You are currently viewing our desktop site, do you want to visit our Mobile web app instead?
 Registered users can save articles to their personal articles list. Login here or sign up here

Naspers’s biggest investor considers cutting R245bn stake

Reportedly over concerns the GEPF is overexposed to a single stock.

Naspers’s biggest shareholder is considering whether to reduce its R245 billion stake in Africa’s biggest company because of concern it’s overexposed to a single stock, according to four people with knowledge of the matter.

South Africa’s Government Employees Pension Fund is being encouraged by its manager, the Public Investment Corporation, to reduce its Naspers shareholding of about 16%, said three of the people, who asked not to be identified as the talks are private. Any decision is ultimately up to the GEPF.

Naspers’s value has grown 72-fold since 2004 on the back of the success of an early-stage investment in Chinese games developer Tencent, which listed in Hong Kong that year. That’s turned Naspers, a Cape Town-based internet technology investor once focused on South African newspapers, into a R1.53 trillion global entity. But it’s also made the company dependent on China, where it has little influence.

“Naspers success is dependent on the Chinese government,” said Tahir Maepa, deputy general manager for members affairs of the Public Servants Association, whose 240 000-members make it the biggest labor union representing contributors to the GEPF. “It’s a huge risk, not only for the PIC, it’s a risk for the South African economy and the JSE,” he said, adding that the GEPF should “definitely” cut its stake.

The rapid growth also means Naspers accounts for almost 25% of a shareholder-weighted index on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange. While that will be reduced when the company spins off its Tencent stake and other internet-focused assets into a new vehicle listed in Amsterdam next month, its 73% holding in that entity, known as NewCo, will only cut its weighting in Johannesburg by about a quarter, according to Naspers. Furthermore, Naspers and NewCo are both reliant on the Tencent investment, which is worth more than the company as a whole.

Tencent has been struggling with a Chinese government crackdown on addiction to computer games, and regulators are currently working on an overhaul to the approval process for new titles.

Naspers currently makes up almost 21% of the value of the GEPF’s listed equity holdings, the fund said in an emailed response to questions. “The GEPF does review its benchmarks from time to time,” although “not all reviews lead to changes.” The pension fund didn’t answer a query about whether it has held talks with the PIC about the Naspers stake.

Naspers declined to comment on discussions with specific investors. “The formation and listing of NewCo is in response to shareholder requests,” spokeswoman Shamiela Letsoalo said in an emailed response to questions. The move will allow investors to move “some of their weight off the JSE onto (Amsterdam’s) AEX index while at the same time continuing to lock in continued high returns,” she said. “This will likely result in shareholders having more balanced weightings and will help to reduce any overhang.”

Read: Naspers finds ways to convince SA of foreign move

While Naspers acknowledges that the company’s assets and management will overlap with NewCo “there are also important differences,” Letsoalo said. The parent group will separately own news business Media24, online marketplace Takealot and “continue to invest in South Africa’s fast-growing ecommerce and internet segment,” she said. “These differences will cause many investors to view them separately within their portfolio.”

NewCo will hold various internet businesses around the world, including Russian social-media network Group and Indian food-delivery service Swiggy as well as Tencent.

The debate over the stake in Naspers has been going on for months. One element being discussed is whether the GEPF should change its holding from an arrangement known as a full SWIX, or shareholder-weighted index, to one called a capped SWIX, where a single stock can make up a maximum of 10% of the funds, three of the people said. Any sell down would be done in phases, one of the people said.

Phased selldown

Last October, another of the PIC’s clients, the Unemployment Insurance Fund, sold Naspers shares to switch from a full SWIX position to a capped one, the fund said in an emailed response to questions. Prior to this it had used derivatives to hedge the risk but found this too costly, it said.

What to do with the GEPF’s Naspers stake is being considered by the fund’s board of trustees, one of the people said. Pierre Snyman, a member of the board and chairman of the Public Servants Association, declined to comment.

Some senior members of the GEPF are opposing cutting the shareholding, said one of the people.

“The PIC does not publicly discuss its strategy on specific investee companies,” Deon Botha, its head of Corporate Affairs, said in a response to queries.

© 2019 Bloomberg L.P.

Get access to Moneyweb's financial intelligence and support quality journalism for only
R63/month or R630/year.
Sign up here, cancel at any time.


To comment, you must be registered and logged in.


Don't have an account?
Sign up for FREE

Perhaps they should frame this in an NPV argument. What is the alternative that will give you a higher expected return than Naspers?

Tongaat Hulett and Steinhoff? Wait. This doesn’t sound right.

They can always invest in Eskom or SAA or SAPO or SABC and such rising stars.R200billion will help Eskom a lot for a few weeks

One thing is close to certain-the GEPF will time the exit incorrectly. Look at Ayo . Summarizes their investment capability-useless lot!

The downside of this is that pensioner pensions are going to be reduced when they move away from Naspers, and, on the other hand if they fail to cover their losses then the tax payer foots the shortfall

Transactions that big, even in the lower tens of billions, the word “timing” is of great different meaning compared to that of the “retail” folk.

Good idea. Bank profits, unlikely to find a better historical investment performance. Future performance? Personally I think there is better value out there. I always ask the question, would I buy 100% of the Company at its current value and take it private? In the case of Naspers the risk is simply too high and the share is priced for perfection.

is gepf / pic the same crowd that allowed investment in steinhoff??? or was the steinhoff-debacle a type of wake-up call for them???

I wouldn’t worry too much – Naspers will just add an ANC heavyweight onto it’s Board and the problem will be solved!

Mmm interesting that Naspers is now in the sights of the politicians and the unions, wonder what sits behind this.

As Koos Says So, Folks this is nothing to worry about we will continue to ride on the Tencent wave until I cash out completely….

I am not sure why Koos Bekker gets all the flack he does. From what I have read and heard of him (very good interview on RSG some time ago) he seems to be quite sane and reasonable. For someone who has been invested since ~1996 all I can say is he has contributed tons to shareholder value. Which is all I can ask as a shareholder. As far as I am concerned he can have one eye and scales on his body, I don’t care. Koos did what he was supposed to do for me. In spades.

Load All 12 Comments
End of comments.





Follow us:

Search Articles:Advanced Search
Click a Company: