The sale of the controlling stake in Rai Way becomes an increasingly intricate puzzle. In addition to the doubts about the Dpcm it authorizes the sale of the controlling stake now in the hands of Rai in order to arrive at the national pole of the towers which has been talked about for years now, important innovations risk further complicating the operation just as consolidation in the sector is advancing. Consolidation that instead Tim seems to have hooked: the company has recently sold the Inwit towers for 1,3 billion to a consortium led by Ardian.
The Rai Way sale: resignation and stop from the Supervisory Authority
It is the political relevance of the Dpcm that has restarted the controversy, but let's see what happened in order: first of all, on 17 March the Supervisory hearing of Minister Giancarlo Giorgetti who clearly expressed his thoughts: "... it is indeed necessary that such resources are fully allocated to the activities of the public radio and television service. In this perspective, the contents of the next service contract will be of fundamental importance…”.
Then there was the resignation of the president of Rai Way, Joseph Pasciucco, and of the RAI shareholder director Stefano Ciccotti, former CEO of the same company, now CTO Rai and considered a figure of great importance for experience and knowledge of the sector. In particular, on her resignation, we have gathered strong doubts and perplexities from various parties inside and outside Rai regarding her presumed disagreement with the operation. While, as far as Pasciucco is concerned, we learned from our sources that he should now pay particular attention to the drafting of the new Business Plan expected for next June. Then the Rai Parliamentary Supervisory Commission issued a Policy Statement on this issue and, finally, last Wednesday the CEO of Rai Way was heard in the same Supervisory Board, Aldo Mancini.
On the resignation of the two members of the Rai Way board, it can only be said that formally they took place for "personal reasons" and precisely on the eve of the next shareholders' meeting scheduled for 27 April. However, it is difficult not to grasp that they were presented just a few days after the publication of the Dpcm on which, as far as we know, not everyone in Viale Mazzini expressed particular enthusiasm. On the contrary, there are not a few who see this initiative as a further push towards the "sale" of a family jewel (see also the trade union strike in recent days).
The Rai Way sale: the stakes of politics
We now come to the most significant part of this phase: the "political" indications of the Rai Supervisory Commission expressed with a act of address, i.e. without operational constraint. It is advisable to carefully read the document in which the Commission "... commits the RAI Board of Directors:
- to frame the operation to reduce the stake in RAI Way Spa, or the creation of a new legal entity that owns the infrastructure, within an overall and organic growth strategy of the Company, which must find reflected in the business plan, of which, moreover, the Commission renews the need to be promptly brought to the attention, at least as regards the fundamental lines already outlined;
- to take into account, also in relation to the forthcoming Service Contract, on which the Commission is required by law to express a mandatory opinion, that the proceeds of any transfer cannot be used to settle previous debt situations or to allow for a balanced budget ...
- to ensure that the new set-up resulting from the participation reduction operation does not jeopardize the performance of the fundamental tasks of the public radio and television service ... but is maximally oriented towards solutions for strengthening and efficiency of the infrastructure.
Rai Way sale: Parliament puts its foot down
It is a clear and strong orientation and affects the exposed nerve of the whole architecture of the DPCM: the total lack of any industrial policy vision or project, especially referring to the company and, more generally, both to the notorious "pole of the towers" both the associated company for the network.
In this context, we highlight the comments of those who believe that it is only a question of financial alchemy aimed only at "raising cash" in view of an economic picture that is certainly not comforting for the coffers of Viale Mazzini (these days the news of the approval in the Chamber of the Energy Decree which heralds the return to the collection of the Rai license fee through the postal order, as requested by the EU but with a possible return to its evasion estimated at several tens of millions).
With specific regard to Viale Mazzini, the findings of the Supervisory Authority on the response to the Industrial Plan is not accidental and even less unfounded: not only, it should be noted that it has not yet been communicated to the Supervisory Authority itself, but also that, at the moment, the new Plan only a few "guidelines" are known which do not contain any reference to the Rai Way operation.
The document that we have been able to view does not make explicit reference to the transfer. On the page relating to the "pillars" of the new Business Plan we read of:
A. Evolution of the traditional offer
B. Integration of digital offer
C. Rationalization and enhancement of corporate assets
D. Evolution of the agile and digital operating model
And yet, the issue of the towers and the distribution of the radio and television signal is of absolute strategic importance for the future of the Company which, moreover, becomes evident precisely at the moment in which the transition to the new DVB-T2 reception method is in full swing where , as we have also written for some time on these pages, could damage the public service catchment area.
Rai Way: the CEO goes to Parliament, the ball to the government
We now come to the hearing of the Rai Way CEO on Tuesday 12 April. Mancino dutifully stated that he manages the company controlled by Rai and that therefore he can do nothing but take into account the intentions of the majority shareholder who, pending a forthcoming hearing of CEO Rai Carlo Fuortes in Supervision, are not still notes. At this point the "policy" arose which, as declared by the commissioners, first of all reaffirmed the validity of the Guidelines, then reinforcing its content, emphasizing that "we have no preclusions ... but first there is a process and constraints with the plan industrial that has its own interweaving with the Service Contract…” (Valeria Fedeli, Pd); then: "parts of Rai Way cannot be sold before the new Service Contract" (Michele Anzaldi, Pd) or that the DPCM is "incomprehensible and unacceptable" (Primo DI Nicola, M5S).
The synthesis of what we have already written in the previous article with what has emerged in recent days seems to lead everything in the same direction: the Dpcm seems fragile in its regulatory and application architecture (see also article 2 where its "validation" is specified following the opinions of the control and supervisory Authorities, i.e. Consob, AgCom and Antitrust) as well as, as emerged in the Supervision, also in the "political" support for the entire operation. At this point there seem to be only two possibilities: either the Government (and the parties that support it) disavow the intentions of the Supervisory Authority or, vice versa, due account is taken of the Guidelines and then the ball goes to the grandstand and the transfer of the share majority of Rai Way and the "pole of the towers" will be discussed later.
