“A significant number of the BISX-listed communications provider’s shareholders have become uncomfortable about the near-$400m debt currently sitting on its balance sheet as a result of the need to finance its mobile and US expansions.”

Cable’s debt is not near $400m, in just long term debt and preference shares it is now $442m not to mention current liabilities. This company is grossly over leveraged and it is hard to see how this debt will ever be repaid. As for Aliv it keeps coming back for more debt after promising it would not need to. This whole article seems like more spin from management and it has been going on for years.

I wonder...I'm not a finance person ..but I wonder if their high risk strategy will pay off. BTC is the lumbering giant and Aliv is the speedy rabbit...who will survive? It's hard for me to tell. But I would put my money on Aliv, if there are no significant changes in the environment over the next 20 years the gamble may not pay off but if there is an almost impossible to avoid tetonic shift in the technological environment...i think BTC will be caught out. They are not innovating fast enough. Who knows, the Bahamas may no longer be their focus.

You may be right and Aliv will win but most assuredly it will be a Pyrrhic victory. They have achieved market share but at what cost? Aliv is gaining more of an ever shrinking telecommunications pie. Cutthroat competition and rapid technological changes have seen to that. WhatsApp has eroded profitability as voice revenue has gone to zero. Aliv’s problem is that ARPU average revenue per unit (subscriber) is falling far below expectations and a level necessary to be profitable. It is hard to see how they get this to increase in a meaningful way. Will customers suddenly have a need to pay more for services each month? So yes they will be profitable eventually but very likely only marginally so with the bulk of profits simply servicing an onerous legacy debt. And then even if they can manage to service this debt there will inevitably be further capital raises to finance the build out of 5G and beyond. That is the peril of being in a capital intensive industry with rapid technological changes. It is clear this second cellular license is not nearly as valuable as once thought. Surprisingly most shareholders have not realized this yet.

And that is where I think BTC'S mistake is. In my eyes Aliv is no longer a mobile provider. I see a company using the mobile network as a foundation for innovation. To compete, BTC needs to innovate and for some inexplicable reason theyre not doing it, zero, zilch, nada. Theyre focused on mobile subscriber numbers alone, with that strategy when the next technological innovation arrives they'll be holding a mobile phone, dead in the water. Aliv will be able to adapt.

But again I'm not a finance person, if at some point no one wants to give them money to continue i guess BTC wins.

Since Aliv is already onboard with Hauwei. Their transition to 5G will be much more cost effective as compared to BTC . Every technology they are installing during the build out of their network is in preparation for the next big innovative upgrade to 5G . Having Hauwei as a partner (the world leader in 5G technology that even Trump and America is affraid of because they are eating US 5G companies lunch) Will mean they will leap frog BTC shortly and hopefully their financials will significantly turn around and the share holders will see some profits as they pay down a substantial portion of their depth. I would put my money on Aliv compared to BTC anyday. .

Cable Bahamas (shareholder of ALIV) is a rogue, and almost criminal organisation. The US acquisitions were nothing but ruse to extract money out of the company in American dollars. They paid over a hundred million dollars for two entities that were not worth a tenth of that. However it was a nifty scheme to buy two moribund US companies under several corporate vehicles, and sell them at highly inflated prices to Cable Bahamas. It borders on wire fraud and racketeering but since nobody cares in the Bahamas and the regulator is a paper tiger, it's anything goes. Karma is a bitch and it killed Phil Keeping the original mastermind, but now they are running rampant with no oversight and they have taken huge amounts of money out of the BAHAMAS.

But how much money is BTC sending out the country to the parent under the guise of payment for services? We're being screwed either way

It is an exclusive club... and you ain’t invited.😁

Don Anthony, it ain't exclusive, some of dat money has been invested by financial institutions in mutual funds owned by da general public. Some mutual funds have +30% exposure to Cable and REV bonds. If sometin happen i feel sorry for da poor ppls dem.

http://tribune242.com/users/photos/2019…

dey issue $54 million of preference shares last year. dey mussy issue dem to pay da interest to da ppl who lend dem $400 million.

http://tribune242.com/users/photos/2019…

#Revealing that Aliv’s subscriber base has now hit 150,000 customers based on a 60-day subscriber ‘churn’ cycle, he said: “We have a very clear handle on our plan and what we need to do. We’ve taken a debt level for the business that we think is appropriate given its needs and where we will grow to in the future.

*Simply put, customer churn occurs when customers or subscribers stop doing business with a company or service. Also known as customer attrition, customer churn is a critical metric because it is much less expensive to retain existing customers than it is to acquire new customers – earning business from new customers means working leads all the way through the sales funnel, utilizing your marketing and sales resources throughout the process. Customer retention, on the other hand, is generally more cost-effective as you’ve already earned the trust and loyalty of existing customers.*

So basically Aliv's strategy is to recycle customers rather than to gain them permanently. So they give away the handsets and the bonus minutes and data to churn revenue. But what happens when this strategy gets played out. will customers return home to BTC? Of course since Aliv was the new kid on the block, it was easier for them to attract new customers. Young people like new and they like excitement

Both Aliv and BTC have outsourced their Top Up services to companies outside the Bahamas. A service that was previously done by Bahamians. So the funds have t be deposited directly into the banks and the bulk of this money leaves the country. Bahamians are only involved on the retail end where they get 6 cents on the dollar. If the Top-Up goes to a wrong number those funds are taken out of the retailer's bucket. This may sound trivial but sometimes a top-up of say $50.00 may be sent. It goes to a number that is not in services and both providers will not reverse the transaction. So they benefit by $50.00 while the retailer loses out.

Actually not. Leon Williams was dismissed from BTC because he was on the take from an LA-based company for top-ups for BTC. The LA company did all of the work for BTC and gave kickbacks.