The spleen files: The rage of Telstra shareholders

Oct 7, 2009 11:15 AM
Filed under Telco/ISP

Communications Minister's hate mail arrives.

Senator Stephen Conroy is a "Communist" hellbent on destroying Telstra out of "ego" and "spite", according to submissions from Telstra shareholders to a Senate Standing Committee inquiry into the Communications Ministers' plan to split Telstra.

Submissions to the inquiry into the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Competition and Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2009 are due by midnight. Those posted to the Australian Parliament House website are mostly from Telstra shareholders expressing their disgust at Conroy's plan to split Telstra's wholesale and retail arm.

iTnews has collated some of the more explosive comments:

1. YOURS IN DISGUST
- Peter Thornhill

"As a long-suffering shareholder of Telstra I am amazed at the 'spiteful' way in which this Government is attacking shareholders. Yours in disgust."

2. IT'S IMMORAL
- Frank Johnson

"I bought my Telstra shares in good faith from the Government. I feel that it is quite immoral of you to now reduce the value of that enterprise by forcing it to off load a major part of it's operation."

3. WHAT MONOPOLY?
- Tony Bergman

"Telstra is not a monopoly, with the company having around a 40 percent share in the mobile and internet broadband sectors. Forcing the break-up of this company by the Federal Government seems unbelievable to me in our free, democratic society which our forefathers fought for. If this is Constitutional, who or what could the next target be?

4. WHAT ABOUT WOOLWORTHS, FOR THAT MATTER?
- Ken Jones

"I am amazed that the Government can dictate that a public company like Telstra must be broken up. Surely Woolworths has at least 40 percent of the Australian retail grocery market, will the Government next be asking Woolworths to sell down part of their holding, too?"

5. IT'S BLACKMAIL
- David Lunn

"Please stop it and stop it now as it also severely impacting on the market price of the assets we have all paid for and sold to by the very same government now exercising thievery and blackmail. Who will benefit from this change - a foreign company like Optus (Singapore) or other players that are not Australian-owned or operated. What other country on the planet would connive an idea that is so not in the interests of its own citizens?"

6. IT'S INSIDER TRADING
- Wade McGirr

"It raises serious concerns given the timing of the Government's exit from the stock and the more recent reduction of holding in the Future Fund."

7. THE GODFATHER
- Richard Zielinski

"Your actions in this instance replicate nothing short of a Mafia standover tactic and cannot be interpreted in any other comprehensible way."

8. BLAME THE KIWIS!
- Greg Lane

"I have taken a quick look at the companies who want Telstra broken up. Optus and Powertel [owned by Telecom New Zealand] are overseas companies, their interests aren't in the Australian people. They want more income to pass on to their relevant shareholders in other countries.

"Bottom line is I bought a company from the Government in the form of Telstra. The Government took my money, spent my money and is now coming back to destroy value in my company."

9. IT'S AN EGO TRIP BY A BULLY
- Frederic Materne

"Why is Telstra being singled out as the whipping boy by a politician who is on an ego trip and who's ego is being fed by self-interested parties?

"I request a challenge to the government's plans in the high court as what they are doing is clearly unconstitutional - actually this is just a bullying exercise of the worse kind."

10. IT'S COMMUNISM
- Michael Rosenthal

"This is supposed to be a democracy and now we have a government telling a public company that they must break up. This ... only happens in a Communist company. This proposal by Senator Conroy is a disgrace and draconian."

- Brett Rosenthal

"It is absolutely outrageous for the Australian Government to command a publicly listed company to sell its assets. The only precedence for this type of behaviour is from the Dictator Hugo Chavez in Venezuela and also by the old Communist Soviet Union or China."

The spleen files: The rage of Telstra shareholders

11 comments in this discussion

"@Bob, if you're going to quote history, you should at least try to get your facts right. Many Telstra shares are in foreign hands, not Australian. All the major figures aren't up, in fact in ..."

By anonymous

Tags

telstra, shareholder, anger, stephen, conroy

Conroy feared giving Telstra $20bn war chest

Conroy plays down Telstra LTE threat to NBN

ACCC declares Telstra wholesale pricing

Federal Court prepares for Optus TV Now appeal

Breaking Stories

Roses Only goes with its heart for hosting

Bankwest credits IT for flat operating expenses

Conroy warns of cloud uncertainties

Hiring strategy vital to government IT transformation

Melbourne scientists ready 2013 bionic eye trial

Comments: 11

singo79 Oct 7, 2009 4:48 PM	I have no sympathy for any of the Telstra shareholders, in fact I am completely behind the Government on this one. Telstra shareholders should have seen the writing on the wall many years ago, but their greed got in the road and now they are about to pay for it. They will get what they deserve and the Australian public will finally be set free from the hateful company that is Telstra. Great work Conroy, you have the vast majority of Australia behind you, don't worry about the small minority that are Telstra shareholders as they are of little meaning in the grand scale of things. If you want to break the monolopy in Australia then you need to separate Telstra, there is no other way of break their grip on the Telco market. I can't wait for the day that Telstra are separated and competition will reign supreme!
notsoflyingdutchman Oct 7, 2009 6:28 PM	Like singo, I have no sympathy for shareholders - whilst it may have 40% of the market for mobile & internet, it has some 90% of the wholesale market, which is the asset the government wants to sell. mind you, shouldn't expect too much from people that don't actually know an actual definition of communism; or compare the nationalization of private assets (what Chavex in Venezuela did) with a breaking up a monopoly into multiple publicly listed corporate entities. The one criticism I do agree with is Wade's (#6), but good luck prosecuting that one !
tallguy Oct 7, 2009 7:44 PM	Government regulation is one of the risks any investor needs to consider, so in that context you could say that the current shareholders of Telstra took a bet and lost. However, I do find it a bit "on the nose" that the government should privatise the company and then do this. On the whole it is a good idea, but maybe a better idea would be to buy the company back and then they can do what they want with it. Fair compensation for shareholders could be another reasonable solution.
Oldsniper Oct 8, 2009 1:18 AM	These shareholders bought into telstra knowing that the regulations would change, they were stupid IF they didnt. Howards liberals did so much damage to Australian telecommunications by not having much stronger regulations in place. Now the following governments are forced to fix that glaring mistake. Howard did a lot of damage whilst in power right across the board. IE the high rents, house prices, lack of housing(public and private), the mess that is telecommunications, the duopoly that is Woolworths and Coles, lack of skilled trades-people can ALL be laid at Howards door. Telstra shareholders were always going to be the rabbits in the headlights, when it came time to fix up the problems caused by the Liberals under Howard, Costello and Minchin in Telecommunications. If Telstra's shareholders want someone to blame blame the above three, for they are the ones largely responsible, with help from Ziggy, Sol, Bob and Donald.
mick09 Oct 8, 2009 7:26 AM	Singo79, you talk of shareholder "greed" and the "hateful company that is Telstra" - then you dream "competition will reign supreme" - from a government-owned (at least for 13 years, though many predict for ever) monopoly called NBNCo - a total blank cheque for $43 billion with no costing. Can't wait to see the vitriol coming from you when you get your first NBN bill.
mick09 Oct 8, 2009 7:33 AM	Oldsniper, how you found your way into ITnews, I don't know - perhaps you could apply for a job in Senator Conroy's office - he could use an old-fashioned orator like you to distract us from the shambles that is NBN.
anonymous Oct 8, 2009 7:49 AM	To state the obvious, there are competing interests between investors and the customers who have had to put up with profiteering and poor service from the corporation. Investors love monopolies because they have the potential to screw the punters. It seems that some people decided the government would be too craven to fix the monopolisation, and took an investment punt accordingly. Fortunately they were wrong about the determination of the present govt to protect the interests of 22 million people. Everybody in this country needs fair access to modern communications at fair prices, and this national interest is far more important than allowing a fixed-line monopoly to continue to act as it has.
mick09 Oct 8, 2009 11:25 AM	To state the obvious, anonymous, the proposed anti-Telstra legislation is designed to remove any competition from NBNCo. Will NBNCo be a benign monopoly? Will it be determined to protect the interests of 22 million people, with seed capital of $43 billion? I'd sooner buy a used ute - at least I could test drive it first and haggle over the price a bit?
PMM Oct 8, 2009 12:21 PM	Just negotiate a fair compensation with Telstra shareholders and lets get on with it. Our country will remain in the telecommunications dark ages while they quibble over a couple of bucks. I bet none of then kicked up a stink with Sol's large salary and payout for sending Telstra up a one way street. On the alternative we could just leave Telstra out of it altogether and start afresh. A lot of Telstra customers only use them because ther is no other option. Lets see how the Telstra shares will fair when there are other options.
Bob Oct 9, 2009 10:04 AM	#Singo, Telstra shareholders are 1.4 Million AUSTRALIAN Mums and Dads, and they all vote. Fortunately for shareholders, (largely through Sol, PMM) all the major figures of sales, ROI etc are up significantly despite the so called financial crisis. That is because they invested heavily into new technology which is world leading. At the end of the day the total Australian market is only 21 million people or about 1% of China where they have invested well. I wonder what would happen if Telstra just stopped investing in Australia at all?
anonymous Oct 9, 2009 4:11 PM	@Bob, if you're going to quote history, you should at least try to get your facts right. Many Telstra shares are in foreign hands, not Australian. All the major figures aren't up, in fact in network and fixed-line services, where the NBN debate is focussed, some numbers have been declining. The Australian market is now more than 22 million (which is 1.7per cent of China), and Telstra is said to have lost heavily on some overseas investments. Finally, it is likely that nothing adverse would happen if they stopped investing here, in fact other companies would quickly fill any gap and would be likely to provide much better service and pricing. The 22 million people depending on good communications in Australia deserve a better deal than in the past, and it's good to know that at last we have a government who are competent and strong enough to level the playing field.