The market, however, has already priced in a degree of scepticism. Shares sold off sharply after the Fastweb ruling, with brokers noting that the court’s reasoning—particularly the suggestion that a change of control could affect contract duration—introduced a new layer of risk. Analysts at Equita pointed to the absence of fumus boni iuris in the Fastweb decision, contrasting it with the TIM ruling that turned on urgency rather than the apparent merit of the claim.
For investors, the numbers tell a story of a business that is still generating high-margin recurring revenue but is now operating under a legal cloud that is suppressing investment, eroding profit, and stretching the balance sheet. The central question is whether the appeals process can restore the contractual certainty that underpins INWIT’s long-term cash flows—or whether the towerco will be forced to renegotiate the terms of its most important relationships from a position of weakness.
Can INWIT’s full trial on the merits deliver a binding ruling before the investment freeze and rising leverage permanently alter its risk profile?
Sources: Source 1 · Source 2 · Source 3 · Source 4 · Source 5 · Source 6
