via @peterodwyer1. This is nonsensical. Any decision to extend the MAN contracts to 2030 would have had an affect on the valuation of eNet. But let's go a bit deeper. 
The Department commissioned the Norcontel report, and that report was published in June 2016. (Redacted version here: drive.google.com/file/d/0B-OmFx… obtained by @irelandoffline via FOI.
Key conclusions of the report:
1. The MANs fulfilled their role? Are you having a laugh?
5. eNet likely can't do FTTH due to State aid rules.
6. Interestingly, the Department reached the same conclusion as Norcontel to extend the contracts.
1. The MANs fulfilled their role? Are you having a laugh?
5. eNet likely can't do FTTH due to State aid rules.
6. Interestingly, the Department reached the same conclusion as Norcontel to extend the contracts.
Anyways: Norcontel reports in June 2016
September 2016: Cube/eNet signs NDA related to an acquisition of shares.
March 2017: The Minister extends the concession agreements
July 2017: eNet agrees to sell most of itself to the IIF. (Cube not happy)
Oct 2018: IIF buys rest of eNet
September 2016: Cube/eNet signs NDA related to an acquisition of shares.
March 2017: The Minister extends the concession agreements
July 2017: eNet agrees to sell most of itself to the IIF. (Cube not happy)
Oct 2018: IIF buys rest of eNet
In other words: Once Norcontel reported, within weeks McCourt was talking to possible purchasers. Hard to believe those are not connected: since the report talks about "impact on revenue". Any extension would remove doubts, which has a value.
Worth noting too, they lay out a scenario that talks about the current concession agreements:
The State gets a minimum rev share of €950k a year from eNet.
The State pays eNet €1.2m in management fees under the second concession agreement (the one I'm in court about)
The State gets a minimum rev share of €950k a year from eNet.
The State pays eNet €1.2m in management fees under the second concession agreement (the one I'm in court about)
