Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Business

Beyond the expected

iiNet to buy TransACT?

By johnboy 16 November 2011 28

screenshot

The Register is carrying speculation that TransACT is about to be bought by the generally excellent iiNet ISP:

Speculation that TransACT is for sale has popped up on a fairly regular basis as far back as 2004, and in 2009, but this time, the Australian Financial Review is reporting “final negotiations” from behind its paywall.

TransACT was an early entrant into infrastructure-based competition in Australia, building a fibre / VDSL network in Australia’s capital that was established in 2000. As well as its network operations, the carrier operates data centres in the ACT, and in 2008 acquired Victorian regional HFC network operator Neighborhood Cable.

Acquisition of TransACT would give iiNet more than just a residential network: over time, the company has also made its way into both state and federal government agencies. The Canberra company also claims 5,000 SME customers, a market that iiNet is increasingly targeting with new services.

UPDATE: Smart Company is reporting a trading halt on iiNet amidst speculation they’re about to announce the move:

Telco iiNet has been placed in a trading halt ahead of what is reported to be a move to acquire Canberra ISP TransACT.

The move comes after the Australian Financial Review this morning reported the company has been speaking with ISP TransACT and that negotiations were in a late stage.

Such a deal would see iiNet take control over some infrastructure elements including networks in Canberra and Victoria.

The move comes after iiNet has already bought out AAPT’s residential customer base earlier this year.

iiNet has requested a trading halt until Friday, or until it makes an announcement.

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
28 Responses to
iiNet to buy TransACT?
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
dungfungus 3:27 pm 17 Nov 11

Grail said :

dungfungus said :

This maybe is great news for ratepayers because we might get back the $80 million odd that Actew and their associate companies have written off investing in TransACT.

There are a lot of investors out there who don’t understand the difference between “real estate” and “infrastructure”. You don’t make a profit trading infrastructure: the whole point is that you write off that capital expenditure with the aim of making a profit on the services provided: this is almost exactly the opposite of real estate where you rent the place out in the short term to offset your losses, with the aim being to make money from selling the property once its value has increased.

Your point regarding Actew blowing our $80 million is?

Grrrr 1:46 pm 17 Nov 11

thatsnotme said :

My question is why, with a business that requires reliable internet connectivity, this situation was allowed to go on for 4 years? Surely issues like this would have caused you to investigate alternatives that were more reliable and met your business needs?

Is it not also possible, that the cause of some of these issues, could be the relationship between TransACT (who, it seems, are also an ISP under a different name) and the ISP, and that iiNet may have been having difficulty with this relationship? The fact that they have mentioned withdrawing from their relationship with TransACT, and not expanding their services through them, seems to suggest that they just couldn’t operate their business properly through the TransACT network.

That’s something I’d believe, too. I’m an Internode customer, on an ADSL2+ connection, and I’ve seen the question asked on Whirlpool in the past – ‘why aren’t Internode a TransACT ISP?’ It seems that TransACT just weren’t interested in them providing services on their network, and eventually Internode just gave up – not surprising really, given the size of the Canberra market.

The sooner TransACT is run by a mob with half a clue, the better we’ll be. Until it’s sold off to the NBN at least (if they even want it).

This. All of it.

Internode didn’t become a TransACT ISP mostly because they want Layer 2 connectivity (as is typical of any resold broadband service) and TransACT only provide Layer 3.

iiNet were not interested in ramping up their TransACT operations probably because it’s a lot cheaper for them to have a customer on their own port (iiNet DSLAMs) than on a TransACT port. L2/L3 night have been part of it, too.

Grail 1:15 pm 17 Nov 11

dungfungus said :

This maybe is great news for ratepayers because we might get back the $80 million odd that Actew and their associate companies have written off investing in TransACT.

There are a lot of investors out there who don’t understand the difference between “real estate” and “infrastructure”. You don’t make a profit trading infrastructure: the whole point is that you write off that capital expenditure with the aim of making a profit on the services provided: this is almost exactly the opposite of real estate where you rent the place out in the short term to offset your losses, with the aim being to make money from selling the property once its value has increased.

dungfungus 10:57 am 17 Nov 11

schmeah said :

great, so I just signed up for bundling services and spent all day yesterday trying to get onto Grapevine to assist with setting up my account .. and all my phone calls and emails went unanswered despite how long I waited on the phone.

Do you think they are trying to tell you something?

schmeah 10:48 am 17 Nov 11

great, so I just signed up for bundling services and spent all day yesterday trying to get onto Grapevine to assist with setting up my account .. and all my phone calls and emails went unanswered despite how long I waited on the phone.

Chop71 10:04 am 17 Nov 11

dungfungus said :

This maybe is great news for ratepayers because we might get back the $80 million odd that Actew and their associate companies have written off investing in TransACT. Can the ACT Government then please legislate to stop them rushing off to blow our money into another crazy scheme?
S***! – I just remembered someone with strong Actew connections is looking for $30 million for an ampitheatre in the bush. Oh well, I guess we will have to settle for $50 million.

Ecowise, Ecowise VIC and Grapevine, god bless your cotton socks ACTEW

No wonder their books are no longer available to the public.

thatsnotme 10:05 pm 16 Nov 11

sebrey said :

I find this very hard to believe. As a long time iinet customer with work, and over the last 4 odd years through Transact broadband with iinet ISP, we have gone away from them, due to their unreliabilty and thieving over use charges. IINET were only able to supply a 40Gb/month connection, and as we went over this we would get a notice a week after the fact with a $1000 over use bill and service suspension without notice. When contacted, the money paid, their stupid system would run again for a few hours and disconnect again, due to a fault in their system not applying the payment. In a business that requires reliable internet connectivity this was not satisfactory.
IINET’s information when questioned regarding upping our bandwidth was that they were moving away from the Transact network and only supporting the bear minimum with existing clients.

For my sake I hope they don’t get to take over Transact.

My question is why, with a business that requires reliable internet connectivity, this situation was allowed to go on for 4 years? Surely issues like this would have caused you to investigate alternatives that were more reliable and met your business needs?

Is it not also possible, that the cause of some of these issues, could be the relationship between TransACT (who, it seems, are also an ISP under a different name) and the ISP, and that iiNet may have been having difficulty with this relationship? The fact that they have mentioned withdrawing from their relationship with TransACT, and not expanding their services through them, seems to suggest that they just couldn’t operate their business properly through the TransACT network.

That’s something I’d believe, too. I’m an Internode customer, on an ADSL2+ connection, and I’ve seen the question asked on Whirlpool in the past – ‘why aren’t Internode a TransACT ISP?’ It seems that TransACT just weren’t interested in them providing services on their network, and eventually Internode just gave up – not surprising really, given the size of the Canberra market.

The sooner TransACT is run by a mob with half a clue, the better we’ll be. Until it’s sold off to the NBN at least (if they even want it).

thatsnotme 9:48 pm 16 Nov 11

Grrrr said :

The more expensive plan has faster line rates. However, some idiot up top of TransACT decided that a recent ACCC ruling meant that they couldn’t advertise line rates anymore.

Ha, that’s got to be one of the most ridiculous things I’ve ever seen! However, this is TransACT we’re talking about, so I find myself believing that this is entirely possible. I don’t suppose you have a link to any info on the ACCC ruling? I’m curious as to what the ACCC could possibly have ruled on to lead to such a stupid decision.

I just find it extraordinary that any company would give potential customers the choice between two different packages (eg, if you just wanted phone and internet, you have the choice between ‘TalkWEB Zoom’ and ‘TalkWEB Rapid’), with absolutely zero explanation of what the difference between the packages is – aside from one being $10 a month more expensive. As far as I can see, the only place on the new website that these packages are mentioned, are in the drop down box where you make that choice. Seems kinda like heading to a restaurant, and getting a menu with ‘Option 1’ and ‘Option 2’ as the only text.

Grrrr said :

There’s no official mention of TransACT being sold either – and TransACT has owned 100% of Grapevine for a little while now, so it seems reasonable to assume Grapevine is included in the sale.

True, the talk of TransACT being sold to iiNet is speculation until an official announcement is made, but it seems like the pieces are all falling in place.

I didn’t realise that Grapevine was 100% owned by TransACT. Given that iiNet are a TransACT ISP, I guess they would just look to transfer all the Grapevine customers over to themselves, and kill off Grapevine as an ISP. It makes no sense to own two separate ISP’s on a network that you also own. It’ll be interesting to see whether iiNet, should they buy TransACT, then go and make iiNet the default choice for ISP, a-la Grapevine – their website almost makes it seem to be your only choice – or if they’re more interested in running it as an open network.

Whatever happens, I can only see the possibility that iiNet purchases TransACT as a positive thing. They can’t possibly make a bigger hash of things than TransACT have for the past 10 years or so!

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site