exv4w20



 








	Preliminary Views on Value




	Project Ring






 









 








	Process Update Process Update Industry Overview Capital Markets Perspective RCM
Overview Microcell Overview Approach to Value Financial Forecasts Preliminary
Views on Value




	Project Ring 1






 









 








	Overview




	•Rogers Wireless Communications Inc. (“RCM“or the “Company”) is considering
executing a Substantial Issuer Bid




	•The transaction will have the effect of transferring financial leverage
related to RCI Communications’ (“RCI”) acquisition of AWE’s stake in RCM from
RCI to RCM




	•Potential transaction would be subject to formal valuation requirements (OSC
Rule 61-501, Quebec Policy Q-27 and RCM’s Minority Shareholder Protection
Agreement)




	•BMO Nesbitt Burns retained to provide formal valuation of Class B Restricted
Voting Shares




	•Formal valuation is to be conducted pro forma Microcell acquisition




	•This draft document provides preliminary views on value based onwork done to
date




	•Closure on outstanding issues/due diligence, including feedback from the
Independent Committee and finalization of terms of the issuer bid transaction,
are required for BMO Nesbitt Burns to be in a position to provide the formal
valuation




	Project Ring 2






 









 








	Work Status




	•Process to be conducted:
-information request list provided to management
-preliminary information received
-organizational meeting
-financial modeling working session
-conference call (financial model)
-management due diligence session
-management due diligence (financial model)
-approach to value internal beat-up
-preliminary views as to value internal beat-up
-conference call (general due diligence)
-management confirmation of forecast
-preliminary valuation internal beat-up
-final due diligence
-review RCI intention
-deliver final valuation report




	•BMO Nesbitt Burns would expect to deliver a
formal valuation to the Independent Committee a week
after this presentation subject to timely completion
of duediligence and finalization of the terms of the
issuer bid transaction
Project Ring 3






 









 








	Status of Work




	•Outstanding Items/Due Diligence:
-due diligence sessions:
legal
auditors
-management certificate




	Project Ring 4






 









 








	Scope of Review




	•Annual Reports, Annual Information Forms and Management Proxy Circulars and
Quarterly Reports (1999-2003)




	•3-yr Strategic Plan (Dated Feb 3, 2004)
-3 year historical management reports




	•FY 2004 -2006 summary Budget (dated mid-September 2004)




	•Draft Board presentation on Microcellacquisition (dated September 16, 2004)




	•Presentation to credit rating agencies (week of October 25, 2004)




	•Management due diligence sessions




	•Management forecast 2004-2009 based on management due diligence sessions
Project Ring 5






 









 








	Assumptions and Limitations




	•Among other things; BMO Nesbitt Burns has
relied upon, and assumed:




	- the review by BMO Nesbitt
Burns did not encompass a review of a complete
copy of the TDSI/Management financial model as
Management has indicated thatit was the
intellectual property of TDSI




	- the completeness, accuracy
and fair presentation of all financial or
other information obtained from public
sources or provided by management or the
Company




	- thatforecasts, projections and
budgets are reasonable in the circumstances
and consistent with historical operating
experience and accounting policies andreflect
the best currently available estimates or
judgments of management and the Company




	- that no prior valuations
relating to the Company, its subsidiaries
(including Microcell) or any of their
businesses or assets have been prepared during
the past 24 months




	- that there is no plan or
proposal for any material change in theaffairs
of the Company or any of its subsidiaries
aside from the Microcellacquisition




	- that no formal offers or
negotiations for all or a material partof the
securities or assets of the Company or any of
its subsidiaries have been made or occurred
during the past 24 months other than the offer
to acquire AWE’s stake in RCM
Project Ring 6






 









 








	Industry Overview Process Update Industry Overview Capital Markets Perspective
RCM Overview Microcell Overview Approach to Value Financial Forecasts
Preliminary Views on Value
Project Ring 7






 









 








	Canadian Wireless Industry -Penetration Forecasts
Penetration Forecasts
Forecasts of market penetration differ substantially
Source: Yankee Group, BMO NB Research, RCM Management
A forward 5-year CAGR of 7.3% would achieve 65% market penetration by 2009
Canadian Wireless Subscriber Growth
Source: Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association and RCMManagement
32.1%23.2%26.4%29.5%26.8%22.3%12.6%11.0%11.8%8.9%8.4%7.3%5.9%0.05.010.015.020.02
5.0199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009Wireless
Subscribers0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%YoY Growth Rate 2004 — 2009 CAGR = 7.3%Total
Canadian Subscribers YoY Growth1999 — 2004 CAGR = 167%Forecasted Canadian
Subscribers47%59%55%51%62%65%20304050607080200120022003200420052006200720082009P
enetration (%)Yankee’s U.S.Yankee’s 3-Yr Lagged CanadaYankee’s CanadaRCMBMO NB
Research CanadaRBC CMResearch Canada
Project Ring 8






 









 








	Global Wireless Industry -Market Penetration
Source: Yankee Group
Global Market Penetration Forecast
Canadian market penetration lags that of other developed markets
Time-Adjusted Market Penetration Since Service Launch
Recently Canada has de-coupled from tracking US trendline
Source: RCM 010203040506070809010020012002200320042005200620072008Penetration
(%)United Kingdom Finland Australia Japan South Korea United States Canada
Canada 3Yr lag 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% 10111213141516171819202122
France Japan Sweden UK USA Canada
Project Ring 9






 









 








	Canadian Wireless Industry -Competition for Subscribers
Leading players converging on ability to win new customers
Market Share of Wireless Subscribers
Source: BMO NB Research Microcell RCM TelusBell 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
40% Q3/01Q4/01Q1/02Q2/02Q3/02Q4/02Q1/03Q2/03Q3/03Q4/03Q1/04Q2/04 Source: RCM
Quarterly Net Subscriber Additions RCMBell
MobilityTelusMicrocell0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%Q3 ‘03Q4 ‘03Q1 ‘04Q2 ‘04Q3
‘0429.2%38.1%27.2%5.5%Annual 2003 Market Share
Project Ring 10






 









 








	ARPU (blended)
Churn (blended)
Constant trend in ARPU over last several quarters
Churn trending downwards for industry. Microcellaffected by higher mix of
prepaid subs
Source: RCM
Source: RCM Canadian Wireless Industry -ARPU and
Churn$0.00$10.00$20.00$30.00$40.00$50.00$60.00$70.001Q002Q003Q004Q001Q012Q013Q01
4Q011Q022Q023Q024Q021Q032Q033Q034Q031Q042Q04 Monthly ARPU
0.0%0.5%1.0%1.5%2.0%2.5%3.0%3.5%4.0%1Q002Q003Q004Q001Q012Q013Q014Q011Q022Q023Q02
4Q021Q032Q033Q034Q031Q042Q04Monthly Churn
BellTelusRCMMicrocell
BellTelusRCMMicrocell
Project Ring 11






 









 








	Canadian Wireless Industry -ARPU
ARPU (prepaid)
ARPU (postpaid)
Prepaid ARPU dramatically lower than Postpaid
Constant trend in postpaid ARPU over last several quarters
Source: RCM
Source: RCM
$0.00$10.00$20.00$30.00$40.00$50.00$60.00$70.001Q002Q003Q004Q001Q012Q013Q014Q011
Q022Q023Q024Q021Q032Q033Q034Q031Q042Q04Monthly ARPU
$0.00$10.00$20.00$30.00$40.00$50.00$60.00$70.001Q002Q003Q004Q001Q012Q013Q014Q011
Q022Q023Q024Q021Q032Q033Q034Q031Q042Q04Monthly ARPU
BellRCMMicrocell
BellRCMMicrocell
Project Ring 12






 









 








	Canadian Wireless Industry -Churn
Churn (prepaid)
Churn (postpaid)
RCM not focused on prepaid churn
Postpaid churn trending downward for industry leaders
Source: RCM
Source: RCM
Note: Churn shown for TelusMobility is its blended churn
Note: Churn shown for TelusMobility is its blended churn
0.00%0.50%1.00%1.50%2.00%2.50%3.00%3.50%4.00%1Q002Q003Q004Q001Q012Q013Q014Q011Q0
22Q023Q024Q021Q032Q033Q034Q031Q042Q04Monthly Churn
0.00%0.50%1.00%1.50%2.00%2.50%3.00%3.50%4.00%4.50%5.00%1Q002Q003Q004Q001Q012Q013
Q014Q011Q022Q023Q024Q021Q032Q033Q034Q031Q042Q04Montly Churn
BellRCMMicrocellTelus
BellRCMMicrocellTelus
Project Ring 13






 









 








	Canadian Wireless Industry -Revenue Mix (Voice vs. Data)
Source: Yankee Group
Data will become an increasingly important
source of revenue for the industry
99%91%92%93%94%95%97%100%0%20%40%60%80%100%20012002200320042005200620072008
Voice RevenueData
Revenue$5,536$7,297$6,464$8,964$8,540$8,084$9,549$9,295Canadian Wireless Voice
and Data Revenue Forecast
Project Ring 14






 









 








	EBITDA Margins
Margins continuing on an upward trend
Note: Bell Mobility data not available for periods prior to Q1/02
Source: RCM Historic EBITDA
Margins0.0%5.0%10.0%15.0%20.0%25.0%30.0%35.0%40.0%45.0%50.0%Q1/01Q2/01Q3/01Q4/01
Q1/02Q2/02Q3/02Q4/02Q1/03Q2/03Q3/03Q4/03Q1/04Q2/04Q3/04EBITDA MarginsMobility
RCMBell MobilityTelus
Project Ring 15






 









 








	Capex as a % of Network Revenue reaching 11-14% for leading players
11%10%13%14%14%25%050100150200250Q1/01Q2/01Q3/01Q4/01Q1/02Q2/02Q3/02Q4/02Q1/03Q2
/03Q3/03Q4/03Q1/04Q2/04Capex (C$ millions)-20%0%20%40%60%80%100%Capex as a % of
Network Revenue
Canadian Wireless Industry
-CapexSpendRCMMicrocellBellTelus14%24%44%55%27%41%17%20%22%22%37%31%25%34%050100
150200250Q1/01Q2/01Q3/01Q4/01Q1/02Q2/02Q3/02Q4/02Q1/03Q2/03Q3/03Q4/03Q1/04Q2/04C
apex (C$ millions)0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%Capex as a % of Network
Revenue63%56%155%82%9%4%3%10%15%27%68%27%31%48%050100150200250Q1/01Q2/01Q3/01Q4/
01Q1/02Q2/02Q3/02Q4/02Q1/03Q2/03Q3/03Q4/03Q1/04Q2/04Capex (C$
millions)0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%Capex as a % of Network
Revenue13%9%26%39%20%25%11%16%18%23%42%48%23%34%050100150200250Q1/01Q2/01Q3/01Q4
/01Q1/02Q2/02Q3/02Q4/02Q1/03Q2/03Q3/03Q4/03Q1/04Q2/04Capex (C$
millions)0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%Capex as a % of Network
RevenueCapital expenditure figures not reported




	Project Ring 16






 









 








	Canadian Wireless Industry -Competitors’
Prepaid and Postpaid Strategies




	Recent trend towards lower mix of prepaid customers
among leading players Prepaid/Postpaid Split (2Q
‘02)26%15%23%46%74%85%77%54%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%BellTelusRCMMicroce
llPercentage of Wireless SubscribersPrepaid/Postpaid Split (2Q
‘04)24%18%19%52%76%82%81%48%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%BellTelusRCMMicroce
llPercentage of Wireless Subscribers
PrepaidPostpaid
PrepaidPostpaid
Project Ring 17






 









 








	Canadian Wireless Market Trends
ARPU Growth
Timeline to 3G Introduction
Market has exhibited ARPU growth to date (2000 -2004 CAGR of 3.2%) but is
forecast to slow
RCM forecasts a flat to declining ARPU profile Canada appears to be on a
2-3 year lag versus US market and more versus European markets Wide range of
estimates for 2009 penetration: Yankee Group 55%, RCM management 65%, RBC CM
Research 60.1%, UBS 61% by 2010 and, BMO NB Research 61.6% by 2008 Canadian
Penetration LevelsGrowth in DataFactors Influencing Churn Market seeing better
than expected growth in data revenue Boosts ARPU and margins Microcell
transaction reduces competition Disciplined pricing environment Anticipated
entry of Virgin into prepaid market in 2005 Growth in prepaid customers
Potential for wireless number portability, but not likely until post 2005
Introduction of 3G Timing of capex spend being accelerated by some
competitors, delayed by others Likely to emerge in the US first, impacting
Canadian roaming revenues Handset development importantImpact of Wi-Fi / WiMax
Potential risk to cellular industry long term Not yet a topic of concern among
industry analysts
Project Ring 18






 









 








	Canadian Wireless Market -Analyst Commentary
Research analysts generally positive on industry outlook Research Scotia
Capital Henderson, John Fall 2004 “Our work shows the most important driver of
value increases in the wireless industry is ARPU growth, followed by reductions
in churn, cost of acquisition declines, and growth in subscriber additions.
Year-to-date growth in ARPU has continued at robust 5%+ levels, of which we
estimate 40% is derived from wireless data adoption” BMO Nesbitt Burns Rhamey,
Peter October 1, 2004 “In the wireless segment, performance has been
impressive, characterized by strong top-line growth and improved cost
efficiencies” RBC Capital Markets Talbot, Richard October 1, 2004 “Following a
strong 2003, Canada’s wireless operators continued to exceed the high end of
expectations in the first half of 2004. Both financial and operating metrics
for the four major operators continued to improve.” “The launch of Virgin
Mobile Canada in early 2005 will likely result in increased competition in the
prepaid market. As a result we forecast that customer churn levels will
actually increase in the near term (2005), before declining in 2006.” TD
Securities Lambert, David July 20, 2004 “...increased minutes of use and a
subscriber growth acceleration could drive all four carriers to increase their
capex guidance”
Project Ring 19






 









 








	Capital Markets Perspective Process Update Industry Overview Capital Markets
Perspective RCM Overview Microcell Overview Approach to Value Financial
Forecasts Preliminary Views on Value
Project Ring 20






 









 








	Relative Performance
RCM showing strong performance Relative PerformanceJan 1, 2004 -Nov 8,
2004050100150200250Jan-04Apr-04Jul-04Oct-04Western Wireless 51% RCM 57% US
Cellular 19%Nextel 0%AT&T Wireless 85% Microcell 104%Feb-17-2004Cingular
announces bid for AT&T WirelessMay-13-2004TELUS launches bid for
MicrocellRelative PerformanceJan 1, 2003 -Nov 8,
20040100200300400500600700Jan-03Apr-03Jul-03Oct-03Jan-04Apr-04Jul-04Oct-04Wester
n Wireless 472% RCM 199% US Cellular 62%Nextel 123%AT&T Wireless 140% Microcell
138%May-13-2004TELUS launches bid for MicrocellFeb-17-2004Cingular announces
bid for AT&T Wireless
Project Ring21






 









 








	RCM -Turn of the Float Analysis
Approximately 99% of float has turned at or below current share price of $43.97
5%25%33%19%12%1%4%1%5%30%64%82%94%95%99%100%0%20%40%60%80%100%120%$31-$33$33-$35
$35-$37$37-$39$39-$41$41-$43$43-$45$45-$47Volume (%)Current Price (8-Nov-04):
$43.97Non CumulativeCumulativeNote: Last turn of float (June 2004 to Nov
2004)RCM — Turn of the Float Analysis
Project Ring 22






 









 








	Share Price Performance
Strong performance despite announcement of potentially high leverage post
re-capitalization transaction
Price$10$15$20$25$30$35$40$45$50Jan-04Mar-04May-04Jul-04Sep-04Nov-04Share Price
(C$)13-Sept-04RCI to acquire AT&T Wireless’ stake in RCM for cash consideration
of $36.37 per shareRCMShare Price PerformanceYear-to-Date28-April-04RCI
receives letter from AT&T Wireless’ of its intention to explore monetization of
its RCM stake17-Feb-04RCM prices private placement of US$750 Million Notes
26-Oct-04RCM announces 3rd 03-Nov-04CRTC approvesMicrocell
transaction16-Sept-04RCM makes filings with the Canadian Competition Bureau
regarding Microcell20-Sept-04RCM announces agreement to purchase Microcell for
cash consideration of $35/share05-Nov-04Microcell quarter results; indicates
intention to fund both Microcell & AWE stake purchases with debttransaction
offer expires. 96% of class A shares tendered to RCM offer 3-Sept-04RCI and AWE
enter agreement to facilitate possible sale by AWE of its entire 34% stake in
RCM
Project Ring 23






 









 








	Wide range of target prices although most agree RCM is an “Outperform”
Analysts’ Views Rogers Wireless EPS Estimate EBITDA Estimate Firm
Recommendations Current Target Price (C$) % Change Year over Year Date 2004E
2005E 2004E 2005E Selected Commentary RBC Capital Markets Outperform $50.00 85%
27-Oct-04 $1.36 $2.13 $940 $1,122 “RCM shares trade at 8.9x 2004E and 7.2x
2005E EBITDA, a premium to US wireless peers at 7.1x and 6.5x, which we feel is
warranted given RCM’s superior EBITDA growth and more favourable competitive
environement.” Merril Lynch Outperform $50.00 N/A 27-Oct-04 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
CIBC World Markets Outperform $52.00 73% 26-Oct-04 $1.40 $0.02 $935 $1,049
“Rogers Wireless continues to generate strong operating results driven by
healthy post-paid subscriber growth, impressive increases in ARPU, strong
network revenue growth, significant margin improvements and attractive free
cash flow. In our view this reflects the attractive fundamentals associated
with the Canadian wireless sector” BMO Nesbitt Burns Hold $47.00 45% 26-Oct-04
$1.39 $2.80 $934 $1,100 “We have increased our revenue estimates by 3-4% in
2004 and 2005 to reflect good subscriber and ARPU performance... Our 2005
estimate (EBITDA) has been increased to reflect the stronger growth outlook for
the company” Credit Suisse First Boston Outperform $48.00 92% 26-Oct-04 $1.24
$2.98 $921 $1,053 “On a longer term view, the acquisition should enable Rogers
to add to its spectrum holdings, lower operating costs and add a significant
brand in the pre-paid segment... Microcell standalone EBITDA margin could rise
to the level of Rogers Wireless” Scotia Capital Outperform $65.00 71% 27-Oct-04
$1.54 $2.80 $943 $1,350 “Rogers Wireless currently trades at 7.7x EV/EBITDA
(NTM). Rogers Wireless’ US peer group valuation multiples are 6x-7x (excluding
AWE at 11x). Our $65 target price represent a 7.5x multiple... We believe the
dynamics of the Canadian wireless market are far more attractive than in the
US”
Project Ring24






 









 








	RCM Overview Process Update Industry Overview Capital Markets Perspective RCM
Overview Microcell Overview Approach to Value Financial Forecasts Preliminary
Views on Value
Project Ring 25






 









 








	Historical Operating Statistics -RCM Cost of
Acquisition$279$295$377$390$366$398$428$385$361$416$362$372$344$0$50$100$150$200
$250$300$350$400$450Q3/01Q4/01Q1/02Q2/02Q3/02Q4/02Q1/03Q2/03Q3/03Q4/03Q1/04Q2/04
Q3/04Cost of AcquisitionARPU by
Product$0.00$10.00$20.00$30.00$40.00$50.00$60.00$70.00Q3/01Q4/01Q1/02Q2/02Q3/02Q
4/02Q1/03Q2/03Q3/03Q4/03Q1/04Q2/04Q3/04ARPU (monthly)Postpaid ARPUPrepaid
ARPUPaging ARPUNet Subscriber AdditionsChurn (Blended)PrepaidPostpaid Market
share of net adds
2.63%2.01%1.93%2.23%2.65%2.07%2.13%2.02%1.98%2.23%1.97%2.14%2.03%0.00%1.00%2.00%
3.00%Q3/01Q4/01Q1/02Q2/02Q3/02Q4/02Q1/03Q2/03Q3/03Q4/03Q1/04Q2/04Q3/04Churn
Rate
(Monthly)58.1106.010.8(7.8)17.323.7(11.0)(11.6)18.26.4(29.4)(5.7)8.755.474.254.2
71.371.4123.061.275.797.0166.283.288.388.833.9%26.7%23.3%25.8%22.0%29.5%22.7%31.
7%30.6%20.4%22.8%24.6%26.8%(50.0)0.050.0100.0150.0200.0Q3/01Q4/01Q1/02Q2/02Q3/02
Q4/02Q1/03Q2/03Q3/03Q4/03Q1/04Q2/04Q3/04Net Additions
(000s)0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%40%Market share of net adds
Project Ring 26






 









 








	Historical Operating Performance -RCM
Network Revenue and EBITDA Margins
Free Cash Flow Generation(1)
Strong historic margin improvements and cash flow generation
1.Defined as EBITDA -Capex
(100.0)(50.0)0.050.0100.0150.0200.0250.0300.0Q3/01Q4/01Q1/02Q2/02Q3/02Q4/02Q1/03
Q2/03Q3/03Q4/03Q1/04Q2/04Q3/04($
millions)41.9%29.6%21.8%33.2%36.5%40.7%30.6%39.8%41.1%26.9%30.1%34.3%26.1%010020
0300400500600700Q3/01Q4/01Q1/02Q2/02Q3/02Q4/02Q1/03Q2/03Q3/03Q4/03Q1/04Q2/04Q3/0
4Network Revenue ($ millions)0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%EBITDA Margin
Project Ring 26






 









 








	RCM -Key Business Issues
Competition for MicrocellSubs
Large Prepaid Component of MicrocellSubs
Near-term, Microcellsubs targeted heavily by competitors
BCE already has specific offering to Microcellsubs
RCM to maintain City Fido plan
RCM forecasting Year 1 net loss of 15% of Microcellpostpaid subs post
“reacquisition” efforts
Microcell’sportfolio more prepaid than RCM’s(52% vs 19%)
RCM focused on postpaid subs, implying high true $/sub acquisition cost
for the deal
Spectrum Value / Sale?
Management currently assumes the sale of 10 MHz of spectrum in 2006 for
$200m
Several reasons why this assumption could be challenged: i) demand
questionable; ii) valuation challenging, iii) may be attractive to keep long
term Timing of UMTS and other technologies uncertain, affecting
capexforecasting Analysts comment that BCE and TELUS better positioned for 3G
wave given their relatively greater debt capacitiesUMTS Spend and 3G
PreparednessLeadership in Data Revenue RCM forecasts greater-than-average
portion of data in overall network revenue Forecast based on fact that RCM is
the leader in the data markettoday Industry churn likely to rise initially but
then settle again (similar to the impact felt in US) Not expected until after
2005 in CanadaImpact of Local Number Portability
Project Ring28






 









 








	MicrocellOverview Process Update Industry Overview Capital Markets Perspective
RCM Overview Microcell Overview Approach to Value Financial Forecasts
Preliminary Views on Value
Project Ring29






 









 








	Historical Operating Statistics -Microcell
2.60%3.00%2.80%2.80%2.80%3.90%3.80%2.60%3.30%3.30%3.50%2.80%3.30%0.00%1.00%2.00%
3.00%4.00%5.00%Q3/01Q4/01Q1/02Q2/02Q3/02Q4/02Q1/03Q2/03Q3/03Q4/03Q1/04Q2/04Q3/04
Churn Rate (monthly)Net Subscriber AdditionsChurn (Blended)
9.948.529.031.148.329.6(8.9)(17.8)27.832.3(1.0)(29.3)(1.9)56.851.8(2.4)11.9(42.4
)(59.8)(31.1)(10.4)13.575.113.445.977.72.3%10.6%16.6%19.1%5.2%5.0% (10.0%)
(6.3%)
(25.2%)13.8%9.3%13.7%15.7%(80)(60)(40)(20)020406080100Q3/01Q4/01Q1/02Q2/02Q3/02Q
4/02Q1/03Q2/03Q3/03Q4/03Q1/04Q2/04Q3/04Net Additions (000s) (30%) (25%) (20%)
(15%) (10%) (5%)0%5%10%15%20%25%PrepaidPostpaid % of Net AddsMarket Share of
Net AddsCost of AcquisitionARPU by ProductPrepaid ARPUPostpaid
$311$262$298$294$251$287$274$261$254241$289$253$250$0$30$60$90$120$150$180$210$2
40$270$300$330Q3/01Q4/01Q1/02Q2/02Q3/02Q4/02Q1/03Q2/03Q3/03Q4/03Q1/04Q2/04Q3/04C
ost of Acquisition
$0.00$10.00$20.00$30.00$40.00$50.00$60.00$70.00Q3/01Q4/01Q1/02Q2/02Q3/02Q4/02Q1/
03Q2/03Q3/03Q4/03Q1/04Q2/04Q3/04ARPU (monthly)ARPU




	Project Ring 30






 









 








	Historical Operating Performance -Microcell
Revenue and EBITDA Margins
Free Cash Flow Generation (1)
1.Defined as EBITDA -Capex
Microcell’s margins and cash flow generation are depressed
(120)(100)(80)(60)(40)(20)02040Q3/01Q4/01Q1/02Q2/02Q3/02Q4/02Q1/03Q2/03Q3/03Q4/0
3Q1/04Q2/04Q3/04($ millions)
25.5%14.9%15.8%18.2%9.7%17.5%12.9%-1.5%20.2%25.2%22.7%9.8%3.8%020406080100120140
160180Q3/01Q4/01Q1/02Q2/02Q3/02Q4/02Q1/03Q2/03Q3/03Q4/03Q1/04Q2/04Q3/04Revenue
($millions)(5%)0%5%10%15%20%25%30%EBITDA MarginMargin RevenueEBITDA
31Project Ring






 









 








	Analysts fairly consistent regarding synergies,
PV of tax losses and pro forma leverage
Analysts’ Summary of MicrocellTransaction RBC BMO Scotia CSFB Valuation 7.25x
EV/EBITDA ‘05/’06 7.4x EV/EBITDA ‘05/’adds $4.00 to share price “Fairly benign”
Annual Synergies $54m in ‘05 $111m in ‘06 Network EBITDA margin to 43.2% in ‘06
$150-200m of EBITDA Large component from network integration $100m + EBITDA
improvement $90m EBITDA upside to 200s PV of Tax Losses Value $100 — $200m
$300m $300m $250m Leverage Strong free cash flow reduces financing risk
Expected to rise to 5.0-5.5x Net Debt/LTM EBITDA Pro forma 5.2x Debt/ EBITDA in
2005 5.2x Debt/EBITDA Research RBC Capital Markets Talbot, Richard October 14,
2004 “The migration path for GSM players to the next generation (3G networks is
expected to be costly. As a result, Rogers’ future capex requirements are
likely to be further increased following the purchase. While none of the
Canadian wireless carriers have yet made public their plans with respect to 3G
we estimate it will likely be a 2006 event at the earliest... Rogers may be at
a disadvantage to TELUS Mobility and Bell Mobility, which have less debt
leverage, and the ability to move quickly to 3G and gain competitive advantage
over RCM.” BMO Nesbitt Burns Rhamey, Peter September 21, 2004 “We note that for
TELUS and Bell Canada, the prospect of Rogers Wireless gaining market share
advantage is amply offset by the prospect that the competitive dynamics in the
industry have improved and that Rogers Wireless with significant debt will
price rationally going forward.”
06Deal 32Project Ring






 









 








	Approach to Value Process Update Industry Overview Capital Markets Perspective
RCM Overview Microcell Overview Approach to Value Financial Forecasts
Preliminary Views on Value
33Project Ring






 









 








	Approach to Value
•BMO Nesbitt Burns has examined three methodologies
-discounted cash flow approach
-comparable trading approach
-precedent transaction approach
•En-bloc value:
-highest price available in an open and unrestricted market
-no adjustment for liquidity, lack of control or effect of transaction
-Must consider potential buyers: Review of Potential Buyers International
Buyers Blocked by foreign ownership restrictions Bell Almost certain to be
blocked by Competition Bureau Telus Almost certain to be blocked by Competition
Bureau Shaw Communications Potential buyer but without significant synergies,
only bundling capabilities Québecor — Videotron Potential buyer but without
significant synergies, only bundling capabilities Financial Buyers Possible, no
operational synergy value created. Full use of tax losses not certain Rogers
Communications Potential buyer but without significant synergies, only bundling
capabilities -Little synergy value expected from buyer universe
34Project Ring






 









 








	Methodology #1: Discounted Cash Flow Approach
•Methodology:
-based on Management’s forecast for 2005 -2009
-mid-period discounting
-tax loss carry-forwards modeled/valued separately
•Key assumptions:
-pro forma Microcell
-effective assessment date as of Monday November, 8th
-WACC of 9.5% -10.5%, tax loss carry-forwards discounted at Cost of Equity
-pre Issuer Bid financing
•Key limitations:
-highly sensitive to financial assumptions
-terminal value calculation assumes a “steady state”, difficult to assess in
the volatile wireless industry
35Project Ring






 









 








	Methodology #2: Comparable Trading Approach
•Methodology:
-observed trading multiples from the North American wireless industry
-focused on EV/EBITDA multiples for 2005 and 2006 and P/E multiples for 2006
-derived trading value range applying selected multiples
-applied take-over premium reflecting premiums paid in precedent Canadian
public company transactions
•Key limitations:
-post acquisition of Microcellthere are no publicly traded comparable companies
in Canada
-while not directly comparable due to differences in size, growthpotential,
coverage, network and industry dynamics between the U.S. and Canada, we believe
that the U.S. companies such as Nextel, AT&T Wireless (pre bid), US Cellular
and Western Wireless may provide benchmarks
-the wireless industry is more mature in Europe and Japan and less mature in
Asia Pacific, Africa and South America rendering companies in these markets
less comparable to RCM
-observed trading multiples may reflect factors not to be taken into account in
an assessment of en-bloc value (e.g. liquidity, minority discounts)
36Project Ring






 









 








	Methodology #3: Precedent Transaction Approach
•Methodology:
-considered recent transactions with purchase prices greater than$500 million
principally in the U.S. and Europe
-focused more specifically on the Cingular/ AT&T Wireless, BCE / Bell Mobility,
and RCM / Microcelltransactions in particular
-relied primarily on: EV/EBITDA, adjusted for announced synergies, and,
premiapaid
•Key limitations:
-there have been very few relevant, comparable completed public transactions in
the wireless industry in recent years (i.e. unaffected by Tech bubble)
37Project Ring






 









 








	Financial Forecasts Process Update Industry Overview Capital Markets
Perspective RCM Overview Microcell Overview Approach to Value Financial
Forecasts Preliminary Views on Value
38Project Ring






 









 








	Background to Development of the Management Case
•BMO NB has developed the “Management Case” model on behalf of Management
-BMO NB has made clear to Management that this is RCM’smodel and we have acted
as designers and builders on their behalf
-Management has at various times reviewed and vetted the model created
•Model developed through:
-initial budget and forecast figures supplied by Management (internal budgets
‘04 -’06) and copies of Board and Credit Rating Agency presentations regarding
the Microcellacquisition
-sessions with Management adjusting assumptions and forecasts to arrive at a
current Management view of both RCM stand-alone and RCM pro forma Microcell
39Project Ring






 









 








	Model Logic -Subscriber Base
Canadian Population
Wireless Market Penetration
Wireless Market Size and Annual “Net Adds”
RCM Existing Market Share
RCM Market Share of Net Adds
RCM Subscribers (“Subs”)
MicrocellSubs Acquired
One-time Loss of MicrocellSubs
Pro Forma MergeCo Subs
Annual Net Adds
Annual Deactivations (Both RCM and MicrocellSubs)
Gross Adds (Both RCM and MicrocellSubs)
X
+
+
-
=
-
+
= % Post-Paid Subscribers-Higher value becausehigher ARPU% Pre-Paid
Subscribers-lower valuebecause lower ARPU
40Project Ring






 









 








	Model Logic -Revenues
Number of Subs
Average Revenue Per User -“ARPU”
Cellular Revenue
X
Roaming Revenue
Data Revenue
One-way Messaging
Network Revenues
Equipment Sales
+
+
+
=
+
-Essentially a pass-through with
little or no margin
Total Revenue
=
Focus for Management
41Project Ring






 









 








	Model Logic -Costs
Number of Subs
Operating Costs -Driven per Sub or through simple growth rates
-Customer Service
-Retention
-Credit & Collections
-IT
-Finance & Accounting
-Admin
-Other
X
Additional Microcell Opex
-Schedule provided by Microcell
+
One-time MicrocellTransition Costs
+
Sales & Marketing (“Cost of Acquisition”)
-Large fixed cost component
-Variable components driven by “Gross Adds”
+
+
Equipment Costs
Total Costs
=
-Only in ‘05 and ‘06
42Project Ring






 









 








	Key Drivers -Market Share
Strong penetration forecast offset somewhat by slight market share decline
forecast Canadian Wireless
Penetration35%38%42%47%51%55%59%62%65%0.05.010.015.020.025.030.035.0200120022003
200420052006200720082009(mm of Canadians)0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%Market
ShareVoice penetrationPro Forma Voice
Subscribers37%36%34%34%34%35%0.01.02.03.04.05.06.07.08.0RingMuse2004
Combined20052006200720082009Subscribers
(mm)32%33%33%34%34%35%35%36%36%37%37%38%Blended Market ShareShare
PostpaidPrepaidMarket
subsCanadian populationWireless 43Project Ring






 









 








	Forecast fairly consistent market share of Net Adds post 2007 Key Drivers -Net
AdditionsNet Subscriber
Additions28%25%32%33%33%28%(50)-501001502002503003504004502004200520062007200820
09Net Adds (000s)0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%Market share of Net Postpaid
AddsPrepaidPostpaidMarket Share of Net Postpaid Adds
44Project Ring






 









 








	Key Drivers -ARPU
Moderate decline in postpaid ARPUs forecast
Note: Average Revenue per User (ARPU) expressed on a monthly basis is defined
as cellular revenue divided by the average subscriber base for the period
1. Actuals for 2001 -2003 include some in-bound roaming revenue modelled
separately in forecasts for 2004 -2014
RCM and New Subscribers’ ARPU(1)
Microcell Legacy Subscribers’ ARPU
$55.78$56.16$53.56$52.58$51.91$51.24$50.59$49.94$57.25$13.00$12.75$12.50$11.75$1
1.50$11.02$10.08$10.17$10.29$0$10$20$30$40$50$60$7020012002200320042005200620072
0082009Monthly ARPUPostpaid
ARPU$48.45$48.97$50.04$51.69$51.69$15.00$15.00$15.00$15.00$15.00$0$10$20$30$40$5
0$60$7020052006200720082009Monthly ARPUPostpaid ARPU
ARPUPrepaid
ARPUPrepaid 45Project Ring






 









 








	Key Drivers -Monthly Churn
Forecast moderate decline in churn to 2009
Note: Churn is defined as lost subscribers divided by the average number of
subscribers in the period Postpaid Subscriber Churn RatesPrepaid Subscriber
Churn
Rates0.0%0.5%1.0%1.5%2.0%2.5%3.0%3.5%4.0%4.5%20012002200320042005200620072008200
9Monthly
ChurnForma0.0%0.5%1.0%1.5%2.0%2.5%3.0%3.5%4.0%4.5%200120022003200420052006200720
082009Monthly ChurnForma
RCMMicrocellPro
RingMicrocellPro 46Project Ring






 









 








	Other Assumptions -PP&E and Tax Attributes




	•Treatment of PP&E




	-RCM book and tax balances provided by class




	-RCM book and tax depreciation rates provided by class




	-capex details provided by class




	-Microcell book PP&E allocated to RCM PP&E classes based on historical public
information




	Microcell total UCC pools provided by RCM management and allocated to
classes based on Microcell book split
used same book and tax depreciation rates as for RCM




	-capex savings from Microcell acquisition allocated to Network Equipment




	•Net Operating Losses (NOLs)




	-total of approximately $2.8 billion (post implementation of tax planning
strategies)




	RCM has approximately $1.0 billion




	Microcellhas approximately $1.8 billion




	-full amount of NOLs available to shelter taxable income
47Project Ring






 









 








	Other Assumptions -Purchase Equation
Over $600 million of goodwill assumed Purchase Equation(C$ mm)Total purchase
price$1,287Less: book value of equity acquired($478)Excess purchase
price$809Allocation of excess purchase priceSpectrum and
Brand$173Goodwill$636Total$809Key Assets(C$ mm)Microcell @RCM @Book
ValuesWrite-UpsFair ValuesPP&E$462$0$462Spectrum and
Brand$227$173$400Goodwill$0$636$636
48Project Ring






 









 








	BMO NB Difference to Management Case
•No credit given for sale of spectrum. Management forecasts $200million sale in
2006
49Project Ring






 









 








	Financial Projections -Summary Data Financial Projections2004-2009(C$
millions)200420052006200720082009CAGRNetwork
Revenue$2,399.9$3,308.4$3,594.0$3,862.9$4,131.1$4,351.213%EBITDA
(1)913.51,224.61,437.91,619.01,806.41,929.216% EBITDA Margin of Network
Revenue38.1%37.0%40.0%41.9%43.7%44.3%Depreciation &
Amortization$466.6$581.3$649.8$599.6$562.9$605.35%Capital
Expenditures416.0577.0456.8545.6425.0611.38%Cash
Taxes0.00.00.00.045.1447.6naEBITDA less
Capex497.5647.6981.11,073.41,381.41,317.922%EBITDA less Capex less Cash
Taxes497.5647.6981.11,073.41,336.4870.312%Total Debt /
EBITDA2.3x3.0x2.5x2.2x2.0x1.8xNet Debt / EBITDA2.1x2.6x1.6x0.9x0.1xna1.
Adjusted for one-time integration costs of $224.9 mm in 2005 and $1.5 mm in
2006
50Project Ring






 









 








	Incremental Impact of Microcell Incremental Impact of Microcell($
millions)200420052006200720082009Network Revenue
Stand-alone$2,399.9$2,676.9$2,958.2$3,288.6$3,537.8$3,740.0 Pro
Forma$2,399.9$3,308.4$3,594.0$3,862.9$4,131.1$4,351.2Incremental Network
Revenue$0.0$631.5$635.8$574.3$593.3$611.2EBITDA
Stand-alone$913.5$1,067.9$1,187.3$1,378.6$1,531.3$1,617.1 Pro
Forma(1)913.51,224.61,437.91,619.01,806.41,929.2Incremental
EBITDA$0.0$156.8$250.6$240.3$275.2$312.2Depreciation & Amortization
Stand-alone$466.6$527.3$597.1$559.8$531.5$584.6 Pro
Forma466.6581.3649.8599.6562.9605.3Incremental Depreciation &
Amortization$0.0$54.0$52.6$39.8$31.4$20.6Capital Expenditures
Stand-alone$416.0$489.0$572.8$685.6$454.0$683.3 Pro
Forma416.0577.0456.8545.6425.0611.3Incremental Capital
Expenditures$0.0$88.0($116.0)($140.0)($29.0)($72.0)Cash Taxes
Stand-alone$0.0$0.0$103.1$262.9$318.7$352.1 Pro
Forma0.00.00.00.045.1447.6Savings in Cash
Taxes$0.0$0.0$103.1$262.9$273.6($95.6)EBITDA less Capex
Stand-alone$497.5$578.9$614.5$693.1$1,077.3$933.8 Pro
Forma497.5647.6981.11,073.41,381.41,317.9Incremental EBITDA less
Capex$0.0$68.8$366.6$380.3$304.2$384.2EBITDA less Capex less Cash Taxes
Stand-alone$497.5$578.9$511.4$430.2$758.6$581.7 Pro
Forma497.5647.6981.11,073.41,336.4870.3Incremental EBITDA less Capex less Cash
Taxes$0.0$68.8$469.7$643.2$577.8$288.61. Adjusted for one-time integration
costs of $224.9 mm in 2005 and $1.5 mm in 2006
51Project Ring






 









 








	Preliminary Views
on Value Process Update Industry Overview Capital Markets Perspective RCM
Overview Microcell Overview Approach to Value Financial Forecasts Preliminary
Views on Value
52Project Ring






 









 








	DCF Assumptions
•5 Year DCF
•WACC range of 9.5% -10.5%
•Terminal growth approach to calculating terminal value (1.5% -2.5% )
•Mid-year discounting convention
•Tax losses valued separately
53Project Ring






 









 








	Observations on WACC Selected WACC range of 9.5% -10.5%•Very few comparable
companies in North America•Observed betas have very low R-squared’s•Microcell
ignored due to zero R-squared and uncharacteristically low beta of .22•AT&T
Wireless (pre-bid) includedto broaden the universe •Selected beta of 1.3
implies an unleveredbeta of 1.02 based on a targeted 40%/60% Debt / Equity
structure•Cost of debt based on the spread between current yield on RCM’s 6.75%
U.S. Note due 2014 and benchmark US Treasury rate swapped into Canadian
dollars•Equity Risk Premium of 6% based on observed historicalpremia over
benchmark Canadian treasuries
54Project Ring






 









 








	WACC LeveredEstimatedDebt/Company NameBarra BetaBloomberg BetaR2Tax RateMarket
EquityUnlevered Beta% Debt% EquityAT&T
Wireless(1)1.271.130.1735.0%32.2%0.9324.4%75.6%Microcell Telecommunications Inc
(1)0.330.220.0033.0%82.6%0.1445.2%54.8%Nextel Communications
Inc.1.351.350.2135.0%29.1%1.1422.5%77.5%US Cellular
Corp.0.910.900.2035.0%33.4%0.7425.0%75.0%Western
Wireless1.271.880.1635.0%67.0%1.3140.1%59.9%Rogers Wireless
(3)0.411.190.1236.3%58.5%0.8736.9%63.1%Mean
0.851.1134.9%54.1%0.8434.0%66.0%Median 0.911.1935.0%58.5%0.8736.9%63.1%Average
(ex. Microcell)1.041.291.00AssumptionsCost of EquityCorporate Tax Rate36.3%Cost
of Equity:Target Capital Structure:Debt40% Where:Equity60% Risk Free Rate
(Rf):4.5% Market Risk Premium:6.0%WACC Calculation Risk Free Rate
(Rf)(2):4.46%Spead3.25% Beta1.30Cost of Debt7.7%Cost of Debt (After-Tax)4.9%
Cost of Common Equity = 12.3%BetaWACCUnleveredLeveredBloomberg Beta of
Comparables (Mean)1.001.42 Cost of Debt (After-Tax)4.9%Bloomberg Beta of
Comparables (Median)0.871.24Barra Beta — Wireless telecommunications1.05Cost of
Common Equity = 12.3%Selected Levered Beta0.911.30WACC=9.3%1. Capitalization
reflects pre-bid prices; No longer publicly traded2. Govt. of Canada 10 Yr3.
Pro Forma for Microcell Transaction
55Project Ring






 









 








	Five Year DCF -Pre NPV of NOLs Stand-alone11/9/2004 to Projected Fiscal Year
Ending 12/31Free Cash
Flow12/31/200412/31/2004(1)20052006200720082009Terminal(C$ million)Selected
Data:Revenue$2,644.5$537.8$3,703.8$4,005.7$4,272.3$4,530.8$4,753.9$4,849.0EBITDA
913.5$177.8999.71,436.41,619.01,806.41,929.21,967.8 EBITDA
Margin34.5%33.1%27.0%35.9%37.9%39.9%40.6%40.6%Unlevered Free Cash FlowsEBIT
$447.0$93.4$418.4$786.7$1,019.3$1,243.5$1,324.01,350.5 Cash
Taxes(162.3)(33.9)(151.9)(285.6)(370.0)(451.4)(480.6)(490.2)Unlevered Net
Income$284.7$59.5$266.5$501.1$649.3$792.1$843.4$860.2 Depreciation
466.6$84.4581.3649.8599.6562.9605.3617.4 Increase in Deferred
Taxes0.2$2.416.5(13.4)(0.5)6.9(10.8)0.0 Changes in Working
Capital(4.7)$1.812.2(7.5)(7.4)(21.6)0.41.6 Capital
Expenditures(416.0)($83.8)(577.0)(456.8)(545.6)(425.0)(611.3)(525.0) Changes in
Other0.0$0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Unlevered Free Cash
Flow$330.8$64.3$299.6$673.1$695.5$915.3$827.0$954.2Terminal Growth RateTerminal
Growth Rate1.0%1.5%2.0%2.5%3.0%1.0%1.5%2.0%2.5%3.0%WACCTerminal
ValueWACCImplied Terminal Trailing P/E
Multiple(c)10.0%$10,601.8$11,225.4$11,927.0$12,722.2$13,630.910.0%14.5 x15.3
x16.2 x17.3 x18.5 xWACCEnterprise Value as of November 8, 2004WACCEquity Value
as of November 8,
2004(a)9.0%$10,700.3$11,233.1$11,842.1$12,544.7$13,364.59.0%$7,304.1$7,836.9$8,4
45.9$9,148.5$9,968.29.5%$10,037.310,497.611,019.211,615.3$12,303.29.5%6,641.17,1
01.37,623.08,219.18,907.010.0%$9,448.79,849.210,299.810,810.5$11,394.210.0%6,052
        .46,453.06,903.67,414.37,997.910.5%$8,922.59,273.59,665.710,106.9$10,606.910.5%5
        ,526.35,877.26,269.46,710.67,210.711.0%$8,449.6$8,758.9$9,102.5$9,486.6$9,918.61
1.0%5,053.45,362.65,706.36,090.36,522.4WACCImplied Terminal Trailing EBITDA
MultipleWACCEquity Value per Share as of November 8, 2004(b)9.0%6.2 x6.6 x7.1
x7.6 x8.2
x9.0%$50.07$53.73$57.90$62.72$68.349.5%5.86.26.67.17.69.5%45.5348.6852.2656.3561
        .0610.0%5.55.86.26.67.110.0%41.4944.2447.3350.8354.8310.5%5.25.55.86.26.610.5%37
        .8940.2942.9846.0149.4311.0%4.95.25.55.86.211.0%34.6436.7639.1241.7544.711.
Equal to approximately 2 months’ of 2005 free cash flow adjusted for one-time
costsNote: Terminal year reflected above represents a 2.0% perpetual growth
rate.(a) Equity Value equals Enterprise Value less total debt and preferreds,
plus cash, option proceeds and investments in unconsolidated subsidiaries.(b)
Equity Value per Share equals Equity Value divided by Fully Diluted shares
outstanding.(c) Terminal Equity Value equals the Terminal Value less net debt
plus the book value of unconsolidated investments.
56Project Ring






 









 








	DCF Sensitivity Analysis (Pre NPV of NOLs) Sensitivity Analysis20052009Market
Penetration (+/- 2.5%)51.1%65.0%$42.12to $52.54Market Share of Net Adds (+/-
4%) — Postpaid35.2%32.0%$44.15to $50.51 — Prepaid23.0%28.3%Monthly Churn (+/-
0.2%) — Postpaid1.68%1.44%$45.52to $49.13 — Prepaid3.07%2.74%Monthly ARPU (+/-
$1.00) — Postpaid$52.58$49.94$42.76to $51.89 — Prepaid$11.50$13.00Capex (+/-
10%)$416$611$43.73to $50.93$41$43$45$47$49$51$53$55Mid-Point of DCF Value
Range$5.21($5.21)$3.18($3.18)$1.80$4.56$3.60($1.80)($4.56)($3.60)$47.33
57Project Ring






 









 








	NPV of NOLs
•NPV is equal to 22% of NOLs Net Present Value of Tax Losses($
millions)200420052006200720082009Cash Taxes without NOLs
$100.2$18.0$205.8$291.6$376.9$434.7Cash Taxes with
NOLS$0.0$0.0$0.0$0.0$45.1$447.6Savings$100.2$18.0$205.8$291.6$331.8($13.0)Discou
nt Rate12.00%12.25%12.50%NPV$647.77$617.3$612.4$607.6NPV per
share$4.23$4.20$4.17Aggregate DCF Value per ShareTerminal Growth
RateWACC1.0%1.5%2.0%2.5%3.0%9.0%$54.27$57.92$62.10$66.92$72.549.5%$49.73$52.88$5
6.46$60.54$65.2610.0%$45.69$48.44$51.53$55.03$59.0310.5%$42.08$44.49$47.18$50.20
$53.6311.0%$38.84$40.96$43.32$45.95$48.91
58Project Ring






 









 








	Precedent Transaction Analysis Premium and Multiple Analysis
SummaryAcquirorRCMCingularTelusBCETargetMicrocellAT&T WirelessClearnetBell
MobilityAverageOffer Price$35.00$15.00$0.53$58.75Target share price
(unaffected)$21.00$8.55$45.80$49.00Equity premium over unaffected price:1 day
66.7%26.9%52.8%19.9%41.6%1 week 37.3%33.3%58.0%29.4%39.5%4
weeks47.7%44.4%66.5%30.6%47.3%Implied EV / EBITDA
Multiple:LTM17.7x10.9xNMF16.0x14.8xFY +113.4x10.9xNA14.7x13.0xFY
+27.9x9.8x34.1x12.0x16.0xImplied EV / Subscriber
Multiple:LTM$1,306$2,792$9,249$3,132$4,120FY +1$1,061$2,619$7,728$2,769$3,544FY
+2$943$2,542$5,445$2,264$2,798Implied EV / EBITDA Multiple:Excludes Tax Asset
and SynergiesLTM14.0x(1)6.6xNMF16.0x12.2xFY +110.7x6.6xNA14.7x10.7xFY
+26.3x6.0x22.7x12.0x11.8x1. Assumes $0.20 per dollar of tax assets
($1.6bn).Note: see detailed transaction list in Appendix C.
59Project Ring






 









 








	M&A Database -PremiaPaid Precedent Canadian Transactions — Equity Value >
C$500MNumber ofAveragePremiumTransactionsSize (1)Transaction Period1 Day1 Week1
Month3
Month200023%28%39%60%24$2,887200121%25%32%38%242,427200225%25%49%62%53,558200315
%17%12%29%45,3312004YTD17%17%20%11%121,4792000 -
2004YTD20%23%30%40%69$3,1362002-2004YTD(No Anticipated
Synergies)20%21%20%12%8$2,5841. Represents Equity Value of the transaction
60Project Ring






 









 








	Preliminary Public Comparable Trading Analysis North American Wireless
Comparable Trading AnalysisShare($ millions except per share
data)PriceMarketEnterpriseEV / EBITDA(1)P / EEV / FCF
(5)08-Nov-04CapValue2004E2005E2006E2005E2006E2005E2006ECanadian Comparables
(C$)Microcell (2)$22.00$854$1,0018.6x 5.1x 3.6x 58.3x 12.6x nmf19.6x RCM
(I/B/E/S) (3)43.976,2919,947NA7.5 6.2 22.4 11.2 14.0 11.5 RCM (Management)
(4)43.976,2919,947NA8.1 6.9 17.7 10.0 15.4 10.1 Group Average8.6x 6.3x 4.9x
40.4x 11.9x U.S. Comparables (US$) NationalNextel Communications
Inc.$27.75$30,730$39,2657.7x 6.7x 5.9x 15.9x 13.0x 13.3 12.9 AT&T Wireless
(Pre-bid)11.8232,51937,3588.8 7.9 8.0 nmfnmf19.7x 15.1x U.S. Comparables (US$)
Regional PlayersWestern Wireless$28.78$2,876$4,9177.8x 6.9x 6.1x 12.7x 12.4x
12.0x 9.9x US Cellular Corp.42.013,6224,7037.0 5.9 5.2 29.8 22.6 32.4 18.6
Group Average US (excluding AWE)7.5x 6.5x 5.7x 19.5x 16.0x 19.2x 13.8x Total
average (pre-bid) excluding RCM8.0x 6.5x 5.8x 29.2x 15.2x 19.3x 15.2x 1.
Estimates per selected street research2. Microcell share price is as of May 30,
2004 prior to Telus’s takeover bid. 3. Estimates taken from select street
research.4. Using management forecasts as estimates.5. FCF defined as EBITDA
less Capex.EV/ Net Debt /EBITDA
MarginsSubscriber(1)EBITDA2004E2005E2004E2005E2004E2005E2004E34.9%69.0%17.8%24.9
%$741$6462.4x
30.617.835.138.72,0131,8472.227.534.134.533.11,7591,6833.932.8%43.4%26.4%31.8%$1
,377$1,2462.3x 17.5%15.4%39.9%41.3%$2,454$2,2571.5x
-5.410.425.527.61,5501,4711.4 43.8%13.3%33.5%34.5%$1,646n/a2.8x
4.417.224.325.8943$8521.816.2%10.2%19.4%20.3%$1,681$1,5542.0x
19.1%25.0%28.2%30.8%$1,467$1,3062.0x EBITDA YOYGrowth Rates
61Project Ring






 









 








	Market Metrics Analysis Implied EV / 2006E EBITDA
Multiple5.0x7.1x$25.65$46.717.1x9.0x$47.00$65.006.6x7.4x$40.40$48.506.0x6.8x$34.
50$42.906.0x7.0x$34.90$44.70Share Price RangeMethodologySelected Multiple
RangeBenchmark(1)Indicative Value Per Share Range(2) (C$mm except per share
amounts)Market MetricsHistorical Trading Range52 Wk High52 Wk Low $25.75 -
$46.71Analyst Price Targets(3)$47.00 — $65.00Comparable Trading Analysis2006E
Price / Earnings10.0x12.0x$4.042005E EV / EBITDA7.0x8.0x$1,2252006E EV /
EBITDA6.0x7.0x$1,4381. All figures pro forma Microcell acquisition per
management plan $20$25$30$35$40$45$50$55$60$65$702. As at November 08, 2004.
Pro forma Net Debt of $3396 million as at December 31, 2004.3. Range of $47 to
$52 excluding Scotia Capital
62Project Ring






 









 








	Summary Analysis
Least MostRelevanceMethodologySelected Multiple RangeBenchmark(1)Indicative
Value Per Share Range(2) (C$mm except per share amounts)Transaction
MetricsRangeMethodologySelected Comparable Transaction AnalysisEV/EBITDA 2006E
plus PV of NOLs(3)6.0x7.0x$1,438Trading Comparables + 20% Premium2005E EV /
EBITDA (5)7.0x8.0x$1,2252006E EV / EBITDA (5)6.0x7.0x$1,438Discounted Cash Flow
MethodIncluding NOLs — WACC / Growth Rate10.0%/2.0%Indicative RangeIndicative
Range1. All figures pro forma Microcell acquisition per management plan
$35.00$37.50$40.00$42.50$45.00$47.50$50.00$52.50$55.00$57.50$60.0002. As at
November 08, 2004. Pro forma Net Debt of $3396 million as at December 31,
2004.3. Multiple derived from AT&T Wireless and Cingular transaction (synergies
of $6.50 per share or $18B)4. Includes $4.20 of present value NOLs per share5.
Control premium of 20%. Adjusted for capital structure using 40% debt to 60%
equityImplied EV / 2006E EBITDA
Multiple6.4x7.4x$39.10(4)$48.90(4)6.7x7.6x$41.60(3)$51.00(3)6.7x7.8x$42.00(3)$53
        .00(3)7.2x8.1x$47.20$56.50$46.00$54.00Share Price Range
63Project Ring






 









 








	Observations
•Preliminary En bloc range $46.00 to $54.00; $50.00 mid-point
•Need to finalize due diligence
•Board has not approved Management forecast
•Meets requirements of 61-501 / Q-27
•Issuer bid value may be different than En bloc value. Fair price
-depends on RCI’sintentions
-capital structure
•Need to confirm no prior valuations
64Project Ring






 









 








	Appendices
November 4, 2004
65Project Ring






 









 








	Appendix A
Other Information
66Project Ring






 









 








	Analyst Comments -Microcell Acquisition
A -1 Date Target Price Comments Richard Talbot RBC CM Oct. 14, 2004 Outperform
Pre Post(1) $50 $54 Deal Reaction - “...purchase of Microcell is an attractive
and potentially accretive transaction...” Valuation - “We value RCM shares
using a combination of 7.25x 2005/06 EV/EBITDA, 16.0x EPS, and a DCF with 5.5x
terminal multiple...” Synergies - “Combined company can achieve significant
cost synergies ($54mm in 2005E rising to $111mm in 2006E)...improve network
EBITDA margins from 35.2% in 2004E to 39.3% in 2005E and 43.5% in 2006E...” Tax
loss - “...estimate the present value of the tax loss shield to RCM to be $100
mm to $200 mm” Leverage - “...debt leverage is the highest in Canada, strength
in RCM’s free cash flow as well as the company’s demonstrated ability to access
the capital markets at attractive rates, reduces financing risk.” Randal
Rudniski CSFB Sept. 22, 2004 Market Perform $46 $46 Deal Reaction - “... a
successful acquisition of Microcell could create meaningful synergies and
shareholder value...” Valuation - “Valuation of the acquisition is fairly
benign, if Microcell can produce the street’s EBIDA expectation in 2005 and if
synergies are produced” Synergies - “Assuming RCM can raise Muse’s margins to
its own level (35%), $90 mm in EBITDA upside to 2005 results... Tax loss -
”...tax loss carry forwards have an NPV of roughly $250 million” Leverage -
“Pro forma RCM debt/EBIDTA will rise to 5.2x from 2.4x...management must
arrange an increase in covenant package...Financing options: 1. Dividend paid
by RCM to equity holders 2. RCM purchases the 48.6 million shares from RCI 3.
Inter-company loan 4. Wireless buys equity in RCI” John Henderson Scotia Sept.
21, 2004 Outperform $60 $64 Deal Reaction - “We believe the proposed Microcell
transaction adds material value to RCM shareholders” Valuation - “At a minimum
we believe Microcell adds $4/share to our RCM target price” Synergies -
“Subscriber churn at Microcell should decrease about 4-5 times...we expect RCM
should be able to generate significant operating and capital cost synergies
(assuming $100 mm of annual cost synergies)” Tax loss - “...estimate of $300
mm” Leverage - “...pro forma debt to rise to 5.2x, which could unnerve
investors...in 2005, we forecast RCMs leverage ratio should improve to 4x”
Peter Rhamey BMO NB Sept. 21, 2004 Market Perform $45 $43 Deal Reaction -
”...increased risk associated with the company given its high financial
leverage and execution risk as the company integrates Muse...” Valuation -
“target priced reduced to $43 from $45 representing a target multiple of 7.4x
2005E pro forma EBITDA” Synergies - “...largest synergies come from network
integration and optimization due to Muse’s network and spectrum position...an
additional $150-$200 mm of EBITDA could be generated off Muse’s subscriber
base” Tax loss - “tax loss carryforwards — $300 mm of value to RCM” Leverage -
“RCM’s leverage is expected to rise to 5.0x-5.5x Net debt/trailing EBITDA...How
the funds can be transferred back to RCI remains to be seen (i.e., intercompany
loan or share buyback at RCM)” 1. Pro forma acquisition of Microcell
A-1Project Ring






 









 








	Other Assumptions
•Other cost line assumptions provided by management (examples)
-Fixed S&M costs growing at 5%
-Customer service costs flat at $3.42/post paid sub and $1.00 perprepaid sub
per month
-Retention costs per sub flat at $4.91/post paid sub per month
•Working capital assumption driven by historical days of turnover
•Sale of spectrum in 2006 for $200m -management assumption
A -2Project Ring






 









 








	Appendix B
Description of Comparable Companies
70Project Ring






 









 








	Nextel
B -1 LFY Revenue Mix — US$10,820 mmService revenue91%Equipment revenue9%Company
Overview Area(s) of operation: Throughout the United States Network: Integrated
Digital Enhanced Network (iDEN) Wireless Subscribers: 12.9mm Penetration: Na
Headquarters: Reston, Virginia Employees: 17,000 Other Services: Digital
wireless mobile services, Nextel nationwide, Direct Connect walkie-talkie
service and various other services Capitalization & TradingShare Price
(1)$24.61EV/2005 Rev.2.4xShares Out.1107.6EV/2004 EBITDA6.9xMarket
Cap.$28,027EV/2005 EBITDA6.1xEnterprise Value$34,920P/2005 EPS13.6x1. As of
October 18, 2004.Financial SummaryCY 2003CY 2004CY
2005Revenue$10,820$13,080$14,582Gross Profit$7,669nanaEBITDA$4,321$5,093$5,763
EBITDA Margin40%39%40%EBIT$2,627nanaNet Income
(Reported)$1,472$2,020$2,001Capex$1,716Source: Capital IQ
71Project Ring






 









 








	U.S. Cellular
B -2 LFY Revenue Mix — US$2,259 mmService Revenue94%Equipment Sales6%Company
Overview Area(s) of operation: 165 territories in 28 U.S. States Network: CDMA
1XRTT Wireless Subscribers: 4.4 mm Penetration: 10% Headquarters: Chicago,
Illinois Employees: 6,175 Other Services: Offer both digital and analog
handsets, dual and tri mode phones Capitalization & TradingShare Price
(1)$43.25EV/2005 Rev.1.6xShares Out.86.2EV/2004 EBITDA7.2xMarket
Cap.$3,728EV/2005 EBITDA6.1xEnterprise Value$4,995P/2005 EPS31.9x1. As of
October 18, 2004.Financial SummaryCY 2003CY 2004CY
2005Revenue$2,583$2,783$3,062Gross Profit$1,651nanaEBITDA$647$676$792 EBITDA
Margin25%24%26%EBIT$214nanaNet Income (Repo$43$84$117CapexSource: Capital IQ
72Project Ring






 









 








	Western Wireless Corp.
B -3 Company Overview Area(s) of operation: 19 Western U.S. States (rural
focus) Network: TDMA/CDMA/GSM Wireless Subscribers: 1.3 mm Penetration: 12%
Headquarters: Washington/Missouri Employees: 2,400 Other: Formed in 1994
through the combination of Pacific Northwest Cellular and General Cellular LFY
Revenue Mix — US$1501 mmSubscriber 47%Austrian operations25%Other foreign
11%Other domestic0%Equipment3%Roamer14%Capitalization & TradingShare Price
(1)$28.20EV/2005 Rev.2.2xShares Out.91.9EV/2004 EBITDA7.4xMarket
Cap.$2,592EV/2005 EBITDA6.5xEnterprise Value$4,674P/2005 EPS12.7x1. As of
October 18, 2004.Financial SummaryCY 2003CY 2004CY
2005Revenue$1,501$1,881$2,065Gross Profit$918nanaEBITDA$449$630$713 EBITDA
Margin30%33%35%EBIT$173nanaNet Income (Reported)($0)$152$204Capex$266Source:
Capital IQ
Project Ring






 









 








	Appendix C
Precedent Transactions
74Project Ring






 









 








	Precedent Transaction Analysis
C -1 Wireless Service Providers — Precedent Transactions(C$ millions)LTMFY+1 EV
/ SubscribersDateDateEnterpriseEV /EV /EV /EV
/AnnouncedCompletedAcquirerTargetValueSalesEBITDAEBITDALTMFY + 1POPSCanadian
Transactions20-Sep-04PendingRCMMicrocell$1,5662.47x17.7x13.4x$1,306$943$8213-Sep
-0413-Oct-04RCIRCM
(1)7,3512.948.77.9x1,8721,47524521-Aug-0019-Oct-00TelusClearnet6,76213.63NMFNMF9
        ,2495,15731930-Jul-9925-Oct-99BCEBCE Mobile
Communications5,0113.9316.0x14.7x3,1322,769290Average
5.74x14.1x12.0x$3,890$2,586$234U.S. Transactions17-Feb-0417-Feb-04CingularAT&T
Wireless$60,6842.74x10.9x9.8x$2,792$2,542$20520-Dec-0120-Dec-01US UnwiredIWO
Holdings1,0785.42N/AN/A17108-Oct-0115-Feb-02AT&T
WirelessTelecorp8,50020.65NMF9,999N/A29-Aug-0130-Nov-01AirGate
PCSiPCS1,48110.59NMF6,97612719-Mar-0101-Aug-02AlltelCenturyTel Wireless
assets2,488N/AN/AN/A300Average 9.85x10.9x9.8x$6,589$161International
Transactions08-Jul-04PendingTeliaSoneraOrange
A/S$9791.43x8.4x10.9x$1,619N/A13-Jun-0328-Nov-03Cesky TelecomEurotel
Praha(1)2,7871.463.066128821-May-0121-Dec-01MatavWestel
Mobil2,780N/AN/A1,209N/A19-Nov-0119-Nov-01IPOMMO2 (BT’s Cellphone
unit)16,7712.3323.59.2x1,016105Average 1.74x11.6x10.0x$1,126$196Overall Average
6.15x12.6x11.0x$3,621$213Overall Average (excl. High &
Low)5.51x14.8x$3,957$1711. No change of control.Note: All numbers converted to
Canadian $ based on exchange ratio at close of transaction.
75Project Ring






 









 








	Case Study -RCM Acquisition of Microcell
Background:
•On May 14, 2004 TELUS announced an unsolicited takeover bid for Microcell
valued at $1.1bn
-The offer, of $29.00/share represented a 38% and 36% premium to the Class A
and Class B shares respectively
•Microcell’s Board of Directors recommended that shareholders vote against the
proposed deal
-On September 20, 2004 Microcell announced they entered into an agreement with
RCM for the purchase of the company, the bid was valued at $1.6 bn at
announcement
-The offer of $35/share represented a 20% premium to TELUS’ bid
Strategic Rationale:
•Significantly enhances spectrum position
•Acquisition of 1.2 million subscribers (54% of which arepostpaid-postpaidARPU
of $62)
•Improved share in youth segment
•Improved share in Quebec region
•Acquisition of strong Canadian brand
•Access to use significant tax losses (approximately $1.6bn as ofDecember 31,
2003)
•Potential upside withMicrocell’sinterest inInukshuk
C -2
$0.00$5.00$10.00$15.00$20.00$25.00$30.00$35.00$40.00Oct-03Nov-03Dec-03Jan-04Feb-
04Mar-04Apr-04May-04Jun-04Jul-04Aug-04Sep-04Oct-0402,000,0004,000,0006,000,0008,
000,00010,000,00012,000,000Sep. 20, 2004Rogers announces its bid for
MicrocellMicrocell Class B Share Price PerformanceOctober 21, 2003 — October
20, 2004May 13, 2004Telus announces its bid for MicrocellImplied
PremiumUnaffectedAt Announcement13-May-0420-Sep-04Final Offer Price$35.00$35.00
1 — Day 66.7%5.7%1 — Week 37.3%9.7%4 — Weeks47.7%17.1%
76Project Ring






 









 








	Case Study -RCM Acquisition of Microcell
C -3 Transaction ValuePrice Per share$35.00Shares OutstandngBasic29.8McCaw
Warrants4.0Options / Warrants 1.3Fully diluted shares outstanding35.1Gross
Equity Value$1,227.9Less: Proceeds from exercise of Options/Warrants(16.4)
Proceeds from exercise of McCaw Warrants (87.5)Existing Warrants163.2Equity
Capitalization1,287.1Debt (1)$412.7Cash on Hand(133.8)Net Debt /
(Cash)$278.9Plus: Minority Interest—Less: Non-consolidated Investments—Total
Enterprise Value ($MM)$1,566.01. Includes $34.42 million relating to cross
currency swapsTransaction Multiples — Benchmarks(C$ millions)LTMLFY + 1LFY
+2Sales$634$658$795EBITDA$89$117$197Subscribers1.2 1.5 1.7 POPs19.0 Transaction
Multiples — Without Tax AssetLTMLFY + 1LFY +2EV / Sales2.47 x2.38 x1.97 xEV /
EBITDA17.65 x13.40 x7.93 xEV / Subscribers$1,306$1,061$943EV /
POPs$82Transaction Multiples — With Tax Asset (1)LTMLFY + 1LFY +2EV / Sales1.97
x1.89 x1.57 xEV / EBITDA14.04 x10.67 x6.31 xEV / Subscribers$1,039$844$750EV /
POPs$661. Assumes $0.20 per dollar or $320m of tax assets ($1.6bn)
77Project Ring






 









 








	Case Study -Cingular’s Acquisition of AT&T Wireless
Background:
•On Jan. 14, 2004, rumours surface that AT&T Wireless is in merger talks
•On Feb. 17, 2004, CingularWireless LLC, a joint venture between SBC
Communications Inc. and BellSouth Corp., announced an agreement to acquire AT&T
Wireless
•Cingular offered AT&T Wireless shareholders $15 cash per common share or
approximately $41 billion
•Combined company would have 46 million customers and coverage in 97 of the top
100 markets
•Combined 2003 annual revenues of the two companies will exceed $32 billion.
Strategic Rationale:
•Give customers access to a larger GSM network in the US
•Improve coverage and call quality
•Improved spectrum holding will allow company to accelerate its offering of
advanced wireless data services
•Combined company expects to achieve more than US$1 billion in operating
expense and capital expenditure synergies in 2006, and in excess of US$2
billion in annual savings beginning in 2007
C -4 Implied PremiumAtAtAnnouncementCompletion17-Feb-0426-Oct-04Final Offer
Price$35.00$35.001 — Day 6.5%0.5%1 — Week 8.6%1.4%4 — Weeks18.7%1.4%Bid History
$8.55$15.00$1.44$3.79$1.22Bid History $0.00$4.00$8.00$12.00$16.00Unaffected
SharePriceTakeover SpeculationCingularAnnouncementBid PriceFinal Purchase
Price13-Jan-0414-Jan-0417-Feb-04
78Project Ring






 









 








	Case Study -Cingular’s Acquisition of AT&T Wireless




	C -5 Transaction ValuePrice Per share (US$)$15.00Shares
OutstandngBasic2,729.7Options / Warrants 71.7Fully diluted shares
outstanding2,801.4Gross Equity Value$42,021.3Less: Proceeds from exercise of
Options/Warrants(603.3)Equity Capitalization41,417.9Debt$10,322.0Cash on
Hand(6,026.9)Net Debt / (Cash)$4,295.1Plus: Minority Interests$32.0Less:
Non-consolidated Investments($1,152.0)Total Enterprise Value
($MM)$44,593.0Transaction Multiples — Benchmarks(US$ millions)LTMLFY + 1LFY +
2Sales$16,883$16,738$17,041EBITDA$4,238$4,264$4,707Subscribers21.7 23.2 23.9
POPs226.0 Transaction Multiples without SynergiesLTMLFY + 1LFY + 2EV /
Sales2.74 x2.77 x2.72 xEV / EBITDA10.93 x10.86 x9.84 xEV /
Subscribers$2,792$2,619$2,542EV / POPs$205Transaction Multiples with
Synergies(1)LTMLFY + 1LFY + 2EV / Sales1.66 x1.68 x1.65 xEV / EBITDA6.63 x6.59
x5.97 xEV / Subscribers$1,694$1,590$1,543EV / POPs$1631. Announced synergies of
US$1 bn in 2006, and in excess of US$2 bn in annual savings beginning in 2007.
Synergies assumed to be valued at US$6.50 per share or US$18.2 bn based on
street research.
79Project Ring






 









 








	Case Study -Privatization of Bell Mobility
Background
•On July 30, 1999 Bell Canada announced it had reached a deal with BCE Mobile
Communications to acquire the remaining 35% of outstanding shares that Bell
Canada did not already own
•Independent valuation provided a range of $54.50 to $63.00
•The price of $58.75 represented the mid-point of the valuation range, and a
31% premium to the one-month closing price and a 47% premium to the two-month
closing price
Strategic Rationale
•Allow BCE to provide customers a single point of contact for all of their
communications needs
•Simplify the ability for both companies to pursue national expansion and allow
the two companies to leverage their business experience in reviewing expansion
opportunities
•allow for greater operational synergies for BCE Mobile through the opportunity
to leverage the assets and resources of Bell Canada.
C -6
$0.00$10.00$20.00$30.00$40.00$50.00$60.00$70.00Jan-99Feb-99Mar-99Apr-99May-99Jun
-99Jul-99Aug-99Sep-99Oct-9901,000,0002,000,0003,000,0004,000,0005,000,0006,000,0
007,000,000BCE Mobile Communications Share Price PerformanceJanuary 1, 1999 -
October 22, 1999July 30, 1999BCE announces its intention to take BCE Mobile
privateImplied PremiumAtAtAnnouncementCompletion30-Jul-9925-Oct-99Final Offer
Price$58.75$58.751 — Day 19.9%5.7%1 — Week 29.4%6.1%4 — Weeks30.6%4.4%
80Project Ring






 









 








	Case Study -Privatization of Bell Mobility
C -7 Transaction MultiplesLTMLFY + 1LFY + 2EV / Sales3.93 x4.34 x3.89 xEV /
EBITDA15.96 x14.70 x11.99 xEV / Subscribers$3,132$2,769$2,264EV /
POPs$290Transaction Multiples — Benchmarks(C$ millions)LTMLFY + 1LFY +
2Sales$1,275$1,155$1,287EBITDA$314$341$418Subscribers1.6 1.8 2.2 POPs17.3
Transaction ValuePrice Per share (C$)$58.75Shares OutstandngFully diluted
shares outstanding76.8Equity Capitalization$4,510.8Net Debt / (Cash)$570.0Plus:
Minority Interests—Less: Non-consolidated Investments($69.4)Total Enterprise
Value ($MM)$5,011.5
81Project Ring






 









 








	Case Study -Telus’ Acquisition of Clearnet
Background:
•On August 21, 2000 TELUS announced its intent to
purchaseClearnetCommunications
-The offer of $70.00/share was payable in cash or 1.636 shares of TELUS
•The offer represented a 53% premium toClearnetsunaffected closing price the
day before the transaction was announced
•At time of acquisition, the deal was the largest in Canadian
telecommunications history
Strategic Rationale:
•Advances TELUS to the leading wireless company in Canada
•1.8 million customers and ability to provide coverage to 30.7 million
potential customers
•Transaction was meant to provide a foundation for TELUS’ data and Internet
strategy
•increased bundling opportunities
•Clearnetshareholders, holding 86% of voting shares and 30% economic interest
entered into a lock up agreement to sell their shares to TELUS
C -8 Implied PremiumAtAtAnnouncementCompletion21-Aug-0019-Oct-00Final Offer
Price$70.00$70.001 — Day 52.8%5.7%1 — Week 58.0%6.1%4 -
Weeks66.5%4.4%$0.00$10.00$20.00$30.00$40.00$50.00$60.00$70.00$80.00Jan-00Feb-00M
ar-00Apr-00May-00Jun-00Jul-00Aug-00Sep-00Oct-00010000002000000300000040000005000
000600000070000008000000Clearnet — Share Price PerformanceJanuary 1, 2000 -
October 20, 2000Aug. 21, 2000Telus announces its bid for Microcell
82Project Ring






 









 








	Case Study -Telus’ Acquisition of Clearnet
C -9 Transaction ValueAt AnnouncementAt Completion21-Aug-0019-Oct-00Cash
Consideration (C$)Price per share$70.00$70.00Maximum cash
consideration$2,190.25$2,179.00Share Consideration (C$)Share Price
$43.25$38.15Exchange Ratio1.6361.636Shares OutstandngFully diluted shares
outstanding62.662.6Telus Shares Issued50.651.2Equity
Capitalization$4,427.9$3,905.7Total Share
Consideration2,213.91,954.0Debt$2,600.0$2,600.0Cash on Hand(318.7)(318.7)Net
Debt / (Cash)$2,281.3$2,281.3Total Enterprise Value
($MM)$6,685.5$6,414.3Transaction Multiples — Benchmarks(C$ millions)LTMLFY +
1LFY + 2Sales$496$547$823EBITDANMFNA$198Subscribers0.7 0.9 1.2 POPs21.2
Transaction Multiples without SynergiesLTMLFY + 1LFY + 2EV / Sales13.63 x12.36
x8.22 xEV / EBITDANMFNMF34.08 xEV / Subscribers$9,249$7,728$5,445EV /
POPs$319Transaction Multiples with Synergies (1)LTMLFY + 1LFY + 2EV / Sales9.10
x8.25 x1.57 xEV / EBITDANMFNMF22.74 xEV / Subscribers$6,172$5,157$3,633EV /
POPs$2131. Announced synergies of C$2.1 bn to C$2.4 bn.