Telecom Operators as an Investment

I opened this thread at the request of the legendary @Divinesia. I am not an expert in anything, especially not in this field, but I hope this thread will be useful for investors through high-quality investment-related discussion.

This thread is dedicated to the telecommunications sector and its companies - from an investment perspective. Its idea is similar to our IT services sector thread – the purpose is to provide a common discussion thread for the industry and its players, for whom there may not be a need to create a separate thread.

Here you can discuss telecommunications companies in general, their market situation, industry trends, and potential investment prospects. Hopefully, this will generate excellent discussion, and companies in the sector can indeed be brought up here with a lower threshold. :blush:

Company threads for the sector, if you want to discuss specifically only these companies:

Telia

Elisa

Vodafone

North American operator thread:

Other threads:

Your own experiences with companies in the sector here

Savings tips


Divinesia indeed noted something about the telecommunications sector often being undervalued, but it comes with certain concerns, such as indebtedness and the question of the future of mobile networks if satellites eventually achieve 100 percent coverage. Furthermore, as he also said, securing a signal coming from afar is problematic, as it can be exposed to interference and blocking by great powers such as China and Russia (or nowadays the United States).

This thread is intended for discussions about this sector, in the style of the IT services sector thread. :slight_smile:

Thank you and happy investment-related discussions to all! :slight_smile:

EDIT:

Thanks!

I put this here. :slight_smile:

8 Likes

Is the idea to focus only on operators or also on the industry’s technology? The current title of the thread “Telecommunications Technology Sector as an Investment Target” first brings to mind companies such as Apple, Samsung, Broadcom, Qualcomm, Cisco, Nokia, Ericsson, Huawei, and others that develop and manufacture technology themselves. Depending on the company, their customers include telecom operators, other companies, or consumers.

On the other hand, if the scope is viewed even more broadly, the sector also includes other types of companies such as real estate investment trusts that own communication infrastructure, like American Tower and Crown Castle.

Therefore, I would suggest either “Telecom Operators as an Investment Target” if only operators, or “Telecommunications as an Investment Target” if both operators and technology companies and other related entities are included.

4 Likes

Thanks for creating the thread @Sijoittaja-alokas ! :clap: It has crossed my mind a few times to write some general commentary and questions about the operator situations in Europe and/or Asia/Africa (where even the big ones form country-specific alliances), but there hasn’t been a suitable thread.

In that sense, Elisa is an incredibly great story, having remained a Finnish company on the stock exchange. Sonera (Telia, Sweden), DNA (Telenor, Norway), and many smaller companies have been sold to these three over time.

A greater undervaluation in the sector is actually already a bit outdated information from me. Just a year or two ago, the sector was penalized downwards when tech stocks generally rallied. The main reason, of course, was the rise in interest rates, as many telecom companies have a lot of debt due to network infrastructure and other investments.

STOXX® Europe 600 Telecommunications 5V illustrates this well:
image

But far are the days when the 2000s bubble burst; this can be seen as a cautionary tale if the same happens to AI-tech:
image

Among the big ones, Deutsche Telekom in particular has performed well recently.
image

The survival of telecom operators in general has required a tremendous amount of effort from every long-standing operator still in business. When mobile phones became common, text messages and calls could be charged at a per-time/minute rate, and money poured in from all directions. Suddenly, for example, Whatsapp emerged, through which one could text and call largely for free. Disruption has been practically constant in everything related to mobile networks. Perhaps the fixed network has, in a way, been the “most stable” business in recent years, although fiber optic technology has also developed.

The trend in Europe has been that even the largest companies have been joining forces country-specifically in recent years. But perhaps more on that later.

4 Likes

This is based on the fact that it owns a majority stake in the T-Mobile US mobile operator in the United States.

T-Mobile US has grown to become the most valuable of the three US mobile operators, surpassing AT&T and Verizon.

Deutsche Telekom’s market value is currently €168 billion, and its ~51% ownership in T-Mobile US is worth over €150 billion, which is over 89% of Deutsche Telekom’s market value.

7 Likes

Mielenkiintoinen ja tarpeellinen ketju!

I myself work a bit too close to the telecom operator industry, but here are some key trends that could be significant, at least in the near future, in Finland and the Nordics. The order is random, based on what comes to mind.

1. Mobile Markets are Saturated

The number of operators’ main products, i.e., mobile subscriptions, is no longer growing significantly. Small growth may arise, for example, due to immigration, but in Finland, this seems to be mainly directed at prepaid subscriptions. In practice, this means that revenue growth comes mainly from price increases and 5G upgrades. In recent years, consumer markets have indeed seen price increases.

This year, however, the situation may change, and significant price increases may no longer be expected. Mobile revenue growth is thus increasingly dependent on customers switching from competitors.

2. Growth from Fiber and IoT Markets

However, volume growth is particularly evident in fiber connections for detached houses in Finland. Currently, there is a construction boom underway, financed with high debt leverage and private equity funds.

What is peculiar about this development is that operators have not been the most active players, as the scale of investments is large and returns take a long time to materialize. Selling mobile subscriptions is more scalable and yields results faster. The problem, however, is that customers seem to prefer fiber over 5G connections.

Another challenge for the fiber boom is that operators still have old copper and especially cable broadband networks in areas where fiber is being built. These old networks are cash cows for operators, built long ago, so replacing them with fiber – especially fiber built by a competitor – can be expensive for operators.

It will be interesting to see if any mergers and acquisitions occur in this sector. In Sweden, the broadband market is more developed than in Finland, and its size relative to the population is almost double that of the Finnish market – meaning there is potential for value creation.

The IoT market is currently growing rapidly, as more and more devices require mobile network connections. Operators are indeed able to increase the number of IoT subscriptions by tens of percent annually. The challenge, however, is that the average revenue per subscription (ARPU) is low. For IoT to become a significant part of operator business, either ARPU must rise, or volume growth must continue to be equally strong.

3. Where to Invest When Mobile Networks Are Ready?

The coverage of operators’ 5G networks is already almost 100% of the population in Finland, even though the share of 5G subscriptions out of total subscriptions is still far from 50%. This means that operators have to consider new profitable investment targets.

Investment opportunities can be found, for example, in fiber infrastructure, but another option is to increase dividends. For example, Elisa is raising its dividend more this year than in previous years.

4. Monetization of Towers and Other Infrastructure

Operators often own significant amounts of valuable infrastructure that may not yet be fully utilized financially.

In Sweden, many operators have already separated their radio masts into their own companies and brought in external investors. In Finland, Telia has done this, and Telenor (DNA) appears to be in the process of separating its mast business.

The value of masts should not be underestimated – for example, Telia’s mast business in Finland and Norway was recently estimated to be worth approximately 1.5 billion euros, which corresponds to about 12% of Telia’s current market capitalization.

Masts are not the only valuable infrastructure asset. For example, rooftop sites and many fixed network components can also offer new monetization opportunities or are at least partially underutilized.

5. Moats Are Still Deep

The operator business is attractive in the sense that it does not currently appear to be exposed to significant disruptive threats. Companies have invested up to 15% of their revenue annually for decades to build networks that are difficult for competitors to challenge. Furthermore, products are subscription-based, which makes the business predictable – even a 5% annual revenue decrease would be rare even in a poor market situation. Conversely, peak growth is rarely expected, as operators typically grow by only a few percent per year.

Of course, technological trends occasionally emerge that could challenge the position of operators. One such could be satellite internet. It remains to be seen whether, for example, Elon Musk’s Starlink could take market share from traditional operators.

12 Likes

A year ago, I wrote for Sijoitustieto about four telecom operators on different continents, in emerging markets.

Although currency is one major risk when investing in companies operating in emerging markets, telecom operators in emerging markets still have growth potential, they have interesting and significant side businesses, and own infrastructure that many intend to monetize, referencing AE85’s good points. They also often have more reasonable debt compared to Western telecom operators.

Of the four telecom operators, Airtel Africa has performed well, the Philippine PLDT has stagnated, Telefonica Brasil’s stock has suffered from currency fluctuations even though the business is doing quite well, and Telkom Indonesia’s share price has drifted to an interesting level during the beginning of the year.

9 Likes

A partial reason for the decline in Telkom Indonesia’s share price is likely political risk, and as a state-owned company, it is subject to increasing political control.
In the presidential elections, Prabowo promised, among other things, greater economic growth and free lunches for schoolchildren, and won the elections with these promises.
To finance his promises, a new “welfare fund” will be established, under which Telkom, as a state-owned company, will partially fall.
Former President Jokowi had a similar project, and the public as well as several investors are very skeptical of these funds because the amount of corruption and political patronage jobs is feared to increase.

https://jakartaglobe.id/business/what-we-know-about-danantara-indonesias-second-sovereign-wealth-fund
(link leads to a Jakarta Globe newspaper article about the fund plan)

Some of the profits directed to the fund are intended to be used for a project where Jakarta will have to give up its capital city title and Nusantara will become the new capital.

Telkom has data center projects planned which require large investments, and through this, the current dividend level is likely to decrease.
Whether the company is a good investment target in the long term is difficult to say.

4 Likes

Starting from 1G, it can probably be stated that they are unlikely to be “ready” very quickly. When a 5G network is built, even if it’s never truly ready due to the need for continuous improvement, as technology advances, the 5G 2nd technological generation will arrive, and after that the 3rd. Support for previous generations will end, and they will need to be replaced with new ones. I don’t know if this will change for 5G, but this is how it has worked for all previous generations. New network devices are, of course, always more efficient in many ways. As technology develops, new uses are found for it, which in turn increases the need for new, more efficient, and greater capacity. The hamster wheel is thus complete. I mean, at the beginning of 4G, hardly anyone saw a use for all that capacity and speed, but it has been put into use, and the need has only increased until now. Has the operator business improved with it? Perhaps not. The industry needs new approaches to be offered on the altar of efficiency and profitability.

and after this comes 6G.

Mast businesses have indeed been spun off; in these, private equity investors have taught operators a slightly new way of thinking, as infrastructure that previously functioned as a so-called support function has actually become a business for someone. The same change in mindset could be quite welcome between businesses and other infrastructure as well. I believe that efficiency is available if one dares to start looking for it.

So-called rooftop sites are also on the table. For these, one must consider how existing locations fit into future needs from a sales perspective. With current networks, there might be a somewhat limited possibility for monetization, but the need for current 26 GHz and other potentially upcoming higher frequency networks may change this market and create an incentive for operators to find ways to streamline site infrastructure investments, and from this, we move to the next level.

Is the network still a competitive factor now or in the future? This is an interesting topic of discussion as a whole. If infrastructure monetization has now begun using sales, where does it end? Could one imagine that spinning off network infrastructure into separate companies would bring more efficiency to the business?

Would it be good for the customer if operator operations moved even more towards electricity, where there is a backbone network, distribution networks, and the service seller separately?

3 Likes

Interesting thread opener, but it always frightens me to see stable, growing cash flow oligopoly companies seeking growth outside their comfort zone.

I still understand Elisa’s and Telia’s desire to integrate IT and cybersecurity into their operations in recent years as a logical step, but these entertainment ventures have all failed badly.

When big US companies make moves, I guess smaller ones have to try similar things?

When AT&T destroyed its wealth with TimeWarner and DirecTV acquisitions, and Verizon increased its debt with its failed Yahoo+AOL purchases, here in this backwater, Telia was forced to acquire MTV3 and Elisa started wasting money on Elisa Viihde.

Elisa has also started dabbling in some industrial software business, eSports, and battery storage.

These companies seem to have a compelling need to renew themselves and focus limited resources on activities outside their core business, instead of concentrating on what’s essential.

On the other hand, when there’s no real competition here in the Nordics, prices can be raised year after year, and that money must somehow be “invested.”

4 Likes

They have to because the core business, despite its necessity, is a so-called race to the bottom.

The image shows the number of mobile network subscriptions in Finland 2005-2023:

IMG_20250303_005642_917

For example, Elisa has managed to generate profit from this almost zero-sum game by investing in 5G and, above all, by selling those 5G subscriptions to people who don’t need them.

If companies in the industry want growth from somewhere, they have to try to come up with something.

9 Likes

The biggest problem in this industry is that people think that companies in the sector are comparable to technology companies with their growth aspirations. Against this compulsive growth hype, the industry has managed to waste billions, for example, on entertainment services mentioned in the chain. Even though they operate with technology, the business logic is not tech-driven (perhaps it was closer during the rollout of 2G-4G networks).

The sector is closest to the real estate sector, where “plots” are divided in the form of radio spectrum licenses, and then these oligopolies get to monetize it. The expected return from this should be risk-free interest + a couple of percentage points of premium, and it should practically all be paid out as dividends, with inflation kept priced in over the long term. Should operators be placed under REIT-style management to improve understanding?

Elisa has been a success story because, unlike many others, they have understood this basic logic, and money is made through cost discipline rather than increased sales compared to competitors. Elisa might even be the most efficient operator globally (costs per customer, no direct source found)? T-Mobile is similar, but they have also been able to invest smartly (e.g., Sprint’s 5G spectrum licenses) while competitors engaged in complete chaos, and they have benefited from that.

The industry’s standardization through the 3GPP specification also keeps the technology standard for all operators, which does not allow for differentiation from competitors.

For me, a more interesting bigger issue in the industry would be the potential rise of IoT, as the “customer base” is no longer practically limited to the number of people, and theoretically, there is an unlimited number of devices that can be connected to the network.

9 Likes

In the US, these tower companies are REITs. The three biggest operators: AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile have spun off their towers.

An example of such companies is American Tower:

Global Wireless Infrastructure Provider | American Tower

5 Likes

Let’s mention it here too because it’s related to the topic:

1 Like

T-Mobile reported an excellent first quarter; the company’s service revenues grew at an industry-leading pace, with particularly significant growth in postpaid customer revenues, in addition to record-high net income and EPS.

The company’s operating income and free cash flow also grew strongly, achieving their best first-quarter figures ever.

The CEO emphasized the importance of customer-centricity in the excellent results, mentioning record customer growth in both wireless and broadband services.

https://x.com/earnings_guy/status/1915497085316505811

image
image


EDIT:

https://x.com/finchat_io/status/1915503520012517465
image
image

4 Likes

Telenor-owned DNA continued its strong performance.

Summary of DNA’s key figures in January–March 2025

Figures in parentheses refer to the corresponding period a year earlier, unless otherwise stated. The figures are unaudited.

  • Revenue grew by 3% to EUR 275 million (266).

    • Service revenue grew by 4% to EUR 218 million (208).
  • EBITDA grew by 9% to EUR 114 million (104).

  • Average Revenue Per User (ARPU):

    • Mobile ARPU grew by 3% to EUR 19.6 (19.0).
    • Fixed broadband (retail) ARPU grew by 3% to EUR 17.1 (16.6).
    • TV subscriptions (retail) ARPU grew by 8% to EUR 10.8 (10.0).
  • Number of subscriptions:

    • The number of mobile network subscriptions grew to 2,792,000 (2,762,000).
    • The number of fixed broadband subscriptions (retail) grew to 695,000 (680,000).
    • The number of TV subscriptions (retail) decreased to 179,000 (211,000).
4 Likes

Operators are tech companies in the same way that the post office is an automotive company. Could telecom operators be thought of more as logistics companies, for example? Bits (packages) are moved from one place to another.

In Finland, they currently sell on a “send as many packages as you want, we’ll buy and operate the necessary number of trucks so that everyone’s packages always arrive on time” basis. 5G slicing might bring a new opportunity to change productization in a more profitable direction, if operators can utilize this “point of discontinuity.” As an investor, this sparks my interest; I’m not sure if I’m as excited as a consumer :grinning:

3 Likes

An interesting move from Gigantti, a new virtual operator is coming from them. It’s not yet known which company’s network it will use, but since MOI used DNA’s network and DNA bought it, I’m guessing it will be another network. So, Telia or Elisa.

It can be assumed that Gigantti will also largely compete on price.

Kauppaketjulta jättiyllätys: Suomeen uusi teleoperaattori | Tivi..

8 Likes

On the other hand, Gigantti is a Norwegian company and so is Telenor. Both operate in Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and Finland. Only in Finland under the DNA brand. Elisa, again, only in Finland, and Telia does not operate in Denmark.

3 Likes

That’s certainly an interesting move! Of course, usually if the average prices of subscriptions rise, this is one of the consequences. Now, regarding Gigantti, the interest is focused on whether it can withstand the potential removal of operators’ resale commissions - and at the same time, large marketing investments. Establishing a new operator and increasing its recognition is not very cheap.

3 Likes

That’s a fascinating observation about the rise in the average price of subscriptions and the opportunities it brings for new players. Expectations for 5G technology have fallen short. Or rather, people have perhaps been able to filter out the marketing hype, and 5G has done what was expected. For the majority of users, 4G would still be perfectly sufficient – and not everyone would necessarily even want an internet plan, but such a plan doesn’t seem to be available.

It would indeed be interesting if a newcomer succeeded in disrupting the price landscape – and, for example, SIM plans costing less than a euro per month made a comeback.

1 Like