On October 14, 2025, Orange, Bouygues Telecom, and Iliad (Free) offered nearly 17 billion euros for the majority of SFR, owned by Altice France. On October 15, the parent company firmly rejected the offer, deeming the valuation insufficient. At the heart of SFR’s news: the consolidation of telecoms in France, promised investments, and the fate of subscribers, under the watchful eye of regulators.
Mobile market of three: it takes shape, then slips away
The scenario unfolded over two clear days. On October 14, 2025, a joint statement announced that Orange, Bouygues Telecom, and Iliad (Free) submitted a non-binding joint offer to acquire the majority of the telecom assets of Altice France, parent company of SFR, the market’s number two. The stated amount: 17 billion euros in enterprise value, with debt remaining separate. The next day, October 15, 2025, Altice France, led by Arthur Dreyfuss, internally announced that it immediately rejected the proposal. This two-step process reveals the tension in a mature sector. Margins are achieved through heavy investments. Moreover, patience is becoming rare.
What the three rival competitors proposed
The sketched architecture resembles a meticulous mapping of assets. The scope immediately excluded: Intelcia, UltraEdge, XP Fibre, Altice Technical Services, as well as overseas activities. At the core, the metropolitan activities of SFR. The indicative distribution aims to be balanced while assuming a functional imbalance: Bouygues would take 43% of the whole, Iliad 30%, Orange 27%. In the B2B telecom sector, the majority would go to Bouygues and Iliad, while in the consumer and infrastructure sectors, a sharing would be organized. The setup requires a transitional joint company to operate what cannot change immediately. Thus, a progressive migration of customers is envisaged. The ambitions are not hidden: moving from a market of four to a landscape of three, while promising to preserve service continuity.
Why Altice said no
The immediate rejection is attributed, according to internal emails cited by the press, to a valuation deemed too low by the controlling shareholder, Patrick Drahi, controlling shareholder of Altice. The debt reduction achieved in summer 2025 has indeed loosened the financial grip. However, it has not eliminated the desire to control the timeline and the price equation. Altice France informs its employees that it does not wish to engage in discussions on this basis. The matter is also being played out at the table of creditors, now co-owners of a significant part of the economic capital. The message is simple: the company is less eager to sell than previously thought. Moreover, it wants to better value what remains its main asset.
Altice France’s debt in the background
Behind the drama of offers and counteroffers, a balance sheet. Altice France announced in the first half of the year a restructuring reducing its net debt to approximately 15.5 billion euros, with 8.6 billion of debts erased or refinanced, and maturities extended to 2028/2033. This adjustment does not solve everything, but it extends the runway and stabilizes operations. It is the foundation on which Patrick Drahi, controlling shareholder of Altice intends to negotiate. To acquire SFR, one will have to pay not only for its customers and frequencies. But also, one will have to compensate for the renunciation of a coherent scope.
Telecom regulation: competition law as a peacemaker
If the case were to resurface, it would follow a well-defined path: thorough audit, seller’s agreement, consultation with employee representatives, then control by the Competition Authority and ARCEP, possibly at the European level if the operation, due to its market effects, requires it. Over the years, the French regulator has refined its tools, examining concentration through the lens of relevant markets: mobile, fixed, wholesale, retail, enterprises, passive infrastructures. The European Commission has, on its side, sent more flexible signals on some recent operations, without giving up on imposing remedies: asset sales, strengthened MVNOs, wholesale access. In short: the door can open, but only at the cost of substantial conditions. In the daily life of subscribers, the priority remains service continuity and offer clarity.
An open social project
The SFR teams are the lifeblood of the operator. Any piecemeal sale alarms the organizations. The unions will demand guarantees on jobs, internal mobility, the continuity of regional sites. The buyers, on the other hand, will tout synergies that, beyond words, cover potentially painful reorganizations. The consultation of employee representative bodies would be a decisive step. Nothing guarantees a quick alignment of corporate cultures. In the depths of the networks, the engineering teams know the difficulty of an equipment swap, a frequency refarming, an IT convergence. These are months of invisible work for the subscriber and challenging for the employees.
Timeline: after the refusal, what’s next?
The refusal by Altice does not close the horizon. The three operators can return with a revised offer, documented by a due diligence, and adjusted to the anticipated remedies. The price is not the only variable: the simplicity of execution, the clarity of the division, the robustness of commitments to customers and employees will count just as much. A complete process would stretch over quarters, even years, with regulatory milestones. The political time is intertwined: the State observes, concerned with territorial cohesion and digital sovereignty. Regulators translate these priorities into obligations of coverage, quality, access, and pricing transparency.
Lines of force, without emphasis
On October 14, 2025, an offer attempted to redraw the French telecom landscape. On October 15, it hit a no. Between these two dates, a program: reduce the number of operators, free up investment capacity, secure continuity for millions of subscribers. Between the lines, a price does not convince the seller. Moreover, regulators are ready to question the promise of a more efficient market. Nothing prevents the case from reappearing, recomposed. However, the episode reminds us of a simple truth: a consolidation is credible only at the crossroads of a fair price. Moreover, it requires a clear industrial project and a social contract capable of holding.