EditorialsPREMIUM

EDITORIAL: Cell C’s second act

Investors would be wise to ask whether they’re buying into a revived telecom or gambling on another restructuring

Picture: 123RF
Picture: 123RF

Blue Label has rolled out a high-stakes teleportation trick, recasting Cell C’s perennial losses as R13bn-plus equity prize ahead of a planned JSE listing. The valuation baked into the statement issued earlier this week looks juicy on paper, but this high-wire act may leave the market hanging without a safety net. 

Blue Label’s plan is ingenious engineering. Convert R3.67bn of debt into equity, shift the R2.5bn telecom equipment arm across the balance sheet, and swap as much as R7.5bn of airtime for shares. Et voila: a freshly minted Cell C equity value north of R13bn, waiting to be sliced and diced in a sell-down to institutional buyers. 

Trouble is, Blue Label’s market cap of about R12bn suggests the wider market hasn’t swallowed the whole carrot. At roughly 70% ownership through its Prepaid Company special purpose vehicle, Blue Label should be embedding at least R9bn of Cell C value on its books. Instead, the share price lingers as if Cell C doesn’t exist. That raises questions about the actual cash flow and asset quality of Cell C. Or, equally, one could easily say the spin-off and separate listing unlocks long-dormant value. It’s not hard to lean towards the former question, given Cell C’s historical performance.

Number crunchers believe Blue Label could double its market value once Cell C is unbundled and repriced. The reason is that Blue Label would have transferred this risk, and passed the Cell C buck to public shareholders. It’s less a bet on Cell C’s competitive resurgence than a bet that the market will reward hope over history. Cell C has posted losses almost every year since launch in 2001, bleeding cash faster than MTN and Vodacom can dial up subscriber gains.

The upshot is that financial markets have long viewed Cell C as a capital sinkhole. Blue Label learnt this the hard way. After buying 45% of Cell C for R5.5bn in 2017, it was forced to write down the stake to zero by 2020 amid operational collapse and a debt chokehold.

A smart play would be to leave Cell C under the bridge until it turns a profit or secures a strategic partner.

Cell C’s investor pitch will lean heavily on its capital-light model. A roaming strategy that piggybacks on rival networks rather than building its own. But what is framed as agility is, in truth, outsourced dependence. Cell C lacks the pricing power to dent the grip of MTN and Vodacom, the duopoly that prices their services as if Cell C doesn’t exist. That calculus will be hard to shift. 

Even if the initial public offering (IPO) goes off without a hitch, unlocking value hinges on two big “ifs”. First, Cell C must stem its leaking margins in a cut-throat market. Second, Blue Label must resist the temptation to prioritise short-term gains over long-term shareholder gains. Too often, spin-offs disappoint when parent companies monetise quickly and leave retail investors holding the bag. 

A smart play would be to leave Cell C under the bridge until it turns a profit or secures a strategic partner. An outright sale to an operator desperate for spectrum would crystallise real cash, not just paper balances.

Granted, Cell C’s IPO does offer one undeniable virtue: clarity. Free from the tangled ownership chain, analysts can value Blue Label prepaid vouchers and distribution arm on their merits. That side of the business has real cash flow and a strong footprint across a vast informal market, which has attracted the attention of Capitec and Shoprite — two of the country’s most successful companies. 

Still, turning Cell C into a stand-alone company before it is fully rehabilitated risks rewarding hope over substance. Investors signing up should brace for a bumpy ride. A spin-off can unlock value, to be sure, but only if the underlying business is battle-ready. Cell C’s challenges are far from over. Before charging the gate, investors would be wise to ask whether they’re buying equity in a revived telecom or simply gambling on another restructuring encore. 

Correction: September 4 2025

This updated version of the article corrects figures in the second paragraph to 70% ownership and R9bn of Cell C value, from 50% and R6.5bn, respectively. It also fixes typos in the first and second paragraphs. 

Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.

Comment icon