, a major international telecoms provider with a long and publicly reported background in the field.
In fact, almost all of the bidders for BTC throughout this long and complicated process were private financiers who saw an opportunity to make money. Digicell and CWC are the most obvious telecoms buyers in the region, but Digicell (which decided not to bid in the last auction) is purely a cellular operator. CWC is one of the few entities that does everything BTC does throughout the region and has a strategic reason to invest for the long-term. And since CWC has been interested in the Bahamas for the last 15 years, how can it suddenly be suspicious when they step up to the plate?
It is easy to research a large global business like Cable & Wireless, which may have problems in some areas but a very healthy balance sheet overall. In fact, CWC is a leader in all regional markets except Jamaica where they are second. It should also be noted that, although declining to participate in the most recent auction due to an internal reorganisation, CWC eventually went through the same entry process as all other bidders.
As for the terms of the CWC agreement, it is a fact that all the bidders required BTC's unfunded pension deficit to be covered by government - including Bluewater. How can this now be "repugnant" to the PLP, when they agreed to pay off the full deficit and close the pension plan entirely. I would suggest that there is no business in the world where employees make zero contributions to their own pensions while the employer pays 20 per cent of salaries into a fund. This obviously has a huge impact on BTC's value.
It is also true that all the bidders - including Bluewater - demanded a management fee in their plans, something which some commentators find egregious. The rationale for the fee that was eventually agreed is that CWC brings a lot of added value to BTC in terms of technology and intellectual property, which will significantly benefit the other shareholder. This is normal practice where a minority partner is involved, and industry benchmarks are used to set the fee scale.
Clearly, connecting the dots selectively amounts to spouting propaganda. It does nothing to help people reach a genuine understanding of the issues. This is known as pinpointing the enemy - simplifying a complex situation by presenting a specific group or person as the enemy in a clear-cut choice between right and wrong. And the better informed you are, the less susceptible you will be to this type of propaganda.
One of the worst allegations in this saga was made recently by PLP Chairman Bradley Roberts (who was the minister responsible for BTC in the Christie administration). He accused current BTC chairman Julian Francis of a corrupt conflict of interest in awarding to Providence Advisors (a financial services company which Francis also chairs) a lucrative contract to manage part of the BTC pension fund.
"As a result of this contract that Julian Francis awarded to himself, he positioned himself and Providence Advisors Ltd to be paid in excess of $400,000 per annum for the past 3 years," Roberts said. "The PLP calls for Julian Francis' immediate resignation and for the police to commence investigations..."
The facts are that efforts to place BTC pension funds with local investment managers began in 2006 under the Christie administration, when Greg Bethel was BTC chairman and also president of Fidelity Bank & Trust - one of the firms chasing the business. Providence, headed by Kenwood Kerr, was also invited to bid, and was eventually approved (along with Fidelity and CFAL) in a process guided by the accounting firm of Deloitte & Touche.
The actual contract was not executed until after the 2007 general election, and Francis (who is not a Providence shareholder) had nothing to do with choosing the investment managers. And Providence's fees over the past two and a half years were less than $350,000.
Statements from political operatives and unsupported extrapolations by sympathetic or thoughtless journalists are not the only forms of propaganda we must watch out for. There are also those entities which pose as legitimate news media. While party newspapers or radio broadcasts may be easily identified and their information taken with a grain of salt, some propaganda outlets try to disguise their true nature to fool an audience into believing they are presenting valid information.
The current prime example locally is the online propaganda outlet known as Bahamas Press, which refuses to even acknowledge that it is financed, owned and operated by real people, although it classifies itself as a "leading news website." An anonymous responder claimed the site is owned "by the people of the Bahamas."
As George Orwell wrote in his novel 1984, "the process (of mass-media deception) has to be conscious, or it would not be carried out with sufficient precision, but it also has to be unconscious, or it would bring with it a feeling of falsity and hence of guilt."
Of course, now that I have waded into the propaganda swamp, I must be part of the conspiracy, right? Well, now you can make the call.
What do you think?
Send comments to
larry@tribunemedia.net
Or visit www.bahamapundit.com
March 09, 2011
tribune242
Friday, March 4, 2011
The Bluewater story will be told, and it’s a wonderful story for the people of The Bahamas to know and to have
PM responds to Bluewater threat
By CANDIA DAMES
Guardian News Editor
candia@nasguard.com
Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham last night responded to a threat recently issued by Bluewater Ventures Limited, saying he will not be intimidated by the “shell company” and promising to tell the whole story of the Christie administration's plan to sell 49 percent of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC).
Bluewater recently alleged that the Government of The Bahamas has been making defamatory comments against it and the company threatened to take legal action against the Ingraham administration.
Bluewater has asked the government’s attorney to advise no later than today whether the government intends to issue a public statement repudiating the alleged defamatory statements.
But the prime minister made it clear last night that no such step will be taken.
“They seek to intimidate,” said Ingraham, while wrapping up debate on the government’s mid-year budget statement. “Well, you know you can’t intimidate me in my private life. I wouldn’t talk about the Government of The Bahamas. And so, the Bluewater story will be told, notwithstanding any threats by them.
“The Bluewater story will be told and it’s a wonderful story for the people of The Bahamas to know and to have.”
Ingraham noted that the letter Bluewater’s attorney sent to the government’s lawyer last week never indicated what were the alleged defamatory statements.
Ingraham is expected to address the Bluewater issue during the upcoming debate in the House of Assembly on the BTC privatization.
The prime minister also touched on Baha Mar, a project introduced under the Christie administration that changed substantially under the Ingraham administration. Ground was broken last week on the Cable Beach development and Opposition Leader Perry Christie hit out at the government for not acknowledging at the event the PLP’s role in bringing the project about.
But Ingraham said last night, “Baha Mar is going ahead because the Chinese government is providing the money. They (the PLP) never wanted any business dealing with the Chinese government.
“They recognized Taiwan. In fact, that’s how the leader of the opposition got back in the PLP. The PLP made a deal with the Taiwanese government to recognize them and not the People’s Republic of China.
“Ervin Knowles, who was the minister, got fired, and Christie got hired. Ervin Knowles was appointed ambassador to Taiwan.
“The only reason why we have [ties] with the People’s Republic of China today is because the FNM did that and the Chinese regard us as an old friend and they are supporting us in the Baha Mar project.
“And there was no possibility of Baha Mar being able to get a loan with the Chinese unless The Bahamas government said ‘yes’, please do it.’”
Ingraham said the Free National Movement is delighted at the opportunity to be in government.
But he said, “We are concerned about the extent to which outright lies are told to the public, shamelessly so.”
Ingraham said what the FNM government has done is “unmatchable by them”.
“The reality is, Mr. Speaker, that we on this side of the House are pleased that the people of The Bahamas have reposed their trust in us and that we are spending their money wisely.
“We are preparing their economy for the future.”
3/4/2011
thenassauguardian
By CANDIA DAMES
Guardian News Editor
candia@nasguard.com
Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham last night responded to a threat recently issued by Bluewater Ventures Limited, saying he will not be intimidated by the “shell company” and promising to tell the whole story of the Christie administration's plan to sell 49 percent of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC).
Bluewater recently alleged that the Government of The Bahamas has been making defamatory comments against it and the company threatened to take legal action against the Ingraham administration.
Bluewater has asked the government’s attorney to advise no later than today whether the government intends to issue a public statement repudiating the alleged defamatory statements.
But the prime minister made it clear last night that no such step will be taken.
“They seek to intimidate,” said Ingraham, while wrapping up debate on the government’s mid-year budget statement. “Well, you know you can’t intimidate me in my private life. I wouldn’t talk about the Government of The Bahamas. And so, the Bluewater story will be told, notwithstanding any threats by them.
“The Bluewater story will be told and it’s a wonderful story for the people of The Bahamas to know and to have.”
Ingraham noted that the letter Bluewater’s attorney sent to the government’s lawyer last week never indicated what were the alleged defamatory statements.
Ingraham is expected to address the Bluewater issue during the upcoming debate in the House of Assembly on the BTC privatization.
The prime minister also touched on Baha Mar, a project introduced under the Christie administration that changed substantially under the Ingraham administration. Ground was broken last week on the Cable Beach development and Opposition Leader Perry Christie hit out at the government for not acknowledging at the event the PLP’s role in bringing the project about.
But Ingraham said last night, “Baha Mar is going ahead because the Chinese government is providing the money. They (the PLP) never wanted any business dealing with the Chinese government.
“They recognized Taiwan. In fact, that’s how the leader of the opposition got back in the PLP. The PLP made a deal with the Taiwanese government to recognize them and not the People’s Republic of China.
“Ervin Knowles, who was the minister, got fired, and Christie got hired. Ervin Knowles was appointed ambassador to Taiwan.
“The only reason why we have [ties] with the People’s Republic of China today is because the FNM did that and the Chinese regard us as an old friend and they are supporting us in the Baha Mar project.
“And there was no possibility of Baha Mar being able to get a loan with the Chinese unless The Bahamas government said ‘yes’, please do it.’”
Ingraham said the Free National Movement is delighted at the opportunity to be in government.
But he said, “We are concerned about the extent to which outright lies are told to the public, shamelessly so.”
Ingraham said what the FNM government has done is “unmatchable by them”.
“The reality is, Mr. Speaker, that we on this side of the House are pleased that the people of The Bahamas have reposed their trust in us and that we are spending their money wisely.
“We are preparing their economy for the future.”
3/4/2011
thenassauguardian
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
The opposition Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) cries shame on The Bahamas government for accepting an offer that is clearly below market value for the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC)
BTC political row worsens
By CANDIA DAMES
The Nassau Guardian News Editor
candia@nasguard.com
Parties hit out over $210M deal
The sparring over the government’s decision to sell 51 percent of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) to Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) has intensified, with the two major political parties arguing over whether the majority of Bahamians support the deal.
The Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) said yesterday that its parliamentary caucus has embarked on a thorough and comprehensive review of the BTC and CWC transaction, and will be releasing regular positions on each component of the transaction.
“The PLP has clear and unequivocal objections to the commercial terms of this transaction, and more specifically the purchase price and consideration the government, and the Bahamian people, will realize from the sale of this prized national asset,” the party said in a statement.
The government has agreed to sell 51 percent of the shares of BTC to CWC for $210 million plus taxes.
“However, when one looks more closely at the terms of the transaction as set out in the share purchase agreement, it is clear The Bahamas government is receiving far less than $210 million, and it is equally clear that whatever the government eventually receives is far less than the value of 51 percent of BTC,” the PLP claimed.
“The Bahamas government is obligated to leave at least $15 million in cash in the company. Furthermore, The Bahamas government is obligated to fund pension liabilities in the amount of $39 million. Taking into account these obligations of the Bahamian government, the most the government will receive is $156 million for 51 percent of BTC.
“The PLP objects to this and cries shame on the government for accepting an offer that is clearly below market value for BTC. In fact, the Financial Times pointed out that the $210 million purchase price was below the industry average; certainly $156 million is significantly below market price for 51 percent of BTC.”
Meanwhile, an argument has intensified over the level of support the government has on the privatization issue.
An earlier statement released by Elizabeth MP Ryan Pinder on behalf of the PLP said the party takes exception to the Free National Movement’s practice of “misleading the Bahamian public on the support for the BTC sale to Cable and Wireless.”
“The PLP proposes that the majority of Bahamians are against this specific sale of BTC. The PLP has committed itself to a series of statements and position pieces that will clearly note our objections to the BTC sale, focused on different objections,” Pinder said.
“The PLP is also committed in these releases to educating Bahamians as to the shortfalls of this proposed sale of BTC. The PLP demands that the FNM be honest and straightforward with the Bahamian people on this give away of the people's asset, BTC.”
But the FNM shot back in a statement last night, saying as support for the opposition’s position on the partnership to create a new BTC with Cable and Wireless continues to erode, it has begun to panic and continues to ignore the voices of the majority of Bahamians.
“The opposition says that it ‘proposes that the majority of Bahamians are against this specific sale of BTC’. Rather than proposing, the FNM has taken note of two surveys over the past two weeks which have shown the surge of support for the creation of a new BTC. One survey was conducted by a private group (Consumer Voices Bahamas) the other by one of the dailies,” the FNM said.
The FNM noted that in The Nassau Guardian’s online survey 4,563 people responded. The question was whether respondents supported the PLP’s decision to reject the deal.
“It appears that the voices of these thousands of Bahamians and many others are of no consequence to the PLP, which now seeks to substitute its own faltering position for that of the majority of Bahamians,” the FNM said.
But Pinder said in his statement that a previous FNM release and associated polls “misrepresented” the views of Bahamians.
“The unscientific polls focused on whether privatization was a good idea, and not [the] real issue that concerns the majority of Bahamians, which is whether this sale to Cable and Wireless under the proposed terms tabled in the House of Assembly last week is a good deal,” he said.
The FNM insisted however that support for the deal continues to grow among Bahamians.
“We believe that after the House of Assembly debate on BTC’s future, that many more Bahamians will support the new partnership, as misinformation and incorrect information are countered with the facts, which will shed more light on the fiction promoted by certain narrow interests,” the FNM said.
2/16/2011
thenassauguardian
By CANDIA DAMES
The Nassau Guardian News Editor
candia@nasguard.com
Parties hit out over $210M deal
The sparring over the government’s decision to sell 51 percent of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) to Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) has intensified, with the two major political parties arguing over whether the majority of Bahamians support the deal.
The Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) said yesterday that its parliamentary caucus has embarked on a thorough and comprehensive review of the BTC and CWC transaction, and will be releasing regular positions on each component of the transaction.
“The PLP has clear and unequivocal objections to the commercial terms of this transaction, and more specifically the purchase price and consideration the government, and the Bahamian people, will realize from the sale of this prized national asset,” the party said in a statement.
The government has agreed to sell 51 percent of the shares of BTC to CWC for $210 million plus taxes.
“However, when one looks more closely at the terms of the transaction as set out in the share purchase agreement, it is clear The Bahamas government is receiving far less than $210 million, and it is equally clear that whatever the government eventually receives is far less than the value of 51 percent of BTC,” the PLP claimed.
“The Bahamas government is obligated to leave at least $15 million in cash in the company. Furthermore, The Bahamas government is obligated to fund pension liabilities in the amount of $39 million. Taking into account these obligations of the Bahamian government, the most the government will receive is $156 million for 51 percent of BTC.
“The PLP objects to this and cries shame on the government for accepting an offer that is clearly below market value for BTC. In fact, the Financial Times pointed out that the $210 million purchase price was below the industry average; certainly $156 million is significantly below market price for 51 percent of BTC.”
Meanwhile, an argument has intensified over the level of support the government has on the privatization issue.
An earlier statement released by Elizabeth MP Ryan Pinder on behalf of the PLP said the party takes exception to the Free National Movement’s practice of “misleading the Bahamian public on the support for the BTC sale to Cable and Wireless.”
“The PLP proposes that the majority of Bahamians are against this specific sale of BTC. The PLP has committed itself to a series of statements and position pieces that will clearly note our objections to the BTC sale, focused on different objections,” Pinder said.
“The PLP is also committed in these releases to educating Bahamians as to the shortfalls of this proposed sale of BTC. The PLP demands that the FNM be honest and straightforward with the Bahamian people on this give away of the people's asset, BTC.”
But the FNM shot back in a statement last night, saying as support for the opposition’s position on the partnership to create a new BTC with Cable and Wireless continues to erode, it has begun to panic and continues to ignore the voices of the majority of Bahamians.
“The opposition says that it ‘proposes that the majority of Bahamians are against this specific sale of BTC’. Rather than proposing, the FNM has taken note of two surveys over the past two weeks which have shown the surge of support for the creation of a new BTC. One survey was conducted by a private group (Consumer Voices Bahamas) the other by one of the dailies,” the FNM said.
The FNM noted that in The Nassau Guardian’s online survey 4,563 people responded. The question was whether respondents supported the PLP’s decision to reject the deal.
“It appears that the voices of these thousands of Bahamians and many others are of no consequence to the PLP, which now seeks to substitute its own faltering position for that of the majority of Bahamians,” the FNM said.
But Pinder said in his statement that a previous FNM release and associated polls “misrepresented” the views of Bahamians.
“The unscientific polls focused on whether privatization was a good idea, and not [the] real issue that concerns the majority of Bahamians, which is whether this sale to Cable and Wireless under the proposed terms tabled in the House of Assembly last week is a good deal,” he said.
The FNM insisted however that support for the deal continues to grow among Bahamians.
“We believe that after the House of Assembly debate on BTC’s future, that many more Bahamians will support the new partnership, as misinformation and incorrect information are countered with the facts, which will shed more light on the fiction promoted by certain narrow interests,” the FNM said.
2/16/2011
thenassauguardian
Friday, January 21, 2011
Allow Bahamians To Buy 100% of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company Limited (BTC) and Let Competition Reign!
By Dennis Dames
About eleven years ago, my wife, along with hundreds of BaTelCo employees, accepted the company’s severance package; the deal was, according to my understanding, to prepare the entity for privatization.
That was sometime in 1999. This is now 2011, and the people’s government of the day has selected a candidate to purchase a 51% stake in the ailing BTC. The masses should be delighted about the good news; but ruckus has clouded the issue at hand and the nation has become bitterly divided over this simple matter.
Okay, let Bahamians buy the entire BTC (100%) and liberalize the market forthwith. Let competition reign!
No one in this 21st century Bahamas should have a problem with that. After selling BTC to Bahamians and giving other Bahamians a chance to compete with it, I wonder what the noise in the market would be then.
Let’s go that route, and give the consumers an immediate choice as to which telecommunication company that they would prefer doing business with; just like the local radio stations that we choose to patronize.
We have had a fax-line problem at our office lately, and it took five different technicians from BTC, on five separate visits to remedy the problem. What a national disgrace!
This is what the unions are fighting to keep; pure incompetence alive at the public’s expense.
It’s time for The Bahamas government to divorce itself of this ineptitude 100% as far as BTC is concerned. So, sell it to Bahamians with money to burn and liberalize the market simultaneously for other Bahamians to capitalize on BTC’s uselessness.
I can’t wait to see the unions demonstrate against Bahamians and competition. Then we shall see their real motives clearly; and that is to protect their lot of backward comrades.
Bahamas Blog International
About eleven years ago, my wife, along with hundreds of BaTelCo employees, accepted the company’s severance package; the deal was, according to my understanding, to prepare the entity for privatization.
That was sometime in 1999. This is now 2011, and the people’s government of the day has selected a candidate to purchase a 51% stake in the ailing BTC. The masses should be delighted about the good news; but ruckus has clouded the issue at hand and the nation has become bitterly divided over this simple matter.
Okay, let Bahamians buy the entire BTC (100%) and liberalize the market forthwith. Let competition reign!
No one in this 21st century Bahamas should have a problem with that. After selling BTC to Bahamians and giving other Bahamians a chance to compete with it, I wonder what the noise in the market would be then.
Let’s go that route, and give the consumers an immediate choice as to which telecommunication company that they would prefer doing business with; just like the local radio stations that we choose to patronize.
We have had a fax-line problem at our office lately, and it took five different technicians from BTC, on five separate visits to remedy the problem. What a national disgrace!
This is what the unions are fighting to keep; pure incompetence alive at the public’s expense.
It’s time for The Bahamas government to divorce itself of this ineptitude 100% as far as BTC is concerned. So, sell it to Bahamians with money to burn and liberalize the market simultaneously for other Bahamians to capitalize on BTC’s uselessness.
I can’t wait to see the unions demonstrate against Bahamians and competition. Then we shall see their real motives clearly; and that is to protect their lot of backward comrades.
Bahamas Blog International
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) is becoming a dinosaur with diminished capacity
The BTC Dinosaur
by Simon
The unmistakeable symptom which demonstrated that BTC was becoming a dinosaur with diminished capacity surfaced as the bottom fell out of its long distance market almost overnight. On the way to losing its outdated status as a state monopoly, the company started exhibiting the classic stages of grief.
First, BTC stuck its head in the sand, attempting to use legal tactics and lame arguments as to why it should maintain a laughing-all-the-way-to-the-bank monopoly with outrageously high rates.
Those rates continued to suck endless millions from businesses and homes despite long distance charges plummeting around the world, thanks to innovations from the internet to fibre optic cable and mobile phones. In addition to rapidly changing technologies, the economics of telecommunications was upended globally even as BTC remained in the first stages of grief: denial and anger.
BTC did attempt the next stage, bargaining. With fanfare it announced its introduction of Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP) to The Bahamas. The announcement of ViBe was curious as the company tried to convince customers that this was a revolution in long distance service. Too little. Way too late.
STRANGLEHOLD
The revolution had already occurred as Bahamians in droves turned to various VOIP options to circumvent BTC’s stranglehold on long distance. As the revolution, which BTC came too late, quickened, the Vonage boxes were stacked high at various mail courier services which Bahamians were also turning to in avoidance of a postal system which had given a new meaning to snail mail.
Still, BTC lagged behind, late in introducing various services, with all manner of excuses. But it wasn’t simply the new services of which BTC was not yet proficient that annoyed customers. As frustrating were the things it still had not mastered after many decades in operation.
For too many, getting a new landline was the equivalent of root canal with the latter perhaps less painless and quicker. While jurisdictions around the world enjoyed landline voice mail for some time, BTC, despite supposedly having the technology, was once again late in introducing such a relatively simple feature.
It took some time for BTC to respond to the BlackBerry, despite our position as a world financial centre with many travelling here to conduct high-end business. And, despite the millions of tourists we host annually.
BTC’s time problem was at times also comical. A friend recalls dialling 917 to get the time and listening to a time off by several minutes. If you call 917 today, the long pause is a fitting example of the company’s woes. Of course, many people no longer call the time. Instead many consult portable devices especially cell phones now more ubiquitous than watches.
So, starved of overpriced long distance revenues, BTC turned to cellular services to gouge customers to fund its operations and fuel its growth. Today, The Bahamas has some of the highest cell phone rates in the world. It was not too long ago that we stopped paying for making and receiving a call on our cells.
BTC will tell us that they charge what they do in order to invest in new technology, serve a far-flung archipelago, pay decent salaries to valuable employees, while maintaining a certain level of service to customers.
TOO SMALL
And, this is precisely the Catch-22. As a stand-alone entity the company is too small and does not have the economies of scale necessary to compete with other telecoms while providing Bahamians with less expensive and improved service.
BTC is too small to provide, in a more cost-effective manner, the capital expenditure and investments needed to keep pace with advancements in areas from mobile data to broadband. Moreover, as a part of a larger network, BTC will be able to diversify its revenue streams in order to provide cheaper and better service.
One argument making the rounds is that BTC and The Bahamas can mirror Brazil, Singapore, South Korea and Australia in terms of the ability of the governments of those countries to invest in their respective telecommunications sectors. The sheer size of those countries, whether geographically or economically, makes such comparisons unconvincing.
In 2009 terms the gross domestic product of The Bahamas was around $7 billion dollars. Singapore’s was approximately $182 billion, South Korea’s was $832 billion, Australia’s was $924 billion and Brazil’s was a near $1 trillion dollars. In terms of market size and the ability of these governments to invest in telecommunications as opposed to The Bahamas, it is a matter of comparing a single apple and an orange grove.
The case for privatization is clear if The Bahamas is to prevent the lumbering dinosaur of BTC from turning into a fossilized giant. Cable and Wireless is the sort of international partner that may breathe new life into BTC, which, as a stand-alone may only survive through Bahamians endlessly paying exorbitant rates.
The heated rhetoric flowing from the proposed arrangement between BTC and Cable and Wireless has obscured many facts, some out of fear and some out of political manipulation in service of certain interests.
OVERSIGHT
The Bahamas will maintain a 49 percent stake in BTC. This will ensure critical influence in the new BTC. Further, the Government will have significant regulatory and oversight power, to help check and balance Cable and Wireless.
Moreover, Bahamians from every walk of life will be able to purchase shares in BTC as the Government eventually makes 25 percent of its shares available to individuals and groups such as union pension funds. And, within three years, Cable and Wireless will face new competitors, including any consortium of Bahamians interested in the telecoms sector.
So, in relatively short order, Bahamians will enjoy cheaper rates, better service, more communications options and broader economic empowerment through access to shares in a telecom.
Yet, those realities are being drowned out by a dying dinosaur still in denial, still angry and still bargaining, grieving for a past that is gone and a future that is unsustainable as it charges its customers outrageous prices for what others in the region and around the world pay pennies.
Over the many years, BTC has had many dedicated employees who have rendered valuable service to the company and The Bahamas. But collectively, the current company, like the dinosaurs of old, has been hit by life-altering realities in a new global telecommunications landscape forever transformed by the internet.
To provide its customers with less expensive and more reliable service, BTC must act less as an employment bureau for featherbedding cronies and constituents.
For some, the new reality is a depressing, the penultimate step in the stages of grief. Still, it appears that despite all the shouting and screaming and cries of Armageddon, most Bahamians long ago accepted the need for change. While they may be somewhat nostalgic about the old Batelco, this is less an expression of the last stage of grief, and more a celebration of a new chapter in telecommunications.
Of course, for some, acceptance will only come reluctantly and painfully. Yet even for these individuals, indeed for all Bahamians, BTC is one dinosaur from whom the country can still gain significant, though declining benefits, before it slides into possible irrelevance and a weakened state if left in its present form. If that happened we really would have something to mourn.
bahamapundit
by Simon
The unmistakeable symptom which demonstrated that BTC was becoming a dinosaur with diminished capacity surfaced as the bottom fell out of its long distance market almost overnight. On the way to losing its outdated status as a state monopoly, the company started exhibiting the classic stages of grief.
First, BTC stuck its head in the sand, attempting to use legal tactics and lame arguments as to why it should maintain a laughing-all-the-way-to-the-bank monopoly with outrageously high rates.
Those rates continued to suck endless millions from businesses and homes despite long distance charges plummeting around the world, thanks to innovations from the internet to fibre optic cable and mobile phones. In addition to rapidly changing technologies, the economics of telecommunications was upended globally even as BTC remained in the first stages of grief: denial and anger.
BTC did attempt the next stage, bargaining. With fanfare it announced its introduction of Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP) to The Bahamas. The announcement of ViBe was curious as the company tried to convince customers that this was a revolution in long distance service. Too little. Way too late.
STRANGLEHOLD
The revolution had already occurred as Bahamians in droves turned to various VOIP options to circumvent BTC’s stranglehold on long distance. As the revolution, which BTC came too late, quickened, the Vonage boxes were stacked high at various mail courier services which Bahamians were also turning to in avoidance of a postal system which had given a new meaning to snail mail.
Still, BTC lagged behind, late in introducing various services, with all manner of excuses. But it wasn’t simply the new services of which BTC was not yet proficient that annoyed customers. As frustrating were the things it still had not mastered after many decades in operation.
For too many, getting a new landline was the equivalent of root canal with the latter perhaps less painless and quicker. While jurisdictions around the world enjoyed landline voice mail for some time, BTC, despite supposedly having the technology, was once again late in introducing such a relatively simple feature.
It took some time for BTC to respond to the BlackBerry, despite our position as a world financial centre with many travelling here to conduct high-end business. And, despite the millions of tourists we host annually.
BTC’s time problem was at times also comical. A friend recalls dialling 917 to get the time and listening to a time off by several minutes. If you call 917 today, the long pause is a fitting example of the company’s woes. Of course, many people no longer call the time. Instead many consult portable devices especially cell phones now more ubiquitous than watches.
So, starved of overpriced long distance revenues, BTC turned to cellular services to gouge customers to fund its operations and fuel its growth. Today, The Bahamas has some of the highest cell phone rates in the world. It was not too long ago that we stopped paying for making and receiving a call on our cells.
BTC will tell us that they charge what they do in order to invest in new technology, serve a far-flung archipelago, pay decent salaries to valuable employees, while maintaining a certain level of service to customers.
TOO SMALL
And, this is precisely the Catch-22. As a stand-alone entity the company is too small and does not have the economies of scale necessary to compete with other telecoms while providing Bahamians with less expensive and improved service.
BTC is too small to provide, in a more cost-effective manner, the capital expenditure and investments needed to keep pace with advancements in areas from mobile data to broadband. Moreover, as a part of a larger network, BTC will be able to diversify its revenue streams in order to provide cheaper and better service.
One argument making the rounds is that BTC and The Bahamas can mirror Brazil, Singapore, South Korea and Australia in terms of the ability of the governments of those countries to invest in their respective telecommunications sectors. The sheer size of those countries, whether geographically or economically, makes such comparisons unconvincing.
In 2009 terms the gross domestic product of The Bahamas was around $7 billion dollars. Singapore’s was approximately $182 billion, South Korea’s was $832 billion, Australia’s was $924 billion and Brazil’s was a near $1 trillion dollars. In terms of market size and the ability of these governments to invest in telecommunications as opposed to The Bahamas, it is a matter of comparing a single apple and an orange grove.
The case for privatization is clear if The Bahamas is to prevent the lumbering dinosaur of BTC from turning into a fossilized giant. Cable and Wireless is the sort of international partner that may breathe new life into BTC, which, as a stand-alone may only survive through Bahamians endlessly paying exorbitant rates.
The heated rhetoric flowing from the proposed arrangement between BTC and Cable and Wireless has obscured many facts, some out of fear and some out of political manipulation in service of certain interests.
OVERSIGHT
The Bahamas will maintain a 49 percent stake in BTC. This will ensure critical influence in the new BTC. Further, the Government will have significant regulatory and oversight power, to help check and balance Cable and Wireless.
Moreover, Bahamians from every walk of life will be able to purchase shares in BTC as the Government eventually makes 25 percent of its shares available to individuals and groups such as union pension funds. And, within three years, Cable and Wireless will face new competitors, including any consortium of Bahamians interested in the telecoms sector.
So, in relatively short order, Bahamians will enjoy cheaper rates, better service, more communications options and broader economic empowerment through access to shares in a telecom.
Yet, those realities are being drowned out by a dying dinosaur still in denial, still angry and still bargaining, grieving for a past that is gone and a future that is unsustainable as it charges its customers outrageous prices for what others in the region and around the world pay pennies.
Over the many years, BTC has had many dedicated employees who have rendered valuable service to the company and The Bahamas. But collectively, the current company, like the dinosaurs of old, has been hit by life-altering realities in a new global telecommunications landscape forever transformed by the internet.
To provide its customers with less expensive and more reliable service, BTC must act less as an employment bureau for featherbedding cronies and constituents.
For some, the new reality is a depressing, the penultimate step in the stages of grief. Still, it appears that despite all the shouting and screaming and cries of Armageddon, most Bahamians long ago accepted the need for change. While they may be somewhat nostalgic about the old Batelco, this is less an expression of the last stage of grief, and more a celebration of a new chapter in telecommunications.
Of course, for some, acceptance will only come reluctantly and painfully. Yet even for these individuals, indeed for all Bahamians, BTC is one dinosaur from whom the country can still gain significant, though declining benefits, before it slides into possible irrelevance and a weakened state if left in its present form. If that happened we really would have something to mourn.
bahamapundit
Friday, December 17, 2010
Say, Sway and Raw Power
The Bahama Journal Editorial
Available evidence suggests that, the Progressive Liberal Party and a number of unions are apparently finding themselves united as regards certain aspects of that deal that would –if approved- provide Cable and Wireless a fifty one per cent stake in BTC.
On the other hand, the governing party seems to be suggesting that they have been blind-sided by union leadership and that, in addition, they are adamant that, the Bahamian people are getting a good deal, moving forward.
These are the bones of contention between the governing party, its Opposition and the unions.
Evidently, politics matters.
And here, as we revert to some of what the Opposition is saying, we note where they say that, “…The PLP holds fast to the belief that the sale of BTC to C&W is a ‘national issue’ and not a political issue as there is a general concurrence on the Privatization of BTC.
“To this end the primary spokespersons outside the Halls of Parliament have been primarily the Party’s Chairman, the Leader and Deputy Leader. This position by the PLP has been clearly demonstrated with the ongoing Senate Debates, as opposition members, despite attempts to be censored, continue to hammer the Government for not making public the details of the Memorandum of Understanding on the BTC / C&W Deal…”
The PLP concludes on this note of warning, explaining that, “…the government continues to stubbornly proceed with this bad deal despite mounting national opposition by the People of the Bahamas. Considering the above factors, the PLP again call on the Prime Minister to make public the details of the sale by releasing the Memorandum of Understanding on the BTC / C&W Deal without further delay. More importantly, we call on the government to listen to the majority of the People and cancel the Government’s plans to sell BTC to Cable & Wireless…”
And so, the battle lines have been drawn.
Evidently, these battle lines recapitulate parameters that have proven decisive in times past – with workers and others ranged in alliance with one party or the other.
Only time will tell how this struggle will eventuate.
But even as we wait for time’s verdict, we can say with some high degree of confidence that, the struggle is on; and that, those who oppose the BTC deal are seemingly on the offensive; with their quarry – the governing Free National Movement now pulling out the stops in order to better sell the deal they thought they had in the bag.
But notwithstanding those aspects of this matter that turn on the use of raw power by some in the halls of parliament, we are today somewhat discomfited by some of the tactics used by the Speaker in the Assembly; particularly where it seems as if he ignored the right of Her Majesty’s Opposition to speak, once notice of adjournment was announced.
While –like others- we have no way of divining what could have motivated him to act as he did; suffice it to say that he left us and quite a number of other right-thinking persons with the sense that he was acting in the immediate political interests of the ruling party in the Assembly.
While we would like to think otherwise, the evidence directs us the clear conclusion that, Mr. Speaker erred when he acted as he did this Wednesday past.
But be that as it may, we hope that –in time- Mr. Speaker would have the good grace to explain himself to each and every member of that august assembly; this in order to convince them that he was not biased in his recent decision making.
Now while we are quite aware of some of those other aspects of this matter that now provide the Opposition with so much political fodder; we are still adamant that, they should have been given an opportunity to speak.
In addition, we would have much preferred that things had gone in such a way so that, those who lead and those who would lead might have had an opportunity to say Merry Christmas to each other and to send similar greetings to their constituents.
And clearly, we do believe that, the Opposition should have been given an opportunity – on the notice of adjournment to speak.
This is a time honored tradition in any number of countries that would hew to the democratic way of doing things; where while governments might have their sway, those in Opposition should have their say.
Evidently, while this nostrum might be heeded in other jurisdictions, there seems to be some difficulty with it as parliamentarians dicker and debate the matter concerning the proposed ‘sale’ of BTC to Cable and Wireless.
And so today, we regret the way things have happened in the Assembly; and as they might have done, we wish them all a Merry Christmas.
December 17, 2010
The Bahama Journal Editorial
Available evidence suggests that, the Progressive Liberal Party and a number of unions are apparently finding themselves united as regards certain aspects of that deal that would –if approved- provide Cable and Wireless a fifty one per cent stake in BTC.
On the other hand, the governing party seems to be suggesting that they have been blind-sided by union leadership and that, in addition, they are adamant that, the Bahamian people are getting a good deal, moving forward.
These are the bones of contention between the governing party, its Opposition and the unions.
Evidently, politics matters.
And here, as we revert to some of what the Opposition is saying, we note where they say that, “…The PLP holds fast to the belief that the sale of BTC to C&W is a ‘national issue’ and not a political issue as there is a general concurrence on the Privatization of BTC.
“To this end the primary spokespersons outside the Halls of Parliament have been primarily the Party’s Chairman, the Leader and Deputy Leader. This position by the PLP has been clearly demonstrated with the ongoing Senate Debates, as opposition members, despite attempts to be censored, continue to hammer the Government for not making public the details of the Memorandum of Understanding on the BTC / C&W Deal…”
The PLP concludes on this note of warning, explaining that, “…the government continues to stubbornly proceed with this bad deal despite mounting national opposition by the People of the Bahamas. Considering the above factors, the PLP again call on the Prime Minister to make public the details of the sale by releasing the Memorandum of Understanding on the BTC / C&W Deal without further delay. More importantly, we call on the government to listen to the majority of the People and cancel the Government’s plans to sell BTC to Cable & Wireless…”
And so, the battle lines have been drawn.
Evidently, these battle lines recapitulate parameters that have proven decisive in times past – with workers and others ranged in alliance with one party or the other.
Only time will tell how this struggle will eventuate.
But even as we wait for time’s verdict, we can say with some high degree of confidence that, the struggle is on; and that, those who oppose the BTC deal are seemingly on the offensive; with their quarry – the governing Free National Movement now pulling out the stops in order to better sell the deal they thought they had in the bag.
But notwithstanding those aspects of this matter that turn on the use of raw power by some in the halls of parliament, we are today somewhat discomfited by some of the tactics used by the Speaker in the Assembly; particularly where it seems as if he ignored the right of Her Majesty’s Opposition to speak, once notice of adjournment was announced.
While –like others- we have no way of divining what could have motivated him to act as he did; suffice it to say that he left us and quite a number of other right-thinking persons with the sense that he was acting in the immediate political interests of the ruling party in the Assembly.
While we would like to think otherwise, the evidence directs us the clear conclusion that, Mr. Speaker erred when he acted as he did this Wednesday past.
But be that as it may, we hope that –in time- Mr. Speaker would have the good grace to explain himself to each and every member of that august assembly; this in order to convince them that he was not biased in his recent decision making.
Now while we are quite aware of some of those other aspects of this matter that now provide the Opposition with so much political fodder; we are still adamant that, they should have been given an opportunity to speak.
In addition, we would have much preferred that things had gone in such a way so that, those who lead and those who would lead might have had an opportunity to say Merry Christmas to each other and to send similar greetings to their constituents.
And clearly, we do believe that, the Opposition should have been given an opportunity – on the notice of adjournment to speak.
This is a time honored tradition in any number of countries that would hew to the democratic way of doing things; where while governments might have their sway, those in Opposition should have their say.
Evidently, while this nostrum might be heeded in other jurisdictions, there seems to be some difficulty with it as parliamentarians dicker and debate the matter concerning the proposed ‘sale’ of BTC to Cable and Wireless.
And so today, we regret the way things have happened in the Assembly; and as they might have done, we wish them all a Merry Christmas.
December 17, 2010
The Bahama Journal Editorial
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)