Are our cellular providers stealing from us?

The hashtag #datamustfall is currently trending on Twitter where people are calling for an end to high data prices.

Consumers have once again become fed up with the high cost of mobile data in South Africa.

Poet and activist Ntsiki Mazwai has called on South Africans to boycott all social media platforms from midnight.

The social media blackout campaign has the following aims:

“The social media blackout is a campaign that is aimed at lowering data prices. Data costs are obscene and are not affordable for people on the ground. We want to bring attention to this issue; we want to engage government and cellular network companies.”

Mazwai says that from midnight people should log off social media.

“We don’t buy data for 24 hours, we will meet back on social media the following day to discuss the way forward. Why should data expire after 30 days when you’ve paid for it?”

She has encouraged people to take part in the campaign because it is too expensive to access information.

“We keep talking about #feesmustfall but how must students access information or hand in assignments if data costs are so high? This has a negative impact on entrepreneurs and our families because we can’t communicate with them.”

Mazwai has further called on the country to unify for a good cause.

By Refilwe Pitjeng for EWN

Amazon has sent shockwaves through the food retailing business with its near $14-billion acquisition of natural and organic food chain Whole Foods.

The move has dominated the financial news over the past three days and has been called a game-changer for the food retailing industry, but could there be wider ramifications for the business supplies industry? We suggest a few things to think about…

Whole Foods locations could be used as collection points for Amazon online sales, providing customers with more delivery options.

Whole Foods stores could act as local distribution hubs for fast delivery, two hours or even less, and give Amazon a stronger last-mile delivery presence.

Amazon’s move could have a disruptive effect on the wider food retailing industry. There is already speculation about the need for accelerated consolidation in the mass and grocery sector, and if that happened that would affect vendors that sell into these retailers.

Amazon has been testing more consumer-friendly retail concepts, such as its Amazon Go initiative where customers just pick items off shelves without the need to go through a checkout. Acquiring Whole Foods will give it a wider test platform and could lead to faster adoption of some of these shopping innovations as well as speeding up digital transformation in the retail sector in general.

We have previously downplayed the idea of Amazon acquiring retail locations in the business supplies channel because there was no indication that it would make a significant move into the retail space. That has now changed, and the Whole Foods deal validates Amazon’s belief in an omnichannel experience that combines the digital and physical worlds.

Could this mean that Amazon now looks to acquire retailers in other business segments, such as office supplies, and that Staples or Office Depot’s stores could be on the Amazon radar? Possibly, especially if Amazon is not happy with the way that Amazon Business is growing; it hasn’t updated its customer and sales figures on Amazon Business in the US since April 2016. Is that because the growth rate has slowed and it’s not getting the traction it thought it would after Amazon Business’ initial success?

The Whole Foods acquisition is reportedly being driven by difficulties Amazon was having in growing its Amazon Fresh grocery delivery business. If Amazon Business is stalling or not growing fast enough, then why wouldn’t Amazon look at buying growth? We now know that this strategy is part of Amazon’s playbook.

By Andy Braithwaite for OPI.net

Is the new Public Protector trying to kill the rand?

The rand tanked on Monday after the Public Protector recommended changes to the Constitution that would see the removal of a clause to protect the currency.

Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane announced her findings after her investigation into the South African Reserve Bank’s assistance to Bankorp between 1985 and 1995, which Absa bought in 1992. She wants Absa to repay R1.125bn, a move the bank refutes as it believes it has paid all money owed.

However, her big remedial action was a recommendation that the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services change the Constitution.

It “must initiate a process that will result in the amendment of section 224 of the Constitution, in pursuit of improving socio-economic conditions of the citizens of the republic, by introducing a motion in terms of section 73(2) of the Constitution in the National Assembly and thereafter deal with matter in terms of section 74(5) and (6) of the Constitution”.

She wants section 224 of the Constitution to read:

“The primary object of the South African Reserve Bank is to promote balanced and sustainable economic growth in the Republic, while ensuring that the socio-economic well-being of the citizens are protected.

“The South African Reserve Bank, in pursuit of its primary object, must perform its functions independently and without fear, favour or prejudice, while ensuring that there must be regular consultation between the Bank and Parliament to achieve meaningful socio-economic transformation.”

Mkhwebane’s suggestion removes reference to “protect the value of the currency”, Bloomberg told traders on Monday.

The Constitution currently states: “The primary object of the South African Reserve Bank is to protect the value of the currency in the interest of balanced and sustainable economic growth in the Republic.”

Opening Pandora’s box

Nomura economist Peter Montalto said the rand is taking a knock because it’s “not a good headline … it’s a live wire issue”.

“Even if a change here is not likely to actually occur, the risk of it is important to markets and ratings agencies,” he said in an emailed comment to investors.

“This is quite unusual that a Public Protector has been so specific on changing the Constitution or indeed be so radical on transformation.”

“This is touching the real last Pandora’s box,” he said. “Note, whilst the PP is meant to be independent she is widely viewed as a Zuma loyalist.

“I don’t think this is going to happen in the short to medium run. The ANC cannot really muster the support to change the Constitution in Parliament and would require a two-thirds majority.

“What the worry is here is that actually it’s much, much easier than that. You just need a new MPC (monetary policy committee) mandate, which is done by a letter from the FinMin to MPC and can be done technically at any time.

“I do not think (Finance Minister Malusi) Gigaba is going to do that, but this raises the risk and promotes the idea in public debate about how secure this last bastion of an institution is.

“The SARB is also one of few ratings positives for the ratings agencies,” he said. “The very fact this issue is being raised and the SARB dragged into the debate is negative.

“However, I see the SARB leadership strongly and resolutely defending their independence and existing mandate including via court action if necessary.”

By Matthew le Cordeur for News24

Thursday is D-day for no confidence ballot

The Constitutional Court will make its ruling on Thursday on the UDM’s application to force National Assembly Speaker Baleka Mbete to conduct the vote of no confidence in President Jacob Zuma by secret ballot.

After Zuma’s controversial Cabinet reshuffle at the end of March, that saw Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan axed, among others, the opposition asked Mbete to schedule a vote of no confidence in Zuma.

It was initially set down for April 18. The opposition however asked for it to be postponed pending the application to the court for the vote to take place in secret.

Opposition parties hope this would encourage enough ANC MPs to vote against Zuma for it to succeed.

UDM leader Bantu Holomisa had argued that Zuma’s reshuffle led to two ratings agencies downgrading the country’s debt to junk status. In addition, he said MPs had been threatened with losing their seats and with violence if they voted against him.

Mbete previously said the UDM’s application had no merit and it did not fall within the court’s exclusive jurisdiction.

She said if the court found she had the power to order a motion of no confidence via secret ballot, she would act in accordance with its ruling.

Source: News24.com

What you post can wreck your life

Harvard recently rescinded admission offers for some incoming freshmen who participated in a private Facebook group sharing offensive memes. The incident has sparked a lot of discussion: Was Harvard’s decision justified? What about the First Amendment? Do young people know the dangers of social media?

I’m a business school lecturer, career services counselor and former recruiter, and I’ve seen how social media becomes part of a person’s brand – a brand that can help you or hurt you.

College admissions staff, future employers and even potential dates are more and more likely to check your profile and make decisions or judgments about you.

Here’s what you should know so you don’t end up like those Harvard prospects.

1. Social media posts disappear, right?

Let’s be clear about one thing: You’ve been building your online reputation since your first Snapchat. Think the posts disappear? Think private pages are private? Think again.

You might feel like your life and opinions are no one’s business, but you can’t always control who sees what you post. Every photo, video, tweet, like and comment could be screenshotted by your friends (or frenemies). You might make a mistake with your privacy settings or post to the wrong account. And a determined online sleuth can sometimes find ways around privacy settings, viewing photos and posts you might think are well hidden.

2. Do employers and colleges actually look at this stuff?

Your profile will very likely be scrutinised by college admissions officers and employers. According to CareerBuilder’s 2017 social media recruitment survey, social media screening is through the roof:

  • 600% increase since 2006 in employers using social media to screen
  • 70% of employers use social networking sites to research job candidates
  • 34% of employers found online content that caused them to reprimand or fire an employee

This trend is common with admissions as well. Kaplan Test Prep’s 2017 survey of over 350 college admissions officers found that 35 percent checked applicants’ social media profiles. Many who do said social media has influenced their admission decisions.

3. What are recruiters watching out for?

So what are the potential hazards to avoid? These are some of the types of posts that left a bad impression on me when I used to recruit:

  • References to illegal drugs, sexual posts
  • Incriminating or embarrassing photos or videos
  • Profanity, defamatory or racist comments
  • Politically charged attacks
  • Spelling and grammar issues
  • Complaining or bad-mouthing – what’s to say you wouldn’t do the same to a new school, company, boss, or peer?

4. What can I do to build a positive online reputation?

Remember, social media is not all bad; in many cases it helps recruiters get a good feel for your personality and potential fit. The CareerBuilder survey found 44 percent of employers who screened candidates via social networks found positive information that caused them to hire a candidate.

From my experience, the following information can support and confirm a candidate’s resume:

  • Your education and experiences match the recruiter’s requirements
  • Your profile picture and summary is professional
  • Your personality and interests align with the values of the company or university
  • Your involvement in community or social organizations shows character
  • Positive, supportive comments, responses, or testimonials

5. How do I clean things up?

Research. Both the college of your dreams and your future employer could Google you, so you should do the same thing. Also check all of your social media profiles – even the ones you haven’t used for a while – and get rid of anything that could send the wrong message. Remember, things can’t be unseen.

Bottom line: Would you want a future boss, admissions officer, or blind date to read or see it? If not, don’t post it. If you already have, delete it.

By Thao Nelson; published on MSN.com 

Unemployment pressures tempt fraud

With unemployment at its highest level, the youth are anxious, agitated and searching for creative ways to earn a living.

“In this environment, you cannot write off the temptation that confronts young people to commit fraud, when doors slam shut in their faces or do not even open in the first place,” says Manie van Schalkwyk of the South African Fraud Prevention Service.

The obvious temptation is CV doctoring, he says. By adding a few tweaks, candidates may make their application appear more professional than they actually are and increase chances for a job interview.

“Qualification fraud is simple enough to perform and with any luck an applicant may land an interview, even a job offer. But a few months into the job the employer will begin to wonder why the candidate’s skills and abilities do not match up to the qualifications he or she has presented on their CV. Questions will be asked. “When you are exposed as a fraud, you will have a criminal record,” Van Schalkwyk says.

For young people who are employed who wish to apply for store cards, credit cards or any type of credit, there is the temptation to stretch the salary or the length of time spent in a particular work place to increase their chances of credit approval or credit limit. Van Schalkwyk says, “Falsifying this information constitutes fraud.”

At another level, one of the first goals of a newly graduated student is to learn to drive and get a driver’s licence. So, they may be driving around in their parents’ or older sibling’s car, or they may have a car of their own.

In this case, the individual may wish to have car insurance. After phoning some insurance companies they may learn that their premium is higher than expected because of their lack of driving experience. They will persuade their parents to front for the policy, so that the policy is held in the parent’s name. This is falsely representing information as the younger person will be the primary driver of the vehicle being insured.

“A common illustration of this is alternative fact information given about who the regular driver of a vehicle will be,” says Deanne Wood, short term insurance ombudsman. “Older drivers pay significantly lower premiums than younger drivers.” The difference in premium can be significant.

“Certainly, significant enough to encourage consumers to provide inaccurate information about who the regular driver of a vehicle will be,” Wood says.

“Our office sees far too many claims being submitted where, for example, parents have represented that they will be the regular driver of a vehicle when in fact the vehicle was purchased by them for use by their child.

“Paying the lower premium is all well and good until a loss is suffered. Simple desk-top investigations using Facebook or other social media searches can all too easily reveal misrepresentations made by consumers who forget to cover their tracks when making misrepresentations to their insurance companies,” Wood adds.

Van Schalkwyk says, “Like all fraud, it’s only a matter to time until the perpetrators will be found out and could face prosecution. Starting out in a career with a criminal record is no way to build a future. I urge youth to stay on the right side of the law despite the many challenges of the current economic climate. Don’t put further obstacles in your path.”

Witnesses are key in arbitration

Legal procedure makes it immensely difficult for a party at arbitration to win its case without witnesses.

For example, should an employer send, no witnesses to a CCMA arbitration the employer’s representative will find it extremely difficult to win the case because the testimony of witnesses normally forms the crucial core of the procedure at any arbitration hearing.

The procedural guidelines laid down require the arbitrator to start off by explaining the arbitration process and rules.

This entails explaining:

• that the employer is normally required to present its case first. This will be done via witnesses, documents and other evidence

• the right to cross examine that witness

• the arbitrator has the right to ask the witness questions for clarity and the employer is allowed to re-examine the witness, but only regarding the issues raised during cross examination

• once all the employer’s witnesses have been heard the employee presents his/her case according to the abovelisted steps.

Thereafter the arbitrator must:

• Hear closing statements

• Assess the evidence and make the award.

The evidence that the arbitrator assesses for purposes of deciding in favour of the employer or employee falls into three broad categories. Viz:

• Documents

• Sundry items such as video tapes, stolen goods, photos and other items relevant to the case at hand

• Witness testimony

While all three types of evidence are very important the testimony of witnesses is the most crucial of all. This is because it is difficult (and often impossible) to bring documentary or other evidence without using witnesses as a channel. For example, should the employer’s representative need to bring a letter or a video tape as evidence against the employee, the representative will need to validate the letter or video by bringing, as a witness, the author of the letter or the person who filmed the video. Thus, witnesses are normally the conduit for all other evidence.

In the case of NUMSA obo Buthelezi vs Falcon & another (2003, 10 BALR 1110) the employee was dismissed for attempting to steal paint as reported via a sworn statement from the security guard who had caught him. However, as the security guard did not give evidence at the arbitration hearing the arbitrator found the dismissal to be unfair and ordered the employer to reinstate the employee with full back pay.

Not only are witnesses the most crucial source of evidence they are also the most difficult source of evidence to utilise. There are many reasons for this:

• Unless properly managed witnesses can disappear or fail to turn up at the arbitration hearing

• Unless properly prepared witnesses forget important details

• Witnesses can be bribed or otherwise persuaded to lie

• Unless expertly handled witnesses may get nervous during the arbitration hearing. They may therefore get flustered and so make mistakes.

Due to the fact that witnesses are the most crucial means of winning a case at arbitration and, at the same time, the most difficult evidentiary element to control any party at arbitration should use the services of a labour law expert to:

• Identify well in advance all the witnesses that will be needed

• Prepare these witnesses to ensure that they will truthfully give the evidence relevant to the case of the party who calls them

• Work out which witnesses will be used to validate which documents and other evidence.

By Ivan Israelstam, CEO of Labour Law Management Consulting

Taxi strike causes commuter chaos

A major taxi strike is underway in Johannesburg this morning, causing chaos as commuters try to get to work.

Major transport routes – including the N1 between Johannesburg and Pretoria at Allandale, the M1, N12 and the N3 – have been blocked. Traffic has ground to a halt, causing road users to be stranded in traffic jams backing up for kilometres.

According to EWN, drivers affiliated to South Africa National Taxi Council (Santaco) have gone on strike on Thursday morning after talks with SA Taxi Finance Holdings deadlocked. The association argues that the monthly instalments on the Toyota Quantums it uses are simply unaffordable at prime plus 10%.

People urged to stay at home
The Gauteng Education Department says it will be safer for parents to keep their children at home today. A number of large corporates in Johannesburg’s CBD have advised their employees to stay at home too.

Shots have been fired
There have been reports of gunshots fired as taxis congregated near the Mall of Africa at the Allandale Road off-ramp.

Costs for commuters
Commuters have taken to Twitter to voice their frustrations at being unable to get around the city. Aside from an inability to get to work and the financial implications of losing a day’s wage, people are also citing lost opportunities (such as job interviews) as well as the dangers of taking lifts from strangers to meet commitments (which could result in kidnap, rape or human trafficking).

Image credit: Traffic SA

Darkness descends on Eskom

South Africa’s state-owned enterprises have been hit by one scandal after another signalling serious political and corporate governance failures. The largest of these, the power utility Eskom, has seen its CEO Brian Molefe resign, then return, and then be fired – all in the space of seven months. This was followed by the unexpected resignation of Eskom Chairperson Ben Ngubane. The Conversation Africa’s Sibonelo Radebe asked Owen Skae to make sense of it all.

What do you make of what’s happening at Eskom?
It’s an unholy mess. The entire basis of the departure, reappointment and subsequent firing of the Eskom CEO raises so many red flags it’s hard to know where to start. And, to cap it all, the chairman has resigned with immediate effect. That means Eskom is without a CEO and now has a stand-in chairperson.

One thing is clear. The board, the chairperson Ben Ngubane, the minister of public enterprises Lynne Brown, and Molefe failed in their duties to serve Eskom. They failed South Africa’s taxpayers who are the indirect shareholders of Eskom. And they failed the country.

To understand their duties, one has to consider the basic principles of governing state owned enterprises. Eskom is a public company and its sole shareholder is the government. The shareholder representative is the ministry of public enterprises. A shareholder compact guides the relationship between the board, the executives and the minister.

The shareholder compact is an annual agreement between Eskom’s leadership and the minister. It documents the power utility’s mandate, as well as key performance measures. It also sets out what’s expected from a good governance perspective. It’s meant to avoid the kind of mess that has visited Eskom over the past few months.

What went wrong?
A number of things.

The main one is that corporate governance rules designed to manage conflicts of interest were totally disregarded.

The country’s Companies Act spells out what a director may or may not do if they have a personal financial interest in a matter. These rules apply as much to state owned enterprises as they do to publicly listed ones. The Eskom situation suggests that directors, and Molefe in particular, disregarded this principle.

This is highlighted in the former public protector Thuli Madonsela’s “State of Capture” report which suggested that Molefe had had an improper relationship with the Guptas, a family of businessmen with close ties to President Jacob Zuma. Among other things, the report questioned the way in which the Eskom leaders collaborated with the Guptas to buy, some say hijack, a mine supplying power utility with coal.

The Eskom board and the minister also failed to apply their minds properly around Molefe’s controversial departure and return. This includes a deal to give him a pension payout of R30 million just 18 months in the job and 13 years before he is due to reach retirement age.

A good understanding of the act, as well as the codes of good corporate governance that have been developed in the country, make it clear that the board should have:

  • Called a special meeting to consider Molefe’s departure;
  • Applied its mind to the circumstances of his departure; and
  • Ensured that the necessary legal, risk and reputation issues were addressed.

Another big area of failure was the role of the board’s chairperson. Even though he has resigned, he should still be held accountable for not providing the necessary oversight at such a momentous time.

As the only shareholder, the government is also complicit. As the shareholder representative the minister of public enterprises had the responsibility of asking the board questions as part of a consultative process that’s set out in the shareholder compact.

Either the minister wasn’t properly informed or didn’t ask the questions she was entitled to ask, or a mixture of both. This raises red flags about her level of commitment to the shareholder compact.

What does it tell us about the broader political environment?
There’s just too much interference – for nefarious reasons – from outsiders in the running of state owned enterprises. Excessive power and authority is vested in too few people. I often use the analogy of being a sports coach. Imagine a situation where the coach is called to account for his actions every day, where he has no say in who is picked and is told to change the game plan. The situation becomes unmanageable.

Interference undermines the way things should be, erodes confidence and allows conflicts of interest to flourish. This is particularly true when the interference is from people who aren’t acting in the best interests of the team.

But being untouchable is also a recipe for disaster. So we have to find a middle ground. The rules of the game must be established and the parties must carry them out with integrity, competence, responsibility, accountability, fairness and transparency.

These rules of the game are clearly set out in the South African context. Nobody can claim they don’t know what they are. In the case of Eskom they’ve simply been flouted.

What do the events at Eskom tell us about state owned enterprises in South Africa?
Sadly, state owned enterprises are seen as instruments to serve an elite few rather than fulfilling their broader mandate.

On top of this they aren’t financially viable which means they’ll continue to be a drain on the fiscus. The government must consider partnerships with the private sector. This can be done by selling minority stakes as suggested by former finance minister Pravin Gordhan.

The success of the partly privatised telecommunications entity Telkom supports this view. The company has just posted handsome profits, suggesting it’s a model that could be used to turn around other state owned enterprises, including Eskom.

By Owen Skae for www.mg.co.za

Moody’s deals SA another blow

Moody’s has downgraded the credit ratings of South Africa’s top five banks, three development finance institutions, certain City Power and Sanral credit ratings, and 10 regional and local governments.

In addition, the company downgraded Eskom, Sasol, MTN, ACSA and eight other South African corporates.

The downgrades follow “the weakening of the South African government’s credit profile”, it said in a statement on Monday after the markets closed.

On Friday, rating agency Moody’s downgraded both South Africa’s local and foreign currency rating to Baa3 from Baa2 and maintained a negative outlook.

The five banks – Standard Bank, FirstRand, Absa, Nedbank and Investec – have now all been downgraded to the same level as the country with the same negative outlook.

Reacting to the latest downgrades, Democratic Alliance finance spokesperson David Maynier told Fin24 that “the negative effects of President Jacob Zuma’s ‘midnight cabinet reshuffle’ are spreading like a disease throughout the economy and have now resulted in the downgrade of the five largest banks in SA”.

The rand was not affected by the downgrades and was trading 0.92% stronger against the dollar at 20:40 on Monday. The banks had mixed runs by the close of business and before the Moody’s announcement. Barclays Africa (Absa) was up 1.71%, Nedbank was down 1.95%, Standard Bank was up 0.77%, FirstRand (FNB) was up 0.7% and Investec was down 0.68%.

Regarding the development finance institutions, Moody’s downgraded the long-term foreign-currency issuer ratings of the Development Bank of Southern Africa (DBSA), the Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa (IDC) and the long term local- and foreign-currency issuer ratings of the Land and Agricultural Development Bank of South Africa (Land Bank) to Baa3 from Baa2.

Land Bank’s local- and foreign-currency and DBSA’s foreign-currency short-term issuer ratings were also downgraded to Prime-3 from Prime-2. The outlook on all long-term global scale ratings is negative. At the same time, the rating agency affirmed the Aa1.za/P-1.za national-scale issuer ratings (NSRs) assigned to DBSA and Land Bank.

Regarding the downgrading of the banks, Moody’s said the primary driver is the challenging operating environment in South Africa, characterised by a pronounced economic slowdown, and weakening institutional strength that has led Moody’s to lower South Africa’s macro profile score to “moderate-” from “moderate”.

“The lower macro profile exerts pressure on the individual factors on banks’ scorecards, and implies that the country’s banks need stronger loss-absorption and liquidity buffers to withstand the headwinds and in order to remain at the same rating levels,” it said.

“The rating agency expects GDP growth of only 0.8% in 2017 and 1.5% in 2018, from 0.3% in 2016, levels significantly below the government’s target growth.

“These challenging economic conditions, combined with potentially weaker investor confidence, volatility in asset prices, and higher funding costs will likely pressure banks’ earnings and asset quality metrics going forward, and challenge their resilient financial performance so far.

“In addition, the banks’ high sovereign exposure, mainly in the form of government debt securities held as part of their liquid assets requirement, links their credit profile to that of the government. The top five banks’ overall sovereign exposure, including loans to state-related entities, averages more than 150% of their capital bases, according to South African Reserve Bank’s regulatory returns as of March 2017.”

List of 13 South African sub-sovereigns that were affected (including Sanral and City Power):

Downgrades

Issuer: City Power Johannesburg

LT Issuer Rating, Downgraded to Baa3 from Baa2

Issuer: East Rand Water Care Company

LT Issuer Rating, Downgraded to Ba1 from Baa3

Issuer: The South African National Roads Ag Ltd

ST Issuer Rating, Downgraded to NP from P-3

LT Issuer Rating, Downgraded to Ba1 from Baa3

Issuer: District Municipality of Amathole

LT Issuer Rating, Downgraded to Ba2 from Ba1

Issuer: Municipality of Breede Valley

LT Issuer Rating, Downgraded to Ba2 from Ba1

Issuer: City of Cape Town

LT Issuer Rating, Downgraded to Baa3 from Baa2

ST Issuer Rating, Downgraded to P-3 from P-2

Senior unsecured MTN, Downgraded to (P)Baa3 from (P)Baa2

Senior Unsecured Regular Bond/Debenture, Downgraded to Baa3 from Baa2

Issuer: Metropolitan Municipality of Ekurhuleni

LT Issuer Rating, Downgraded to Baa3 from Baa2

ST Issuer Rating, Downgraded to P-3 from P-2

Senior Unsecured MTN, Downgraded to (P)Baa3 from (P)Baa2

Senior Unsecured Regular Bond/Debenture, Downgraded to Baa3 from Baa2

Issuer: City of Johannesburg

LT Issuer Rating, Downgraded to Baa3 from Baa2

ST Issuer Rating, Downgraded to P-3 from P-2

Senior Unsecured MTN, Downgraded to (P)Baa3 from (P)Baa2

Senior Unsecured Regular Bond/Debenture, Downgraded to Baa3 from Baa2

Issuer: Metropolitan Municipality Mangaung

LT Issuer Rating, Downgraded to Ba2 from Ba1

Issuer: Municipality of Mbombela

LT Issuer Rating, Downgraded to Ba2 from Ba1

Issuer: Metropolitan Municipality Nelson Mandela

LT Issuer Rating, Downgraded to Baa3 from Baa2

Issuer: Municipality of Rustenburg

LT Issuer Rating, Downgraded to Ba2 from Ba1

Issuer: City of Tshwane

LT Issuer Rating, Downgraded to Ba2 from Ba1
Affirmations

Issuer: City Power Johannesburg

LT Issuer Rating, Affirmed Aa1za

Issuer: East Rand Water Care Company

LT Issuer Rating, Affirmed Aa3za

Issuer: The South African National Roads Ag Ltd

LT Issuer Rating, Affirmed Aa3za

ST Issuer Rating, Affirmed P-1za

Issuer: District Municipality of Amathole

LT Issuer Rating, Affirmed A2za

Issuer: Municipality of Bergrivier

LT Issuer Rating, Affirmed Ba3

Issuer: Municipality of Breede Valley

LT Issuer Rating, Affirmed A2za

ST Issuer Rating, Affirmed P-1za

Issuer: City of Cape Town

ST Issuer Rating, Affirmed P-1za

LT Issuer Rating, Affirmed Aaaza

Senior unsecured MTN, Affirmed Aaaza

Senior Unsecured Regular Bond/Debenture, Affirmed Aaaza

Issuer: Metropolitan Municipality of Ekurhuleni

ST Issuer Rating, Affirmed P-1za

LT Issuer Rating, Affirmed Aaaza

Senior Unsecured MTN, Affirmed Aaaza

Senior Unsecured Regular Bond/Debenture, Affirmed Aaaza

Issuer: City of Johannesburg

ST Issuer Rating Affirmed P-1za

LT Issuer Rating, Affirmed Aa1za

Senior Unsecured MTN, Affirmed Aa1za

Senior Unsecured Regular Bond/Debenture, Affirmed Aa1za

Issuer: Metropolitan Municipality Mangaung

LT Issuer Rating, Affirmed A1za

ST Issuer Rating, Affirmed P-1za

Issuer: Municipality of Mbombela

LT Issuer Rating, Affirmed A2za

Issuer: Metropolitan Municipality Nelson Mandela

LT Issuer Rating, Affirmed Aa1za

Issuer: Municipality of Rustenburg

LT Issuer Rating, Affirmed A1za

Issuer: City of Tshwane

LT Issuer Rating, Affirmed A1za

ST Issuer Rating, Affirmed P-1za
Upgrades

Issuer: Municipality of Bergrivier

LT Issuer Rating, Upgraded to Baa1za from Baa2za

ST Issuer Rating, Upgraded to P-2za from P-3za

Outlook Actions:

Issuer: City Power Johannesburg

Outlook, Changed To Negative From Rating Under Review

Issuer: East Rand Water Care Company

Outlook, Changed To Negative From Rating Under Review

Issuer: The South African National Roads Ag Ltd

Outlook, Changed To Negative From Rating Under Review

Issuer: District Municipality of Amathole

Outlook, Changed To Negative From Rating Under Review

Issuer: Municipality of Bergrivier

Outlook, Changed To Negative From Stable

Issuer: Municipality of Breede Valley

Outlook, Changed To Negative From Rating Under Review

Issuer: City of Cape Town

Outlook, Changed To Negative From Rating Under Review

Issuer: Metropolitan Municipality of Ekurhuleni

Outlook, Changed To Negative From Rating Under Review

Issuer: City of Johannesburg

Outlook, Changed To Negative From Rating Under Review

Issuer: Metropolitan Municipality Mangaung

Outlook, Changed To Negative From Rating Under Review

Issuer: Municipality of Mbombela

Outlook, Changed To Negative From Rating Under Review

Issuer: Metropolitan Municipality Nelson Mandela

Outlook, Changed To Negative From Rating Under Review

Issuer: Municipality of Rustenburg

Outlook, Changed To Negative From Rating Under Review

Issuer: City of Tshwane

Outlook, Changed To Negative From Rating Under Review

Ratings not affected:

Issuer: City of Tshwane

ST Issuer Rating, NP

Issuer: Metropolitan Municipality Mangaung

ST Issuer Rating, NP

Issuer: Municipality of Breede Valley

ST Issuer Rating, NP

Issuer: Municipality of Bergrivier

ST Issuer Rating, NP

By Matthew le Cordeur for Fin24

 

Follow us on social media: 

               

View our magazine archives: 

                       


My Office News Ⓒ 2017 - Designed by A Collective


SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER
Top