I mentioned last month that Telekom was possibly planning on offering television services with its HSBB infrastructure that it is currently deploying. It seems like this has come true with the possible bidding for English Premier League broadcasting rights for Malaysia as mentioned in the Edge Weekly this weekend.
Hardline infrastructure has so many advantages over wireless infrastructure that it's a no brainer Telekom Malaysia will have a leg up over the competition. For one, wireless signals can get interrupted by bad weather and weak transmission. Hardline or cable television will have no such problems. People will always get a near perfect picture with hardline televsion technologies.
The same goes for internet as well. But at the same time, I hadn't fully considered that TM would have to spend a lot of money in starting up its media division, buying rights, etc. I do expect the government to give TM a lot of support in forcing Astro give up exclusive TV channels like the Star channel, similar to what Indonesia did. After all, the government owns TM.
I'm not expecting the dividends to stay where they are now. The dividend payouts and policies are quite generous at the moment. I believe they will have to cut it soon as they start ramping up the HSBB and televsion divisions. They will most certainly take a hit to their stock price if they were to cut dividends.
I think the CIMB upgrade of Malaysia is silly. Moving to cyclical stocks will amplify profits and losses in stock returns. Yes, in that case for the short term, it might be a good idea as the market has been rebounding. But if the markets turn south, cyclicals will take the worst beatdown. In the longer term outlook of 6 months to a year, It's simply way too early to move into cyclical stocks.
We are only 9 months in this stock bear market. 9 months ago is when the markets really began to collapse by just looking at charts of the nasdaq and dow. And we're at a bottom already? Give me a break. The stock bear market in 2000 lasted for at least 2.5 years until 2003. And guess which recession is worse? Just because GDP may turn positive doesn't mean anything if growth is weak. In this case the markets will still deteriorate, albeit at a slower rate.
One of the things I've been mulling over is the effect of tax cuts from the government over the past few years. In my opinion, tax cuts can be used as an effective monetary instrument. Because the government cut taxes over the last few years during the good times, most of the money went back into the economy and people spent more as shown by gdp. During bad times, people will save money from tax cuts. But when things get better they have more options.
So, if taxes stay where they are now, we will recover in sync. If taxes go up, our recession will be more severe. Anyways, I believe the tax cuts are all done and won't be lowered anymore. So we had a chance if we didn't cut taxes a few years ago to cut taxes now and get out of this recession a bit faster or in better shape. So I think it was a bit of a failure from a view of fiscal responsibility. If we cut taxes now instead of then, we would not have had as much growth, but at the same time we would be in a good position when the recession ends. Anyhow, there are other things to consider, but that is my general view. But we are not alone, the US did the exact same thing. They aren't that much better.