Disclaimer: This site has been first put up 15 years ago. Since then I would probably do a couple things differently, but because I've noticed this site had been linked from news outlets, PhD theses and peer rewieved papers and because I really hate the concept of "digital dark age" I've decided to put it back up. There's no chance it can produce any harm now.
| Identifier: | 02ABUJA1024 |
|---|---|
| Wikileaks: | View 02ABUJA1024 at Wikileaks.org |
| Origin: | Embassy Abuja |
| Created: | 2002-03-28 09:59:00 |
| Classification: | UNCLASSIFIED |
| Tags: | EFIN ECON BEXP ECPS EINV PGOV NI |
| Redacted: | This cable was not redacted by Wikileaks. |
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 ABUJA 001024 SIPDIS DEPT PASS TO EXIM, OPIC LONDON FOR AFRICA WATCHERS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: EFIN, ECON, BEXP, ECPS, EINV, PGOV, NI SUBJECT: NIGERIA: NITEL PRIVATIZATION HITS DEAD-END AS IIL FAILS TO MEET PAYMENT DEADLINE REF: LAGOS 597 1. Summary: Investors International (London), Ltd. (IIL) was unable to meet the GON deadline for its $1.185 billion payment for NITEL. The GON must now decide what to do with NITEL, IIL, and the privatization process. Of immediate issue is whether the GON will refund IIL,s 10% deposit. Through its loan to IIL for the purchase of NITEL, First Bank of Nigeria is deeply exposed and may face financial losses; however, FBN will no doubt weather the storm. The same cannot be said about the GON privatization process and the future of NITEL. End Summary. ------------------------------------------- IIL Fails to Come Up with a Billion - Plus ------------------------------------------- 2. Investors International (London), Ltd. (IIL), the preferred bidder for Nigeria Telecommunications Limited (NITEL), failed to meet the March 26 deadline for payment of the outstanding balance ($1.185 billion) to purchase 51 percent of NITEL. IIL had earlier deposited 10 percent of the total bid price ($1.318 billion) as a non-refundable earnest money deposit. This latest collapse follows IIL,s inability to raise enough capital to meet an earlier February deadline. At that time the Bureau for Public Enterprises (the GON privatization agency) acceded to IIL,s request for a six weeks extension to obtain the needed financing. Initially, IIL had hoped to raise roughly half of the financing from the international capital market. This did not happen as investor interest abroad did not materialize. Compounding this problem was the reported failure of the core investors to come up with the approximately $500 million that they had earlier promised. While the soft world telecom market did not help IIL,s efforts, a perception that IIL grossly overbid for NITEL essentially sealed their fate. ---------------------------- Where Does BPE Go from Here? ---------------------------- 3. With the IIL purchase of NITEL in tatters, BPE is weighing one or several possible options. However, the Presidency, not the BPE, will ultimately decide the issue. The identified options are: -- To commence negotiations with Newtel, the third-ranked bidder with an offer price of $1.02 billion. (The second-ranked bidder, Telnet, has withdrawn its offer.) -- To re-advertise the NITEL bid and start over. -- To develop more efficient service and improve NITEL's competitiveness by entering into a management contract with a private telecommunications operator to manage a government-owned NITEL. One possible partner mentioned was Korea Telecom. -- To sell 20 percent of the GON's 49 percent holdings on the Nigerian Stock Exchange. 4. A secondary, but important, issue related to IIL's failed bid is whether to refund IIL's 10 percent deposit of $131.7 million. According to the bid offer terms, the 10 percent deposit is nonrefundable and the BPE has formally recommended to the President that the deposit not be refunded. (If BPE retains the IIL earnest money, BPE would cut its losses.) On the other hand, the GON knows that harsh treatment of IIL does its future privatization efforts no good. One compromise the GON is weighing is to provide IIL a 5 percent equity stake in NITEL as compensation for its lost deposit. Such an offer might be unattractive to IIL, especially since any future dividends from NITEL would be many years away. --------------------------------------------- ----------- Does Earlier Treatment of CIL Come Back to Bite the GON? --------------------------------------------- ----------- 5. Ironically, any decision to be lenient with IIL calls into question the GON,s earlier treatment of Communication Investment Limited (CIL) during the 2001 GSM auction process. Along with Econet and MTN, CIL had agreed to pay $285 million, the bid price, for a GSM license. However, the license was promptly revoked when the group failed to meet the strict deadline for deposit of the funds into the GON account at Chase Manhattan Bank, New York. Despite extensive and highly publicized efforts by CIL to get the GON to reconsider what many felt was an unduly harsh application of the auction payment rules, the Government (in the person of Nigerian Communications Commission Vice Chairman Ernest Ndukwe) refused to overrule the decision. That decision may now come back to haunt the GON (which, some surmise, had its own reasons for treating CIL so rigidly.) -------------------------------------- A Fine Mess for First Bank of Nigeria? -------------------------------------- 6. Another critical issue to be considered is the potential financial impact from the IIL debacle on First Bank of Nigeria (FBN), Nigeria,s oldest and largest bank. No doubt First Bank,s image will be bruised. FBN lent $96 million (in dollars) to IIL for the down payment on the winning NITEL bid, and broke numerous Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) rules to do so. First, the amount lent to IIL by FBN almost doubled the CBN,s single obligor lending limit of 35 percent -- and the CBN has already threatened First Bank with sanctions for doing so. FBN also failed to report to CBN the amount as a loan. But the terms of FBN,s role in the IIL bid were never a secret and some people question why the CBN waited until now to make a fuss. A more appropriate question though is why did FBN so blatantly ignore the rules? One speculative answer may be that the temptation to acquire monopolistic leverage over Nigeria,s telecom sector was just too much for Nigeria,s most market-focused, domineering bank to pass up. But only FBN management knows the truth. 7. While First Bank,s image among those in the know has no doubt been severely tarnished, the impact on Bank operations may not be that great. First Bank Managing Director Bernard Longe told Econcouns that he believed it is highly unlikely the deposit will be forfeited (wishful thinking?). But any write-off of the loan, in what Longe described as a worse case scenario, could be easily spread over 2-3 years. FBN would appear to be in a relatively good position to absorb the loss, if necessary. Longe indicated that FBN,s profit during the last nine months was N7 billion (about $60 million.) In recent weeks FBN,s stock price has remained relatively stable and there is no evidence of distress caused by panicky depositors. Smart investors in FBN probably already had discounted the impact of the NITEL debacle on the Bank,s share prices. 8. On the contrary, an unrelated development actually is helping FBN. The CBN,s suspension last week of 21 commercial banks from transacting foreign exchange under the Interbank Foreign Exchange Market (IFEM) serves to encourage customers seeking safety to retreat to First Bank, long considered the bastion of safe banking in Nigeria. A banking crisis among Nigeria,s weaker institutions actually is good for FBN. -------------------------------------------- Privatization: This Is Not BPE's Finest Hour -------------------------------------------- 9. The collapse of IIL's bid represents a major setback to the GON's privatization program and the prestige of the BPE. Many observers had cited the NITEL sale as an important success story for Nigeria ) a success story now beset by controversy, certain complication and potential failure. Never popular with Nieria's elites accustomed to making use of the patronage possibilities offered by state-owned enterprises, BPE now faces serious questions about its handling of the NITEL privatization in public hearings by the House of Representatives. These hearings might make potential foreign investors even more wary of NITEL. The pending decision on the disposal of the 10 percent down payment might also have an impact on the future of the privatization program. Notwithstanding CIL, investors might lose interest in participating in Nigeria,s privatization process if the investment risks are perceived as too great. 10. The effect of an eventual outright forfeiture of IIL's deposit on Nigeria's financial sector is not likely to be as severe as reported in the Nigerian press. Managing Director Longe might not be so lucky. Despite whatever becomes of the earnest money deposit and of First Bank's fate, other Nigerian financial institutions will be shy to lend on any future NITEL bid process and will participate reticently in any large privatization purchase. 11. All agree NITEL was hugely overbid. In the domestic market, the GON's move to license a second national carrier, combined with the successful GSM licensing in 2001, continues to reduce NITEL's prospective profitability. Moreover, the NITEL privatization process, at the direction of President Obasanjo, was implemented faster than many expected with perhaps not enough due diligence on the financial standing of the bidders. BPE did not provide IIL enough of a cushion, less than three short months plus six weeks, to pull such a huge financial deal. Finally, the recently announced &separation8 between the IMF and the GON could not have come at a worse time for the NITEL privatization. With world telecom markets already suffering, investors in the telecom industry will not view Nigeria as fertile ground in which to plant their money. Jeter
Latest source of this page is cablebrowser-2, released 2011-10-04