Latest news with #PhuthumaNathi
Daily Maverick
27-07-2025
- Business
- Daily Maverick
Who will steer the R55bn marriage of MultiChoice and Canal+?
There's a new power couple in African media. After nearly five years of courting, Canal+ has finally put a ring on MultiChoice to form a pan-African content colossus with global ambitions. French media titan Canal+ has secured the final go-ahead to acquire MultiChoice in a landmark R55-billion deal. After years of quiet manoeuvring and regulatory hurdles, the merger is now a question of who controls what. The Competition Tribunal's conditional approval, granted late last week, closes the chapter on a five-year 'creeping takeover' and opens a new era in African broadcasting. Now it's a balancing act weighing foreign capital with national sovereignty on a digital scale with local content. Enter the media monarchy In return for its princely sum, Canal+, owned by the French conglomerate Vivendi, gets access to MultiChoice's 14.5 million Anglophone and Lusophone subscribers, the DStv powerhouse, sports juggernaut SuperSport, and a foothold in streaming via Showmax. MultiChoice, facing rising costs and subscriber declines, finds itself rescued by a suitor with deep pockets and pan-African ambition. Combined, the merged entity will serve more than 24 million subscribers across 50 countries — instantly becoming the largest pay-TV and streaming provider on the continent. However, if Canal+ was hoping for free access, South African regulators had other plans. The deal's approval came wrapped in layers of red tape — not as a deterrent, but as a deliberate design feature. Transformation goals Central to the regulatory conditions is the creation of LicenceCo, an independent company that will hold MultiChoice South Africa's broadcast licence. It will be majority-owned and controlled by historically disadvantaged South Africans and employees. Crucially, Canal+ has no control and no board seats. This structural firewall protects South Africa's legal requirements around media ownership, ensures transformation goals are met and serves as a template for foreign investment in other sensitive sectors. Phuthuma Nathi, the B-BBEE shareholder darling, increases its economic interest in LicenceCo to 27%, with a new employee trust added. The licence, and the local airwaves it governs, stay South African. The R30bn lobola The Competition Tribunal didn't just demand structural separation; it also extracted a commitment package valued at more than R30-billion. This includes: A three-year moratorium on retrenchments linked to the merger; Significant investment in local content production, sports broadcasting, SMME procurement and Corporate Social Investment programmes; Ongoing free-to-air broadcast access for key sporting events, safeguarding the public's ability to view major matches without a subscription; and Local skills development through Canal+'s 'University Programme', to train historically disadvantaged individuals in broadcasting and production. In a media environment where Netflix and Amazon Prime are increasingly dominant, this local-first approach is designed to future-proof South African media. Showmax, SuperSport and scale Behind the regulatory muscle lies a clear commercial imperative. MultiChoice has struggled in recent years, shedding 2.8 million linear subscribers and burning cash to prop up Showmax 2.0, its streaming reboot built on Comcast tech and bolstered by NBC Universal's 30% equity stake. Canal+ brings financial stability and scale. It also inherits Irdeto, MultiChoice's profitable cybersecurity unit, and Showmax's potential to become Africa's answer to global streamers. Vivendi, Canal+'s parent company, views this merger as critical to its own transformation and part of a plan to split into three listed entities, with Canal+ as its global growth engine. Listing Canal+ on the JSE within nine months of deal completion is a further nod to local inclusion, visibility, and capital market confidence. The shiny ring can't cover controversial holes While South Africa celebrates a structurally sound deal with tangible local benefits, not all observers are convinced. Critics warn that Canal+'s track record and the Bolloré Group's 30.4% stake in it come with baggage. Vivendi's past includes one of the largest corporate losses in history and regulatory infractions that still cast a shadow. Vincent Bolloré, the billionaire behind the curtain, faces corruption charges in France and has been accused of turning Canal+'s French media outlets into right-wing political mouthpieces. With Canal+ now embedded in South Africa's broadcasting ecosystem, some fear creeping influence over editorial independence, particularly if there are future attempts to deepen ownership or control beyond the current firewall. Marriage isn't buying a horse Mergers are easy to announce but hard to manage. However, the competition bodies have played their hand cleverly — extracting commitments, safeguarding jobs and setting a precedent for how global capital must behave when it enters South Africa's strategic sectors. The long-term test lies ahead. Can Showmax truly compete with Netflix? Can SuperSport keep its sports crown as global streamers outbid for rights? Will LicenceCo be a transformative force or a regulatory box-ticker? Will Canal+ respect the firewall, or try to chip away at it over time? The merged entity is now king of the hill in African broadcasting, but it's a kingdom that won't run on size alone. Trust, execution and transformation will be the currencies of success. DM
IOL News
14-06-2025
- Business
- IOL News
BEE is at a Crossroads - But Who Benefits from Its Destruction?
BEE, as it has been implemented in too many cases, has failed to meet the aspirations of the majority, writes the author. Gumede is right to point to the recycling of beneficiaries, the political gatekeeping, and the elite capture of empowerment deals. But he is wrong, dangerously wrong, if his insight is used to argue for scrapping BEE altogether. Let me be clear: BEE, as it has been implemented in too many cases, has failed to meet the aspirations of the majority. It is a critique we cannot afford to ignore. But neither can we afford to allow this critique to be weaponised by those who have always opposed transformation, to delegitimise the very idea of economic justice in post-apartheid South Africa. The recent critique by Professor William Gumede that over R1 trillion has been 'transferred' under Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) to fewer than 100 politically connected individuals is a sobering wake-up call. It is ironic that the same voices calling BEE 'racist' rarely propose solutions to white economic over-representation. Here are the facts: 8 of the top 10 richest South Africans remain white men. Over 70% of agricultural land remains under white ownership. Access to venture capital, export markets, and finance remains racially skewed. The idea that 'BEE is the biggest scam in post-apartheid SA' dangerously distracts from the real structural crisis: the continued racial and gendered concentration of wealth. Certainly not the millions of unemployed black youth in townships and rural villages. Not the historically disadvantaged communities who still lack access to capital, land, and markets. And not the African, Indian and Coloured women who remain structurally excluded from the mainstream economy. We must ask ourselves: who benefits when BEE is destroyed instead of reformed? Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. The only ones who benefit from the collapse of BEE are those who were never in favour of transformation in the first place the economic oligarchs who would be thrilled to return to a status quo of white dominance wrapped in the language of meritocracy. Despite limitations, BEE is not a failure: Over 6 million black South Africans now hold direct or indirect ownership in companies through broad-based share schemes (e.g. MTN Zakhele, SASOL Inzalo, Phuthuma Nathi at MultiChoice). Black ownership on the JSE has grown from less than 1% in 1994 to an estimated 25–30% today (direct + indirect via funds and B-BBEE schemes). Over 50,000 black-owned SMEs have been supported via enterprise and supplier development obligations. BEE has enabled the creation of black industrialists, catalysed youth training schemes, and expanded procurement access. The BEE scorecard includes ownership, skills development, employment equity, socio-economic development, and procurement. It is a multidimensional framework, not simply elite enrichment. However now that we know better , we must do better. Acknowledge the Failures, But Don't Abandon the Mission As a former Member of Parliament and lifelong activist for social and economic justice, I have seen first-hand how some BEE deals were little more than rent-seeking schemes. Politically connected figures often acted as fronts for white capital, offering legitimacy without empowerment. These are not just moral failings they are strategic betrayals of the people. But the answer is not abandonment. It is reform, accountability, and reorientation toward true broad-based empowerment. We must ask: What models have worked? What does inclusive, community-rooted BEE look like? And how do we ensure that BEE no longer becomes a revolving door for the same elite, but instead a ladder for the many? What Broad-Based Empowerment Really Looks Like The idea of broad-based empowerment is not hypothetical. I have checked ,it actually exists though often drowned out by the noise of scandal. Let us spotlight real, replicable models that show us what is possible. 1. Sasol Inzalo Trust (2011) – R26 Billion Empowerment for the Public One of the largest and most ambitious empowerment transactions in South African history. Over 200,000 South Africans from nurses to pensioners acquired shares in Sasol via the Inzalo Trust. This was not an elite project, but a mass participation vehicle offering dividends, ownership, and dignity. Yes, the deal had flaws (especially when Sasol's share price dropped), but the intent and structure were inclusive. We must learn from and build on this. 2. Absa Employee and CSI Trust (2023) – A New Vision for BEE In 2023, Absa created a model that should become the new gold standard. It allocated 7% of its ownership to: 3% for over 35,000 employees; 4% to a Community Trust focused on healthcare, education, and township upliftment. This is real empowerment linking productivity with ownership, and profit with community reinvestment. 3. PepsiCo / SimbPioneer Foods (2020) – Worker Trust PepsiCo's merger with Pioneer Foods resulted in a R1.66 billion worker trust benefiting over 12,000 employees 90% of whom are black. It wasn't politically brokered. It was structurally designed to include workers at scale. 4. Heineken's 'Bokamoso' Trust (2021) When Heineken acquired Distell, it was required by the Competition Tribunal to create a broad-based employee share scheme. 'Bokamoso' gave 6% equity to workers a model where empowerment was made a regulatory condition of doing business in South Africa. These are not isolated cases. They are models for the future evidence that BEE can work, and work for the people. Why can the JSE Top 100 Listed Companies not follow this and give shares to their workers, their customers and communities they serve? B-BBEE That Serves the Nation, Not the Network For BEE to be legitimate, it must: Stop recycling elites: No individual or consortium should benefit from more than one major BEE deal. Impose sunset clauses: Empowerment credentials must expire after a certain period. Create a National BEE Beneficiary Registry: All deals and beneficiaries must be publicly disclosed and tracked. Mandate community participation: At least 30% of all future equity deals must be routed through community trusts, worker funds, and township co-operatives. Align with the District Development Model: BEE must build local economies not extract value from them. We must turn BEE into a mechanism for building black productive capacity, not just redistributing shares. That means more funding for black industrialists, township-based manufacturing, rural cooperatives, and tech-enabled youth entrepreneurship. A Call to Action: Reclaim Empowerment from the Few, for the Many To comrades, policymakers, business leaders, and community activists: we are at a crossroads. Either we allow the failures of the past to paralyse us or we reclaim the transformative promise of BEE and remake it to serve all who were historically disadvantaged: Black Africans, Coloured South Africans, Indian South Africans, women, youth, people with disabilities, and the rural poor. I call on the ANC to: Codify a new generation of community-based empowerment deals Reject individual-based enrichment without public impact Strengthen the oversight powers of the B-BBEE Commission Incentivise cooperatives, worker-ownership, and community reinvestment We must restore the moral authority of economic redress by placing THE PEOPLE not political patrons at the centre of empowerment. Conclusion: Build, Don't Burn Professor Gumede has done us a service by exposing what went wrong. But let us not allow this moment to be hijacked by reactionaries who wish to dismantle BEE altogether. Let us not abandon the house of transformation because the roof leaked. Instead, let us rebuild it, repair it, and expand it, so that it shelters all South Africans who have for too long lived on the margins. We don't need to scrap BEE. We need to liberate it from the few and make it finally work for the many. That is the real empowerment and economic justice we must fight and struggle for. This opinion piece was first published in ANC Today * Faiez Jacobs is a former MP, Public Policy Strategist and Advocate for Economic Justice ** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL, Independent Media or The African.
