The Test for Value Sharing for Strive Masiyiwa as Econet Delists from the Zimbabwe Stock Exchange (ZSE): Will Value Unlocking Mean Value Sharing?

 By Dr Last Mazambani

Let there be inclusion!

Econet Wireless Zimbabwe Limited’s further cautionary announcement on its proposed voluntary delisting from the Zimbabwe Stock Exchange (ZSE) marks a defining moment in the company’s corporate history. At its core, the transaction proposes a structural separation: the infrastructure business (InfraCo) will be listed, while the Mobile Network Operator (MNO), or Services Company (ServCo), will be taken private. Existing shareholders in the listed Econet entity will either cash out or receive shares in the newly listed infrastructure company (InfraCo). While this restructuring may be defensible from a strategic standpoint, it raises profound questions about value sharing, minority shareholder rights, and ethical leadership at a time when the company itself acknowledges that it has been trading at a deep discount to its peers.

For many investors, particularly minority shareholders who backed Econet when it was still emerging against formidable odds, this is not a routine corporate action. It is a moment of reckoning. Their capital was committed when capital was scarce, regulatory risk was elevated, and the company’s future far from guaranteed. The network, brand, and infrastructure now being reorganised were built with that early belief and patience. Any delisting process must therefore be judged not only on regulatory compliance, but on whether it fairly honours that contribution.

According to the cautionary statement, Econet’s Board has resolved to pursue a voluntary delisting from the ZSE, citing persistent undervaluation relative to African peers. The company attributes this discount partly to the fact that comparable operators have already separated and monetised their tower infrastructure, while Econet has historically retained both MNO and tower assets within a single listed entity. To address this, Econet has established Econet Infrastructure Company Limited (Econet InfraCo), housing towers and power assets, with a proposed listing on the Victoria Falls Stock Exchange (VFEX) by way of introduction.

In principle, infrastructure separation aligns with global best practice. However, execution matters. Under the proposed structure, the infrastructure company will be publicly listed, while the MNO, the higher-growth, strategically central business, will become a private entity. Existing shareholders in the current listed company are offered a choice: exit for cash, or receive shares in the listed InfraCo. This framing immediately raises a critical question: why is the business with arguably stronger growth optionality and strategic control being taken private, while minority shareholders are steered toward the more constrained infrastructure asset?

The earning potential of a tower-focused InfraCo is not guaranteed, particularly in oligopolistic market environments where there are limited revenue diversification options. Towers generate relatively stable but capped returns, heavily dependent on tenancy ratios, regulatory conditions, and currency stability. In contrast, the MNO business benefits from data growth, service innovation, and ecosystem expansion. Many shareholders invested in Econet precisely because of this upside. For them, a forced migration into infrastructure exposure represents a fundamental shift in risk and return profile.

Minority shareholders are not passive spectators in this process; they are owners. Their rights include fair treatment, equal access to information, and meaningful choice. The announcement that a voluntary exit offer will be extended to “eligible” shareholders is, therefore, troubling. It creates the perception that some investors may be selectively pushed out while others consolidate control over the more attractive assets. In any well-governed market, such distinctions demand exceptional transparency and justification.

If Econet is indeed undervalued, logic and fairness suggest that existing shareholders should first be offered mechanisms to benefit from that undervaluation. Instead, the current proposal appears to confront minority investors with a bitter choice: exit an undervalued company in a weak currency environment, or remain invested indirectly through a business they did not originally choose.

The timing and sequencing of this transaction raise serious concerns about fairness and value reciprocity. If Econet is indeed undervalued, equity demands that solutions focus on structure and sequencing rather than requiring minority shareholders to accept technical market adjustments that risk transferring value at a moment of price distortion. A more equitable approach would be to list the company in its current integrated form in a market and currency that allow proper price discovery, enabling long-standing shareholders to participate in the recovery of value. Only thereafter should the option of delisting or restructuring the MNO be considered. Such sequencing would recognise shareholder loyalty, support genuine value sharing in a less distorted monetary environment, and avoid permanently crystallising losses for investors.

A truly shareholder-centric process would recognise these macroeconomic realities and adjust the processes accordingly, rather than using them as a backdrop against which value quietly migrates from the public to the private sphere or controlling shareholders.

Critically, minority shareholders’ views on which of the two businesses should remain listed deserve serious consideration. There is no self-evident reason why the MNO, rather than the infrastructure company, could not be the publicly listed entity. Equally important, the option of listing both entities should be placed on the table before any shareholder vote. A dual listing, with existing shareholders retaining proportional investments in both the ServCo and InfraCo, would preserve economic continuity, respect the original investment thesis, and allow the market itself to determine relative valuations over time. Such an approach would meaningfully expand shareholder choice, rather than narrowing it to exit or accept a fundamentally altered exposure, especially where ownership is being fundamentally reshaped.

This moment is therefore a personal and ethical test for Strive Masiyiwa and the Econet Board. Leadership is not measured solely by strategic foresight, but by how success is shared with those who made that success possible. Going beyond minimum regulatory compliance through transparent, independently verified valuations, equal access to options, and robust protections against coercion or vote buying; would signal genuine respect for corporate democracy.

As Econet charts its next chapter, the central question remains simple yet profound: Will value unlocking mean value sharing? The answer will not be found in cautionary statements or transaction structures alone, but in the lived outcomes for minority shareholders who believed early, waited long, and now deserve fairness at the table.

Let there be inclusion in everything you do!

Last Mazambani (PhD) is a transformational project management and change management professional. His academic publications are on sustainability, innovation, financial inclusion, financial technology, and cryptocurrency. Click here to access his academic profile. Last can be contacted at lastmazambani@gmail.com.