PT - Portugal Telecom

[Packer16]

It is raw EBITDA

[Guest hellsten]

I found a very good analysis (Master's thesis by School of Business and Economics in Lisbon) of the PT and OIBR partnership.

 

Portugal Telecom’s Strategic Partnership with Oi - The Value Creation Potential:

http://run.unl.pt/bitstream/10362/9608/1/Mouta_2012.pdf

 

Being recognized by key telecom players worldwide as a company which

promotes best-in-class technological and innovation skills, the Portuguese company will

through the strategic partnership with Oi, make an effort to transfer its successes to

Brazil, namely MEO and the optical fiber.

…

Operational synergies are expected to arise from the combination of Portugal Telecom’s

know-how with Oi’s Financial Strength. The Portuguese firm mentions how important

Oi’s strong cash flow generation capacity is.

…

The strategic partnership with

Portugal Telecom is an initial step for Oi to improve competitiveness and find the

necessary know-how to dispute the market. Given this, Portugal Telecom resources are

planned to be used mostly inside Brazil to improve their performance and to compete.

However, as stated by Zeinal Bava (Chief Executive Officer of Portugal Telecom since

2008), the association established between the Portuguese and Brazilian companies will

potentially lead to invest in external opportunities.

…

While under a Joint-Venture with

Telefónica, PT couldn’t afford to invest in other Latin American markets, such as

Argentina or Venezuela. These markets are highly influenced by Telefónica’s presence.

With the exchange from Telefónica’s Joint-Venture to the partnership with Oi, a new

sight of opportunities arises, potentially leading to new acquisitions. Thus, Portugal

Telecom expects this strategic partnership to bring a new geographic projection,

allowing the firm to forecast a presence in other markets such as Argentina, Venezuela

and also improving its performance in Africa.

…

PT and Oi have agreed on several procedures to

promote the transfer of knowledge between companies. Such procedures will be

translated into four major measures.

…

The second measure put in place by the partnership is related to the exchange of

Portugal Telecom’s Human Capital to Oi. Several directors “left” the Portuguese

company and were employed under Oi firm to represent the Brazilian telecom player.

Such action had the purpose of clearly showing they are focused on creating success for

Oi, and not for Portugal Telecom

…

Given these facts, Oi’s market

positioning will be analyzed knowing that “a firm’s profitability depends jointly on the

economics of its market and its success in creating more value than its competitors”

(David Besanko, 2009).

Oi has been looked at as the major telecom player in Brazil due to its broad scope and

presence in all the market segments, such as Fixed Voice, Cellular Voice, Broadband

and Signature TV. Besides, the Brazilian operator possesses the largest share in Fixed

Voice and Broadband service provision. Even though there is a quite large variance in

terms of populated regions, the market still offers a natural barrier regarding the

concessions needed to operate. The telecom player Oi is the only company able to

provide services to the entire country, covering its three regions. Adding to this fact,

considering the new segmentation tendencies of the telecommunications market, PT’s

partner was the pioneer and still is the only operator which delivers converged services.

Convergence allows, as understood, the combined offer of multiple telecom services.

…

Portugal Telecom and Oi will work

together to develop 3G services and Broadband, implementing optical fiber and

Signature TV service like MEO. Moreover, Portugal Telecom has been conveying to Oi

the need to better segment the market in terms of specific client needs, the urgency of

promoting and maintaining the relation with clients, leading to post-paid services

developing more freedom when it comes to customers’ communication. Success and

improving both companies’ value will greatly depend on the achievement of these

goals.

…

Portugal Telecom and Oi also agreed on moving some Human Capital from PT to Oi.

That was the case of three of PT’s directors: customer care director, network

development director and network maintenance director. In fact, the directors were

employed under Oi contracts.

 

IMO, the things mentioned in this thesis makes it likely that OIBR is a better bet than PT. It's also cheaper than PT as packer16 pointed out.

 

Zeinal Bava, the customer care director, network development director and network maintenance director are now working for OIBR and indirectly for PT.

 

It's not going to be easy though; UBS Investment Research says competition is fierce in Brazil:

http://www.teletime.com.br/arqs/Outro/56845.pdf

 

2012 Annus horribilis

If competition has been fierce for some time, what is different about 2012 and

why the underperformance?

To our minds there have been 3 noteworthy changes that have taken place in

2012 that we think have changed the playing field in the Brazilian telecom

industry: the economy has weakened, competition has increased and the

regulatory environment has deteriorated (from an operator's perspective).

 

competition has always been fierce in Brazil, but 2012 and

beyond are shaping up to be even more competitive than in the past. Why? We

see 2 major factors contributing to an increase in competitive pressures in

Brazil; (1) increased industry-wide capex (as discussed) and (2) the resurgence

of Oi.

As can be seen below in Charts 9 and 10, over the past 5 years Oi (and formerly

Telemar and Brasil Telecom) steadily lost share of total telecom revenues in

Brazil. We attribute this loss of market share to both mix (i.e. Oi’s far greater

exposure to the slower growth in fixed line, as opposed to the more rapidly

growing mobile business) and indeed market share losses in the fixed business,

primarily to AMX and GVT.

 

However, following its successful merger and restructuring, we believe the

announcement of Oi's new strategic plan in April 2012 has heralded a much

more aggressive, more self-confident approach from Oi, characterised by more

aggressive pricing strategies, a deeper focus on bundling of triple and quad

services, and higher subsidies in handsets. As we outline in detail in our recent

report, (Walking a Tightrope, August 22nd) although we don't believe that Oi

will reach the ambitious targets laid out in its strategic plan, we certainly think

Oi's operational strategy makes sense and will make Oi a much tougher

competitor. This means there are no more easy pickings for Oi's competitors and

the acquisition cost of new subscribers for everyone has risen.

 

Oi (PN) Investment Case

We endorse Oi’s operational strategy and believe management have correctly

targeted bundling services as their best option to both defend and take market

share. However, although we envisage operating improvements, we are

considerably more cautious than Oi’s guidance, as we see fiercer competition, a

harsher economic environment, and incremental regulatory pressure. Whilst we

think Oi’s generous dividend policy as just manageable, we think Oi is walking

a financial tightrope. With net debt/EBITDA around 3.0x through 2014 with

interest cover of less than 2.0x, Oi is the most levered Latam telecom operator

under UBS coverage. We rate Oi SA with Neutral ratings for both stocks.

[PlanMaestro]

Brisk Deal Making in Europe Telecom Sector to Continue

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324853704578585190841187264.html

[PlanMaestro]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_in_Brazil#Cable_television

 

Cable television services in Brazil were allowed to start business in 1995, according to federal law 8977/95. Since then, there were no major advances in terms of access to the technology. Brazil has one of the lowest number of households with access to cable television, as a result of the combination of high prices charged by providers and the reduced purchasing power of most Brazilians. Cable television in Brazil, as of 2010, was available to only 10 million households (around 30 million viewers, which represents less than 20% of the country's population). Most of the users are from the upper class (70%). While the lower class represents 50% of the country's households, only 1% of them have access to cable television.

 

RR: Embratel/Net is owned by America Movil

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_Servi%C3%A7os_de_Comunica%C3%A7%C3%A3o

 

Pay TV Market Share

 

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2826/9213099258_8b6fefa7a6_o.png

 

Broadband Share

 

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3703/9213449280_582449e158_o.png

[jouni1]

IMO, the things mentioned in this thesis makes it likely that OIBR is a better bet than PT. It's also cheaper than PT as packer16 pointed out.

 

Zeinal Bava, the customer care director, network development director and network maintenance director are now working for OIBR and indirectly for PT.

 

It's not going to be easy though; UBS Investment Research says competition is fierce in Brazil:

http://www.teletime.com.br/arqs/Outro/56845.pdf

 

i was going to quickly buy a small position in OIBR, but found that there's OIBR and OIBR-C. did i understand correctly that OIBR is preferred and OIBR-C is the normal common stock? could not find this info anywhere else than on my broker's site, and they have not always been in the right on these smaller stocks.

[Guest hellsten]

IMO, the things mentioned in this thesis makes it likely that OIBR is a better bet than PT. It's also cheaper than PT as packer16 pointed out.

 

Zeinal Bava, the customer care director, network development director and network maintenance director are now working for OIBR and indirectly for PT.

 

It's not going to be easy though; UBS Investment Research says competition is fierce in Brazil:

http://www.teletime.com.br/arqs/Outro/56845.pdf

 

i was going to quickly buy a small position in OIBR, but found that there's OIBR and OIBR-C. did i understand correctly that OIBR is preferred and OIBR-C is the normal common stock? could not find this info anywhere else than on my broker's site, and they have not always been in the right on these smaller stocks.

 

From the 20-F posted in this thread by PlanMaestro:

On April 9, 2012, the trading symbols for our Preferred ADSs and Common ADSs on the NYSE were changed to “OIBR” and “OIBR.C,” respectively.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1160846/000119312513187787/0001193125-13-187787-index.htm

[muscleman]

IMO, the things mentioned in this thesis makes it likely that OIBR is a better bet than PT. It's also cheaper than PT as packer16 pointed out.

 

Zeinal Bava, the customer care director, network development director and network maintenance director are now working for OIBR and indirectly for PT.

 

It's not going to be easy though; UBS Investment Research says competition is fierce in Brazil:

http://www.teletime.com.br/arqs/Outro/56845.pdf

 

i was going to quickly buy a small position in OIBR, but found that there's OIBR and OIBR-C. did i understand correctly that OIBR is preferred and OIBR-C is the normal common stock? could not find this info anywhere else than on my broker's site, and they have not always been in the right on these smaller stocks.

 

From the 20-F posted in this thread by PlanMaestro:

On April 9, 2012, the trading symbols for our Preferred ADSs and Common ADSs on the NYSE were changed to “OIBR” and “OIBR.C,” respectively.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1160846/000119312513187787/0001193125-13-187787-index.htm

 

Thanks a lot! I see that the preferred shares have no voting rights and no par value. Will this be interesting in any case?

[Guest hellsten]

Credit Suisse - Portugal is not Greece:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/34638/6273349-cs%284%29.pdf

[dowfin1]

Good presentation by Bava. 

 

[stahleyp]

anyone know how many shares Bava owns of OIBR or PT?

[muscleman]

On Oi:

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-27/oi-advised-to-raise-cash-while-ending-dividend-corporate-brazil.html

 

With Bava as CEO, this looks interesting.

 

A few comments on the dividend. This is the current dividend plan according to the investor day presentation after the acquisition.

 

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7304/9119086851_f535d978eb.jpg

 

So it wasn't like they thought the current level was sustainable. The dividends were more about monetizing non-core assets (towers and real estate) while keeping a similar Debt/EBITDA to the one they have in Europe.

 

The concern is that 3x Debt/EBITDA is much higher than Brazilian and European peers.

 

http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/investment-ideas/pt-portugal-telecom/msg121376/#msg121376

 

"While companies have to rent towers they have sold, their margins can improve because they spend less on maintenance, said Alex Pardellas, a Rio de Janeiro-based analyst at CGD Securities."

 

This is confusing to me. How can they get the landlord to allow them to rent back the towers for less than the maintenance cost? The landlord would lose a lot of money in this way.

[muscleman]

IMO, the things mentioned in this thesis makes it likely that OIBR is a better bet than PT. It's also cheaper than PT as packer16 pointed out.

 

I think you are suggesting that OI's upside is greater than PT. How about the downside?

I think whether OI is better than PT as a bet here depends on the expected return, not just the upside. :)

[Guest hellsten]

IMO, the things mentioned in this thesis makes it likely that OIBR is a better bet than PT. It's also cheaper than PT as packer16 pointed out.

 

I think you are suggesting that OI's upside is greater than PT. How about the downside?

I think whether OI is better than PT as a bet here depends on the expected return, not just the upside. :)

 

Excellent question. OIBR certainly seems more riskier than PT, but the price is also lower. IMHO, you're compensated for the risk.

 

I wouldn't bet the farm on OIBR, because telecom is a bad business. However, if the turnaround is successful then OIBR would be a better business (telecom, entertainment, triple/quadruple-play). Hopefully, 3-5 years from now.

 

What could kill OIBR:

- competition

- regulation

- recession

- debt

- ??

 

IMHO, it's more likely that OIBR will fail because the turnaround fails or takes too long. It's impossible to say how likely this scenario is, but the market seems 99% sure the turnaround will fail.

 

My bet is that:

1) Zeinal Bava has the right team in place to implement the turnaround

 

2) they have the right strategy and experience implementing a similar strategy in Portugal

 

3) they have non-core assets they can sell during the turnaround:

we have a lot of non-core assets that we can sell and make cash that can replace any financing necessity

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1387031-oi-sa-management-discusses-q1-2013-results-earnings-call-transcript

 

4) PT and Zeinal Bava are very motivated to turn around OIBR. I guess you could say OIBR will determine PT's future; that's probably why Zeinal and others moved over to OIBR.

 

5) There's room to grow in Brazil:

"Cable television in Brazil, as of 2010, was available to only 10 million households (around 30 million viewers, which represents less than 20% of the country's population)"

~Wikipedia

 

6) ??

 

It would be interesting to hear what Mario Gabelli thinks about OIBR and Brazil. According to Morningstar, the Gabelli telecom fund (GABTX) sold OIBR recently. They seem to have sold a lot of other stocks as well, so maybe it's a good sign (redemptions)?

[HJ]

The biggest question in my mind is the regulatory framework in Brasil vs. Portugal.  From the material available on this board, Bava and management team wants to focus on video as the killer app for broadband infrastructure, but the regulators are pushing them to invest in 4G access.  I just wonder whether that regulatory pressure is what handcuffs the previous management and pushed them towards a direction unsatisfactory to the share holders.  And the fines disclosed in 20-F is only making the suspicion worse.  I maybe reading this wrong, but only half seem to be reserved for?  And that number is a very large percentage of their book equity.

 

"We are subject to numerous legal and administrative proceedings. It is difficult to quantify the potential impact of these legal

and administrative proceedings. We classify our risk of loss from legal and administrative proceedings as “probable,” “possible” or

“remote.” We make provisions for probable losses but do not make provisions for possible and remote losses. As of December 31,

2012, we had provisioned R$6,421 million for probable losses relating to various tax, labor and civil legal and administrative

proceedings against us. As of December 31, 2012, we had claims against us of R$765 million in tax proceedings, R$1,579 million in

labor proceedings and R$4,076 million in civil proceedings with a risk of loss classified as “possible” for which we had made no

provisions. "

 

Is the intention here to create this national champion to compete with the foreign dominated competitors?  Why wouldn't the regulator cut them some slack if that were the case?  And why does the controlling shareholder base want such an aggressive dividend policy anyway, when the company seem to need a meaningful ramp in capex?   

 

[muscleman]

IMO, the things mentioned in this thesis makes it likely that OIBR is a better bet than PT. It's also cheaper than PT as packer16 pointed out.

 

I think you are suggesting that OI's upside is greater than PT. How about the downside?

I think whether OI is better than PT as a bet here depends on the expected return, not just the upside. :)

 

Excellent question. OIBR certainly seems more riskier than PT, but the price is also lower. IMHO, you're compensated for the risk.

 

I wouldn't bet the farm on OIBR, because telecom is a bad business. However, if the turnaround is successful then OIBR would be a better business (telecom, entertainment, triple/quadruple-play). Hopefully, 3-5 years from now.

 

What could kill OIBR:

- competition

- regulation

- recession

- debt

- ??

 

IMHO, it's more likely that OIBR will fail because the turnaround fails or takes too long. It's impossible to say how likely this scenario is, but the market seems 99% sure the turnaround will fail.

 

My bet is that:

1) Zeinal Bava has the right team in place to implement the turnaround

 

2) they have the right strategy and experience implementing a similar strategy in Portugal

 

3) they have non-core assets they can sell during the turnaround:

we have a lot of non-core assets that we can sell and make cash that can replace any financing necessity

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1387031-oi-sa-management-discusses-q1-2013-results-earnings-call-transcript

 

4) PT and Zeinal Bava are very motivated to turn around OIBR. I guess you could say OIBR will determine PT's future; that's probably why Zeinal and others moved over to OIBR.

 

5) There's room to grow in Brazil:

"Cable television in Brazil, as of 2010, was available to only 10 million households (around 30 million viewers, which represents less than 20% of the country's population)"

~Wikipedia

 

6) ??

 

It would be interesting to hear what Mario Gabelli thinks about OIBR and Brazil. According to Morningstar, the Gabelli telecom fund (GABTX) sold OIBR recently. They seem to have sold a lot of other stocks as well, so maybe it's a good sign (redemptions)?

 

Are these two companies fully integrated? From my understanding, PT holds 25% of Oi's equity, so if Oi goes bankruptcy, PT will not be on the hook of Oi's debt. Therefore perhaps you cannot say PT's future depends on Oi.

[Guest hellsten]

Are these two companies fully integrated? From my understanding, PT holds 25% of Oi's equity, so if Oi goes bankruptcy, PT will not be on the hook of Oi's debt. Therefore perhaps you cannot say PT's future depends on Oi.

 

Yes, correct. I was trying to say that PT's future will be less bright without the growth and diversification that OIBR provides. The future might also be riskier because of this strategy, but I assume Zeinal Bava and his team have considered all their options and picked the best strategy for both PT and OIBR.

 

It's pretty clear that they are moving to OIBR because they want to diversify PT, and Brazil is where the growth is.

[tombgrt]

Doesn't OIBR own a 10% equity interest in PT?

[muscleman]

A few other things to consider:

 

- Has a 5-star rating from Morningstar:

http://quotes.morningstar.com/stock/s?t=PT

 

- "Funded until end of 2017":

 

Recently, it issued seven-year debt in the amount of 1 thousand million euros that enabled the company to be "funded until the end of 2017". He said that there was a demand five times higher than the initial offer, which demonstrates the “robustness of the company, its strong governance and above all a regular communication with the market".

Source:

http://www.portugaltelecom.pt/InternetResource/Templates/Print.aspx?GUID=%7BA09E1D50-8BC8-423B-9E10-BB5545B27A4C%7D&LANGUK=True

 

- Recently sold stake in CTM for EUR 330 million:

http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/PT/key-developments/article/2779815

 

- Shares decreased from 1260 to 938 million in about 10 years

 

- 60-80% gross margins

 

- Bestinver presentation from March, 2012 lists a target price of 10.8€ (~4 higher than now):

http://www.slideshare.net/JorgeAlarcnArroyo/xi-conferencia-anual-de-inversores-bestinver

 

More from Bestinver's presentation (Google Translation):

- Portugal Portugal Telecom has one of the best infrastructures in Europe

- It has the largest fixed fiber coverage

- The first ones are investing in 4G. With an estimated coverage of one third of the population in 2013

-  And yet ARPU prices are among the lowest in Europe in mobile and fixed telephony

 

I can hardly understand Spanish. But based on the slides, it seems like their valuation number is based on price/FCF.

Today's environment is tougher than in 2011, and the FCF is negative due to Oi capex.

PT's own FCF seems to be around 85M euro in 2013 Q1, if I exclude the working capital changes. So the current price/FCF would be 7.2 if we assume Oi is worthless and the whole year's FCF is 85x4 Million, which is cheap but not that cheap.

 

They are launching a bunch of services later this year, so if the FCF goes up 50% from the current level, this will be cheap.

[JEast]

I wonder if any would care to place odds on the comparison of NII Holdings (NIHD) vs. Oi S.A. (OIBR).  They both play in the same space and are priced similar, but with much different management styles and business models.

 

I am attracted to the deep value equity candidates, but the overlay of technology and government's heavy hand in Brazil make it hard to get a grasp of a margin-of-safety on either candidate.  On the one hand I have thought that NIHD was a similar type of value call as RIMM, but much cheaper.  But Oi may have better local management and a stronger asset base.  Being an odds maker to determine the best choice is what makes this stuff interesting, does it not?

 

 

Cheers

JEast

[Packer16]

I would favor OIBR due to its larger and more concentrated customer base and its quad-play abilities.  OIBR via PT knows how to play and win in a tough price constrained market. They have developed a low-cost higher margin machine in Portugal.  NIHD is coming from a high priced end of the market and the market size is smaller (only wireless) and always under attack from the lower cost alternatives that may be "good" enough.  I would rather be on the low priced firms side versus the high priced firms in this case,

 

Packer

[muscleman]

Oi 20-F

 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1160846/000119312513187787/0001193125-13-187787-index.htm

 

The principal trading market for our common shares and preferred shares is the BM&FBOVESPA, where they are traded under the symbols “OIBR3” and “OIBR4,” respectively. Our common shares and preferred shares began trading on the BM&FBOVESPA on July 10, 1992. On November 16, 2001, our Preferred ADSs began trading on the NYSE under the symbol “BTM.” On November 17, 2009, our Common ADSs began trading on NYSE under the symbol “BTMC.” On April 9, 2012, the trading symbols for our Preferred ADSs and Common ADSs on the NYSE were changed to “OIBR” and “OIBR.C,” respectively.

 

We have registered our Common ADSs and Preferred ADSs with the SEC pursuant to the Exchange Act. On December 31, 2012, there were 20,146,838 Common ADSs outstanding, representing 20,146,838 common shares, or 3.9% of our outstanding common shares and 168,504,287 Preferred ADSs outstanding, representing 168,504,287 preferred shares, or 15.0% of our outstanding preferred shares.

As of April 25, 2013, we had outstanding share capital of R$7,471,208,836.63, equal to 1,797,086,404 total shares, consisting of 599,008,629 issued common shares and 1,198,077,775 issued preferred shares, including 84,250,695 common shares and 72,808,066 preferred shares held in treasury. All of our outstanding share capital is fully paid. All of our shares are without par value. Under the Brazilian Corporation Law, the aggregate number of our non-voting and limited voting preferred shares may not exceed two-thirds of our total outstanding share capital.

 

Each of our common shares entitles its holder to one vote at our annual and extraordinary shareholders’ meetings. Holders of our common shares are not entitled to any preference in respect of our dividends or other distributions or otherwise in case of our liquidation.

 

Our preferred shares are non-voting, except in limited circumstances, and do not have priority over our common shares in the case of our liquidation. See “—Voting Rights” for information regarding the voting rights of our preferred shares and “Item 8. Financial Information—Dividends and Dividend Policy—Calculation of Adjusted Net Profit” and “—Dividend Preference of Preferred Shares” for information regarding the distribution preferences of our preferred shares.

 

Under our by-laws, our preferred shareholders are entitled to a minimum annual non-cumulative preferential dividend, or the Minimum Preferred Dividend, equal to the greater of (1) 6.0% per year of our share capital divided by our total number of shares, or (2) 3.0% per year of the book value of our shareholders’ equity divided by our total number of shares, before dividends may be paid to our common shareholders. Distributions of dividends in any year are made:

 

• first, to the holders of preferred shares, up to the amount of the Minimum Preferred Dividend for such year;

• then, to the holders of common shares, until the amount distributed in respect of each common share is equal to the amount distributed in respect of each preferred share; and

• thereafter, to the common and preferred shareholders on a pro rata basis.

 

If the Minimum Preferred Dividend is not paid for a period of three years, holders of preferred shares shall be entitled to full voting rights.

 

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5460/9186235259_70e29fecf1_c.jpg

 

Due to this special relationship between preferred and common, I would say when we run a valuation analysis on Oi, such as price/EBITDA, we should take preferred market cap and add it to common's market cap and use that number to run the price/EBITDA ratio.

 

According to the 20-F, net income is 1.7 Bn, D&A 3.7Bn (From their cash flow statement). Interest expense not shown, but from their balance sheet, their long term debt is 30 Bn, so I can assume interest expense is roughly 2 bn. Therefore EBITDA is 4.5 Bn BRL.

Their preferred+common market cap is around 6.5 Bn BRL, so the ratio is 1.44.

 

PT's ratio is around 1.38.

 

Sprint's ratio when it was at the rock bottom of $2.1 last year was 1.2.

 

So I would think this is cheap, but not that cheap given the less stable macro environment.

I am happier to buy PT at 1.38 ratio because it has already completed the 4G upgrade.

 

Sprint and Oi both need a lot of money for 4G upgrade. However, we can view Sprint as a cash cow that generates free cash flow each year until it is dead, if no upgrade. But for Oi, it sounds like the regulators push for a 4G upgrade.

 

What do you think, guys? :)

[Packer16]

I think OIBR's EBITDA for the TTM is closer to R$8.9 billion for 2012 it was R$8.8billion.  See presentations on OIBR web site.  You may also want to add in debt when using EBITDA as this is a measure applicable to both debt and equity.

 

Packer

[muscleman]

I think OIBR's EBITDA for the TTM is closer to R$8.9 billion for 2012 it was R$8.8billion.  See presentations on OIBR web site.  You may also want to add in debt when using EBITDA as this is a measure applicable to both debt and equity.

 

Packer

 

What I actually did here was to use price/EBTDA (No I here). Because I think these companies have very real interest payment and we cannot treat it as if interest payment is non-existing.

I probably made a mistake on the EBTDA. I will double check. :)

[PlanMaestro]

Oi SA : Brazilian Companies Face Hard Times in Capital Markets

http://www.4-traders.com/OI-SA-10413097/news/Oi-SA-Brazilian-Companies-Face-Hard-Times-in-Capital-Markets-17080582/

 

Brazil's Grupo Oi suspends debt sale plans

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/09/brazil-oi-debt-idUSL1N0FF24320130709

[PlanMaestro]

Portugal Telecom: Investing in Fibre Infrastructure in the Downturn. 

http://www.analysysmason.com/About-Us/News/Insight/Portugal-Telecom-fibre-infrastructure-Nov2012/#.Ud5GJWTN7Eh

 

Video: Portugal Telecom's Fiber Play

http://www.fiberevolution.com/2010/03/portugal-telecoms-fiber-play.html

 

Portugal Telecom: FTTH delivers more than telecom

http://www.huawei.com/ilink/en/success-story/HW_047280#.Ud4iU2TN7Eg

 

Fiber to the Premises: Portugal

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiber_to_the_premises_by_country#Portugal

 

Fibre-to-the-home: Why settle for less?

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/0f274cac-176a-11df-87f6-00144feab49a.html#axzz2YZDVEJru