StarHub    Last:1.16    +0.01

Starhub

Why this time dividend apart almost 6 months compare with previous one ? I thought StarHub pay quarterly dividend ?

Integrity      ( Date: 19-Mar-2010 10:07) Posted: Record Date * 22-04-2010   Record Time * 17:00   Date Paid/Payable (if applicable) 07-05-2010   des_khor      ( Date: 16-Mar-2010 18:23) Posted: When is the dividend payable date ?

 

Record Date *	22-04-2010
Record Time *	17:00
Date Paid/Payable (if applicable)	07-05-2010

des_khor      ( Date: 16-Mar-2010 18:23) Posted: When is the dividend payable date ?

 

well done

 

When is the dividend payable date ?

 

With the developments over the past week or so, I believe that the government is trying to arrest the trend of ever escalating content cost that is partly attributed to the exclusivity in the deals. I tend to agree that without intervention, it is very unlikely that ST and SH will come to a common understanding on content sharing. The case in point is the rejection of ST to SH's proposal to carry EPL content over their infra just 2 or 3 months ago. Let's not forget, the government went ahead with full knowledge it will invite criticisms who are advocates of market forces (something they always swear by whenever issues of inflation arise).  Without content sharing, it will mean that end consumers will be inadvertently paying a lot more than their counterparts in other countries for their fix. ST's bid of the EPL have embolden FIFA to ask for exorbitant amount of money for the WC telecast. If the probelm is not nipped in the bud now, it will only get worse and worse. And then we consumers will write in to complain and grumble about why the government didn't do anything back then. So it is ironic that people are berating the government for sending a message to content providers to wise up and play ball. Also, I am aware that the telecast of WC is a political issue in many countries. In some countries, it was even debated in parliments, so it is clear it is close to the hearts of the population. My view is that it is arguable if the content providers will take heed but the message is loud and clear.  

    

des_khor      ( Date: 16-Mar-2010 11:39) Posted: MDA tell the telcos not allow to charge very high fee leh.... xingge      ( Date: 16-Mar-2010 11:37) Posted: Again, the way I see it, there is still competition in bidding because whoever wins the bid essentially owns the content and can charge for it regardless of which set-top box is used to view the content.  MDA is just saving the trouble of households from having to use 2 or 3 set-top boxes for the various contents.  Of course, I could be wrong in my analysis.

 

MDA tell the telcos not allow to charge very high fee leh....

xingge      ( Date: 16-Mar-2010 11:37) Posted: Again, the way I see it, there is still competition in bidding because whoever wins the bid essentially owns the content and can charge for it regardless of which set-top box is used to view the content.  MDA is just saving the trouble of households from having to use 2 or 3 set-top boxes for the various contents.  Of course, I could be wrong in my analysis. des_khor      ( Date: 16-Mar-2010 11:31) Posted: In the first place the Singapore goverment shouldn't interfere at all since allowing more telcos to provide pay TV services. We are compete in free and fair market environment ... Why not I suggest our gorverment going to bid the exclusive right and let our three telco to pay 1/3 fee each to provide to the consumers ? In this way will be very fair and square right

 

Again, the way I see it, there is still competition in bidding because whoever wins the bid essentially owns the content and can charge for it regardless of which set-top box is used to view the content.  MDA is just saving the trouble of households from having to use 2 or 3 set-top boxes for the various contents.  Of course, I could be wrong in my analysis.

des_khor      ( Date: 16-Mar-2010 11:31) Posted: In the first place the Singapore goverment shouldn't interfere at all since allowing more telcos to provide pay TV services. We are compete in free and fair market environment ... Why not I suggest our gorverment going to bid the exclusive right and let our three telco to pay 1/3 fee each to provide to the consumers ? In this way will be very fair and square right ? xingge      ( Date: 16-Mar-2010 11:18) Posted: You misunderstand.  The winning bidder gets to charge for the content no matter what provider (mio or starhub) the household is using. The only thing the winning bidder is unsure of is if they can charge for the rental of the set-top boxes or related services.  The way I see it, I'd rather just sell the content and not be bothered with the technical support of the set-top boxes - unless the margins are high for set-top box rental and support.  Right or wrong?

 

In the first place the Singapore goverment shouldn't interfere at all since allowing more telcos to provide pay TV services. We are compete in free and fair market environment ... Why not I suggest our gorverment going to bid the exclusive right and let our three telco to pay 1/3 fee each to provide to the consumers ? In this way will be very fair and square right ?

xingge      ( Date: 16-Mar-2010 11:18) Posted: You misunderstand.  The winning bidder gets to charge for the content no matter what provider (mio or starhub) the household is using. The only thing the winning bidder is unsure of is if they can charge for the rental of the set-top boxes or related services.  The way I see it, I'd rather just sell the content and not be bothered with the technical support of the set-top boxes - unless the margins are high for set-top box rental and support.  Right or wrong? tonylim      ( Date: 16-Mar-2010 10:44) Posted: Then who is so silly to bid and pay for other subscribers to view.  Maybe, there could be a small fees payable to the successful bidder.  True - mio reception suck

 

You misunderstand.  The winning bidder gets to charge for the content no matter what provider (mio or starhub) the household is using. The only thing the winning bidder is unsure of is if they can charge for the rental of the set-top boxes or related services.  The way I see it, I'd rather just sell the content and not be bothered with the technical support of the set-top boxes - unless the margins are high for set-top box rental and support.

 Right or wrong?

tonylim      ( Date: 16-Mar-2010 10:44) Posted: Then who is so silly to bid and pay for other subscribers to view.  Maybe, there could be a small fees payable to the successful bidder.  True - mio reception sucks xingge      ( Date: 16-Mar-2010 10:35) Posted: The way I see it is this: "shared content" only means that, for example, Singtel can carry content XYZ which belongs to Starhub, acquired after 12 Mar 2010.  Money for XYZ will go to Starhub although viewed on Mio.  So, perhaps we have to see how many households have only Mio.  These households now could view XYZ and this means increased revenue to Starhub.  With the new MDA ruling, there'll be less incentive for households to switch to one or the other - except maybe for EPL.  So, content will rule.  And given that Mio is not as stable and has received bad press, Starhub is likely to gain market share as far as content is concerned.  My 2 cents.

 

Then who is so silly to bid and pay for other subscribers to view.  Maybe, there could be a small fees payable to the successful bidder.  True - mio reception sucks

xingge      ( Date: 16-Mar-2010 10:35) Posted: The way I see it is this: "shared content" only means that, for example, Singtel can carry content XYZ which belongs to Starhub, acquired after 12 Mar 2010.  Money for XYZ will go to Starhub although viewed on Mio.  So, perhaps we have to see how many households have only Mio.  These households now could view XYZ and this means increased revenue to Starhub.  With the new MDA ruling, there'll be less incentive for households to switch to one or the other - except maybe for EPL.  So, content will rule.  And given that Mio is not as stable and has received bad press, Starhub is likely to gain market share as far as content is concerned.  My 2 cents.

 

cheapest and best services win. so who?

 

The way I see it is this: "shared content" only means that, for example, Singtel can carry content XYZ which belongs to Starhub, acquired after 12 Mar 2010.  Money for XYZ will go to Starhub although viewed on Mio.  So, perhaps we have to see how many households have only Mio.  These households now could view XYZ and this means increased revenue to Starhub.  With the new MDA ruling, there'll be less incentive for households to switch to one or the other - except maybe for EPL.  So, content will rule.  And given that Mio is not as stable and has received bad press, Starhub is likely to gain market share as far as content is concerned.

 My 2 cents.

 

should take profit now

 

StarHub TP S$2.06?

sO CFDs ?

 

incase anyone is harboring thoughts that the latest developments are a boon for Starhub, think again...

its not hard to figure why SingTel stands to gain more......read on...

The Media Development Authority (MDA) finally announced mandatory content-sharing for content whose agreement is

signed after 12 March 2010. In the near term, except football world cup rights, not many channels are up for renewal. The

impact would be felt over the long-term and likely to be positive for challenger SingTel. Besides EPL, SingTel does not

have much attractive content, as StarHub holds majority of the popular channels exclusively. In the long term, (i) Incumbent

StarHub would lose its content-advantage offset to some extent by lower content cost. (ii) Challenger SingTel would

benefit in both content line up and cost. (iii) Better case for M1 to enter IPTV business, riding on National Broadband

Network (NBN) and shared content. Maintain Buy on SingTel (TP: S$3.50) and M1 (TP: S$2.15); Fully Valued on StarHub (TP:

S$2.06).

 

 

KiLrOy      ( Date: 15-Mar-2010 21:17) Posted: If they merge after a while the other half of ppl will say the company is monopolizing the industry,,, never end will it?  As long as consumers benefit from this saga, just let it be.  Among all 3, M1 benefits most says one of the leading investment house. pharoah88      ( Date: 15-Mar-2010 18:00) Posted: MERGE ALL THREE TELCOS  to ACHIEVE QUANTUM ECONOMY OF SCALE  and REAP the BENEFIT of LEAST COST and MOST PROFITS. LIKE the MERGE of all bus companies into SBS before. WHY hire THREE CEOs and THREE CFOs and THREE BOARDS when the shareholders can just pay for ONE SET of CEO, CFO and BOARD?

 

If they merge after a while the other half of ppl will say the company is monopolizing the industry,,, never end will it?  As long as consumers benefit from this saga, just let it be.  Among all 3, M1 benefits most says one of the leading investment house.

pharoah88      ( Date: 15-Mar-2010 18:00) Posted: MERGE ALL THREE TELCOS  to ACHIEVE QUANTUM ECONOMY OF SCALE  and REAP the BENEFIT of LEAST COST and MOST PROFITS. LIKE the MERGE of all bus companies into SBS before. WHY hire THREE CEOs and THREE CFOs and THREE BOARDS when the shareholders can just pay for ONE SET of CEO, CFO and BOARD?

 

SH has broken up of an ascending triangle with increased volume (twice of 3 month average). Next stop $2.30. For those who miss the boat, it is still relatively cheap at this price, with PE 12 and Dividend Yield 8.6%.

 

MERGE ALL THREE TELCOS  to ACHIEVE QUANTUM ECONOMY OF SCALE  and REAP the BENEFIT of LEAST COST and MOST PROFITS.

LIKE the MERGE of all bus companies into SBS before.

WHY hire THREE CEOs and THREE CFOs and THREE BOARDS when the shareholders can just pay for ONE SET of CEO, CFO and BOARD?

 

The rOOt  Of  this MARKET DISTORTION  is that

SingTel,  M1,  StarHub  are in one way or another  inter-related.

The sO call  cOmpetitiOn  is  REALLY  iNTERNAL  and  CLOSED.

Why waste so much  TIME and MONEY to pUt Up  this 

iN-hOuse cOmpetitiOn  shOw Like MAGIC?

just let the authOrity be the State ISP will do iNstead of wasting resources.

 

anOther  blOOdy  jOkE

 

pharoah88      ( Date: 15-Mar-2010 16:28) Posted: The OUTCOME of this MARKET DISTORTION is to INCREASE COSTS, PRICES, INFLATION to the players, consumers, investors and ENRICH  SOMEBODY.

 

TRACE  the  mOney and sEE  whO  rEcEive  it.