News
Tunisian operator remains upbeat about Maltese quad-play acquisition, despite lack of support from smaller shareholders.
Minority shareholders in Malta’s Go have for the most part rejected a controversial takeover offer from Tunisie Telecom, figures shared by the company last week showed.
Tunisie Telecom offered €2.87 per share for the quad-play provider in June and set a 24 June-22 July acceptance period for shareholders.
As of the close of the acceptance period, holders of 66.28 million Go shares – or around 65.4% of its issued share capital – had agreed to take up the offer, Go announced late last week.
However, Go’s largest shareholder, Emirates International Telecommunications (EIT), had already indicated that it would accept the offer. Given that it holds 60% of the company, the figures mean that only a small number of minority shareholders are willing to sell their shares.
Nonetheless, Tunisie Telecom talked up the "success" of the offer.
"We are delighted with the results of the offer and the level of acceptances received," Nizar Bouguila, Tunisie Telecom CEO said in a statement shared by Go.
"While it is important that minority shareholders who wished to take the opportunity to participate in the offer were able to do so, it has always been our intention to have a strong, supportive local shareholder base and that Go retains its status as a distinct Maltese listed company," Bouguila insisted.
"We believe that local Maltese support will be essential in ensuring the success of our proposed strong trans-Mediterranean telecoms partnership, and we want Go to be a key pillar of that," he said.
Go shareholders who have accepted the offer will receive their payouts in cash once the deal has closed, Go said, noting that the transaction is still subject to the satisfaction of various conditions.
The deal is also the subject of regulatory scrutiny, due to the fact that EIT also holds a 35% stake in Tunisie Telecom.
Last month the Times of Malta reported that regulatory bodies in both Malta and Tunisia are examining the deal due to the potential conflict of interests created by that cross-ownership issue.
