The following is excerpted from the question-and-answer section of the transcript.
(Questions from industry analysts are provided in full, but answers are omitted - download the transcript to see the full question-and-answer session)
Question: Albert Pranger - Kempen & Co. N.V., Research Division - Analyst
: I just have a bit of a clarification question in line of the questions of my colleagues, or co-competitor, Jonathan. In the sense that you indicated that
you are aiming in the current business plan to acquire roughly 1,400 sites and indicated for the new business plan that you want to buy another
1,500 sites. I was wondering, is there an overlap between those 2 numbers? Or is the 1,500 sites you want to own, is this something new? Especially
when thinking about the potential CapEx involved, would you say that your pricing policy in order to buy land is still the same?
Oscar Cicchetti
Very clear question. And I think it's useful to clarify those numbers for everybody. So what we are saying, and this is clearly reported in Slide number
-- let me start by numbers. First, Slide #7, where you can see that we have already acquired 600 either lands or long-term right of usage.
The second is our 18' targets, where you can see that we are planning to reach, at the end of this year, 1,000 lands or long-term right of usage. And
the third information is contained in the slide of the 2020, where we say that we want to move from 1,000 at the end of this year to 1,500 at the
end of 2020. So I have to clarify that we underperformed in 2018, because we communicated a target of 1,300, and we will close with 1,000. And
we -- our target 1,500 is the total sites that we are planning to have built at the end of 2020.
The second element was about -- no, we continue to apply our policy. We do not have any strong signal of lend aggregate or inaction. But of course,
this is a risk that we have carefully to monitor, because we don't want to be, let's say, caught in the same nightmare that towerco and mobile
operators have been dealing with in the U.S. with the land aggregator.
|
