[SINGAPORE] Singapore’s telecommunications sector has never had a merger on the scale of Simba Telecom and M1’s.

Announced on Aug 11, 2025, the deal is Singapore’s first telco consolidation after decades of liberalisation. If approved, it will see the number of full-fledged telcos here shrink from the current four to three.

Sector regulator Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) has yet to announce its decision, almost six months after M1’s parent Keppel and Simba submitted the required consolidation documents. It is understandable, given the implications the decision may have for national security, resilience and market competitiveness.

Simba’s generous S$1.43 billion offer to Keppel for M1’s telecom business risks lapsing, as it is valid for six months from Sep 26, 2025 – if a new deadline has not been agreed in writing.

What are the considerations and the possible risks of this consolidation?

Safeguarding critical infrastructure

The recent revelation that Singapore’s four major telcos had come under attack by cyberespionage group UNC3886 in 2025 serves as a stark reminder that telecommunications services have become as critical as electricity and water.

Any telco chaos could disrupt Singaporeans’ digital way of life, with business and economic repercussions.

Beyond ensuring that prices remain competitive and affordable, how Singapore governs its critical infrastructure also affects its exposure to cybersecurity and foreign interference risks.

At this point, it is not clear if Simba’s systems have been designated critical information infrastructure like those of Singtel, StarHub and M1. The designation comes with obligations – including safeguarding against risks from suppliers and cloud services – under Singapore’s Cybersecurity Act.

SEE ALSO

Mobile resellers face cost hikes as telco consolidation cuts bargaining power

Additional spectrum from Simba-M1 merger would give new entity ‘structural advantage’, says StarHub

Circles.Life raises concerns over M1-Simba deal to IMDA, warns merger could hurt consumers

Rare public consultation on Simba-M1 deal will test our telco values

More

But what is clear is that Simba’s 5G network is built on Chinese multinational firm Huawei’s technologies, which have been banned in the United States and the United Kingdom over national security concerns.

If Simba controls one of the two nationwide 5G networks in Singapore through its takeover of M1, Simba will need to do more for cybersecurity. This includes explaining its vendor choices and making vendors and suppliers better account for their security decisions and processes.

M1’s islandwide 5G network is built with StarHub through a joint venture. The shared 5G infrastructure is built on Finnish firm Nokia’s technology. The other nationwide 5G network is operated by Singtel, which uses Swedish firm Ericsson’s 5G equipment.

Singtel and the StarHub-M1 joint venture won the much-coveted licences to operate Singapore’s two nationwide 5G networks in 2020 through a rigorous IMDA contest, which favoured business plans that emphasise security, resilience and national responsibility.

Should Simba assume stewardship of the strategic directions and operations of 5G critical infrastructure in Singapore, the telco may need to satisfy more regulatory reviews.

And while Singtel, StarHub and M1 have parentage links to Singapore investment firm Temasek, Simba is wholly owned by Australia-listed company Tuas, whose principal shareholder is Australian businessman David Teoh.

Although there are no foreign ownership restrictions on telcos in Singapore, the potential threat to national security and economic stability amid evolving foreign interference tactics requires more due diligence. It could be one of the reasons why IMDA is giving the Simba-M1 merger the careful consideration it deserves.

Safeguarding the wholesale market

Market competitiveness is another consideration for IMDA.

The combined Simba-M1 entity would control more than three-quarters of the wholesale market. Mandatory regulatory safeguards may be needed for Mobile Virtual Network Operators (MVNOs) to continue thriving here.

An MVNO provides mobile services without owning a physical network by leasing capacity wholesale from host telcos such as M1, StarHub, Singtel or Simba Telecom. Hence, MVNOs are price takers.

In January 2020, IMDA issued a framework for the wholesale of mobile services to ensure that host telcos do not participate in unfair practices. For instance, host telcos are prohibited from imposing unreasonable, discriminatory traffic management practices, or unilateral termination or suspension of wholesale contracts without sufficient notice.

A drawback is that the framework serves only as a guiding principle.

A 2025 legal dispute between Circles.Life and M1 spotlights the ongoing tension over compliance with the framework. The Straits Times understands that the case, which is over M1’s alleged failure to negotiate MVNO contract updates based on the framework, is pending trial.

Circles.Life had also written to the IMDA stating its concern that the combined Simba-M1 entity would control 77 per cent of the wholesale market. M1 has 2.29 million mobile subscribers.

Circles.Life’s subscriber numbers have not been disclosed. But its impact on competition in Singapore is undeniable. New ideas that it brought to the local market soon became industry standards.

For instance, when it launched in 2016, Circles.Life introduced a self-service app where customers could sign up for new products, turn off services and pay bills – an industry first. All other telcos have since adopted this digital-first approach to serving customers. Circles.Life also introduced the idea of a SIM-only plan, free of the typical two-year contracts. These contract-free plans have since become commonplace.

Fairness in resource allocation

The IMDA would also have to consider objections to the merger voiced by telcos, relating to fairness in the distribution of limited radio frequencies.

These objections mostly centre on the limited 900MHz spectrum, a low-band frequency used for propagating 4G and 5G signals to provide islandwide coverage with minimal equipment.

Low-band frequencies are characterised by their ability to travel long distances and penetrate objects like walls, buildings and trees. They are the backbone of mobile networks for providing coverage indoors and in far-flung locations without installing a lot of equipment.

In the 900MHz space, Simba holds a 10MHz-sized block and M1, 5MHz. StarHub holds a 5MHz-sized block, and Singtel, 10MHz. After the proposed merger, the combined Simba-M1 entity will hold 15MHz worth of the premium band – as much as its two rivals combined.

It is understandable why Singtel and StarHub would kick up a fuss. Allocation of such limited resources should arguably be proportional to the size of a telco’s subscriber base.

For Singtel, whose 4.5 million subscribers represent half the local market, it is unthinkable that the new Simba-M1 entity, with its combined three million mobile users, should hold more of the premium spectrum.

StarHub chief executive officer Nikhil Eapen reportedly said in November 2025 that the combined Simba-M1 entity would have a 900MHz spectrum holding above the current caps, and could have a “structural advantage”.

“As a regulator, you would want to allocate more spectrum to the larger telco,” said an industry source.

But there is no easy solution, as most of the usable spectrum has already been auctioned off, and the rights to use them are not due to expire any time soon.

Uncertainty also surrounds the StarHub-M1 joint venture, called Antina, created in 2020 to build a shared 5G network.

It is in StarHub’s interest to secure quality of service for its two million subscribers by safeguarding its right to access Antina’s network. The fear is that, post-merger, Simba’s one million subscribers will crowd out StarHub users and lead to slower connections.

“Loading Antina’s network with an extra one million subscribers may reduce the 5G quality of service and impact churn on StarHub’s subscriber base,” said an industry expert, who declined to be named.

Churn in the telco business refers to the percentage of subscribers who cancel their services or switch to a competitor over a given period. High churn rates usually indicate customer dissatisfaction and are bad for business as retaining existing customers is typically cheaper than acquiring new ones.

Expect some horse-trading in the final furlong as Simba races against the clock to finalise the deal, which some said is existential for the telco.

Simba, being the most poorly resourced where 5G spectrum is concerned, will go all out to complete the takeover mission it started. Its rivals will also actively engage in advocacy to hinder the approval process, which could go down to the wire. THE STRAITS TIMES

[SINGAPORE] Singapore’s Princeton Digital Group (PDG) plans to raise as much as US$5 billion in debt this year to fund a data centre buildout across several countries in Asia, another sign of the capital pouring into expanding artificial intelligence infrastructure.

The planned financing will support facilities in India, Indonesia, Malaysia and Japan, the company said in a statement on Wednesday (Mar 11). The Warburg Pincus-backed firm operates AI data centres in seven Asian markets, with a portfolio exceeding 1.8 gigawatts of capacity.

“We’re in the midst of an investment supercycle in AI,” Rangu Salgame, co-founder and chief executive officer of PDG, said in a video interview from Singapore. “The long-term demand for AI and the kind of innovation that’s yet to come are driving demand for data centre capacity.”

A bank consortium including Barclays, BNP Paribas, Deutsche Bank and Standard Chartered will jointly fund a portion of the loan.

Training and deploying large AI models requires hyperscale data centres with specialised graphics processing unit chips and high-density computing clusters. Building these facilities can cost tens of billions of US dollars, often far beyond what operators can singlehandedly fund.

Operators worldwide with pre-sold capacity are leveraging customer commitments to raise billions in debt and build infrastructure, even as the industry grapples with power constraints, regulatory hurdles and geopolitical uncertainties.

Borrowing against future revenue locked in through signed customer contracts has become a norm among several firms. PDG is following that model, turning AI data centres into an asset class similar to toll roads or power plants, with predictable cash flows.

“We’ve rock solid contracts with hyperscalers averaging 10 to 12 years,” Salgame said.

AI-related data-centre spending could reach US$2.9 trillion between 2025 and 2028, with roughly half requiring external financing, which is driving debt issuance, according to Morgan Stanley. CoreWeave, one of the leading data centre operators in the US, plans capital spending of US$30 billion to US$35 billion this year, and has pushed its long-term borrowings to more than US$14 billion as it builds capacity for customers like Microsoft and Meta Platforms.

SEE ALSO

Warburg-backed Princeton enters South Korea with first data centre

Amid data-centre boom, can South-east Asia keep the lights on and taps running?

Johor-Singapore SEZ helps southern state beat Singapore, Malaysia’s growth: DBS

Lenders are willing to provide billions because revenue is often assured for a decade or longer to investment-grade tenants like Microsoft, Alphabet’s Google, or Amazon.com, providing a steady cash flow to service the debt.

Those three companies together with Meta have forecast capital expenditures that will reach about US$650 billion this year, a tidal wave of capital as they seek a competitive advantage in AI’s future. What’s not clear yet is whether they can generate enough revenue from corporate customers and consumers to make those investments profitable.

Adding to such concerns is the circular nature of deals in the AI economy. Nvidia, the leading provider of AI accelerators, has invested in customers such as OpenAI, for example. That’s prompted sceptics to question whether such agreements are artificially inflating the demand for AI chips and other gear.

PDG’s Salgame said that such concerns have not affected his company’s ability to land financing.

PDG is securing more than US$4 billion in loans by linking them to individual data centre assets in Mumbai, Jakarta, Johor and Tokyo, while about US$750 million will be borrowed by PDG’s parent company.

The holding-company loan is an expansion of the US$400 million debt raised last year, with the full US$750 million converted into a sustainability-linked loan, the company said. BLOOMBERG

IN THE space of just 23 days three decades ago, two initially unassuming releases changed video games forever. 

On Feb 27, 1996, Pokémon Red and Green first hit Japanese shelves. The role-playing titles were the original entries in a series that would grow to become what is now considered the top-grossing media franchise in the world, worth more than Mickey Mouse or Star Wars. 

Just three weeks later, Capcom released Biohazard, better known outside Japan as Resident Evil. There was no cuddly Pikachu here, with the title a bloody experience that sought to make players feel the tension of being hunted by zombies. Almost 30 years on, gamers still cannot get enough. The critically acclaimed latest entry, Resident Evil Requiem, sold five million copies in five days after its release last month, the fastest-ever pace. The series has shipped more than 180 million units in total. 

1996 was a seminal year for gaming, an era of rapid iteration and change that stands in contrast to the tedious years-long development schedule of today. Yet other franchises that emerged at the same time to dominate the decade, from Crash Bandicoot to Quake to Tomb Raider, have fallen into obscurity. It is a testament to their patient stewardship – and a lesson to publishers everywhere. 

As games, they have little in common. Having been in production for six years, an eternity in an era when games were often assembled in months, the kid-focused Pokemon was the last gasp of Nintendo’s Game Boy platform. Resident Evil, meanwhile, was developed by an inexperienced team experimenting on the then-new PlayStation platform, a horror plot that drew inspiration from the movies of Alfred Hitchcock. Both, however, were thought of as long shots.

The influence of both titles extends well beyond games. Pokemon, which was not released outside Japan until 1998, has been described as a “Rosetta Stone” that led directly to today’s anime boom. Initially, it was viewed a curiosity that obsessed kids and baffled adults, as memorably captured in a South Park episode that mocked the late 90s obsession. But unlike other fads, it endured – and would prove a harbinger of how Japanese pop culture would come to be the lingua franca of Western youth.  

Resident Evil drew inspiration from Western movies, particularly the zombie films of George A Romero, such as Dawn of the Dead. But by the 1990s, zombies had become the stuff of camp and parody, with horror moving toward meta trends like Scream, released later that year. The Japanese game’s success would re-establish the zombie as a horror mainstay, paving the way for everything from 28 Days Later to The Walking Dead. And despite its poorly translated script and legendarily hammy voice acting, it was nonetheless a landmark as games moved from cartoon action to the cinematic experiences targeted at adults. 

What is the secret that makes these two so relevant three decades on? 

First is a careful shepherding that gives fans what they want, while also updating the template. Resident Evil has fully reinvented itself at least twice, moving toward a more action-based formula, then later leaning further into its horror roots. Pokemon has stuck closer to a tried-and-true formula, and while the most recent major release, Scarlet and Violet, may have received mixed reviews, they became the second-best selling of the series.

SEE ALSO

Lego bets on Pokemon, interactive bricks as war threatens higher costs

But it experiments, too: The latest spinoff, the Animal Crossing-like Pokemon Pokopia, is attracting rave reviews since its release on the Switch 2 last week, reigniting the franchise ahead of the launch next year of the newest mainline entries, Winds and Waves. Nintendo’s shares surged more than 10 per cent in Tokyo on Wednesday as the market took note of Pokopia’s success.

They also show the importance of a multimedia strategy. Comics, anime and trading cards were crucial to Pokemon’s early success, making the series unavoidable and creating familiarity with the characters. And while the schlocky Resident Evil movies might have borne little resemblance to the games, they were still profitable and increased awareness of the brand. A new take helmed by acclaimed horror director Zach Cregger will hit movie theatres later this year. 

And for all their success, both have left money on the table. In their quest to constantly juice the next quarter’s earnings, many publishers give gamers too much of a good thing. But both Pokemon and Resident Evil have staggered their mainline releases – the major chapters of the franchise – with just nine entries in three decades, while using spin-offs, remakes and side adventures to keep players (and investors) engaged.

Pikachu and flesh-eating zombies might seem to have little in common. But they show that great ideas, if handled with care, don’t get old. BLOOMBERG