Spectrasite to be the target of an acquisition?
Spectrasite (SITE)- a national cell tower company- is the subject of a number of rumors including the AAT rumor posted earlier and a current one that has Crown Castle (CCI) purchasing Spectrasite. Crown, flush from selling European assets, should have the capital to conclude this deal. However, if SITE purchased AAT, would Crown still be able to stomach the acquisition?
Tallest Towers in the World
I came across a website with the tallest structures in the world-and included the top 10 (all towers) or so for your perusal. This list is courtesy of
www.answers.com.
648.38 m
Warszawa radio mast,
Konstantynów,
Poland (destroyed 1991)
628.80 m
KVLY-TV mast,
Blanchard, North Dakota627.89 m
KXJB-TV mast,
Galesburg, North Dakota624.50 m
KXTV/KOVR Tower,
US615.10 m
KLDE-TV mast,
Angleton, Texas610.00 m
Petronius Platform,
Gulf of Mexico610.00 m
WITN-TV mast,
Grifton, North Carolina610.00 m
KATV-TV mast,
Jefferson County, Arkansas609.60 m
WECT TV6 Tower
US609.60 m
KOLR/KOZK Tower
US609.60 m
NYT Broadcast Holdings Tower
US609.60 m
American Tower Management
US609.60 m
Des Moines Hearst-Argyle TV Tower
US
Spectrasite and AAT in Talks?
An unconfirmed and undocumented rumor- but I have heard that Spectrasite and AAT are in talks. Spectrasite needs a deal to increase their number of sites and AAT's portfolio of towers would fit nicely. AAT has a significant number of managed sites as well which would blend into Spectrasite's managed portfolio well.
AAT is cash positive and Cequel, the owner of AAT has a history of building up companies and flipping at the right time. I, for one, don't know if the market will get any better after the multiples that we have been seeing for tower deals lately.
A Wireless Carrier Sending out Threatening Letters to Landowners
A unnamed wireless carrier who has recently merged has been sending out letters to landowners with leases for a cell tower on their property alleging that due to consolidation of assets, that the landowner must take a 45% to 75% reduction in rent if they want to continue receiving any income. The letter is written in a way to suggest that if the landowner fails to renegotiate the lease, that there is a significant chance that the lease will be terminated.
This carrier appears to be sending these letters out to every tower lease holder within certain regions of the country. What is disturbing is that in some of these areas, one of the merged carriers was not even operating prior to the merger and as such, there are no assets to consolidate. I don't believe that these scare tactics are ethical and feel sorry for the rural farmer who needs the lease income but has no way to verify whether or not these threats are real.
To make matters worse, this carrier has turned over the letter writing campaign to a third party company who is probably operating on a contingency arrangement. Some of my landowners have related the claims that agents of this company have been making and they are bull. This is akin to the lease buyout companies claiming that satellites will make towers obsolete within a few years.
Bad business in my opinion.
Beware Carriers Selling Land Sites
It has come to my attention that a large carrier is selling the land that they own under their cell towers. This carrier who bought land for cell tower locations back in the cellular days has now concluded that they no longer need to own the land under the towers.
Rather than be forced to pay the escalating real estate taxes on the land and the potential liability of ownership, they are selling the land as discounted rates. The caveat: that the purchaser takes subject to a very lengthy easement (the easement says "forever") for this carriers continued use of the property and any conceivable use they might have. They give up any rights to revenue, and end up paying the property taxes on the inflated value of the property with the tower.
The landowner gets land for less than the going rate for acreage, but as represented to me, oftentimes does not understand what they are purchasing due to the complexity of the carrier's special warranty deed.
While this may represent a smart deal for the carrier, the landowner needs to be aware of the significant limitations on the parcel they are buying. The savings might not be worth it.
