Kenya has reached an agreement to sell a 15% stake in Safaricom to Vodacom for about $1.6 billion. Once finalised, Vodacom’s ownership will rise to 55%, giving it majority control while the government and public investors keep the remaining shares.
For many observers, this move goes beyond a routine business deal. It speaks to how African telecoms are evolving and how global players view the continent’s digital future. It also hints at how African countries might use strategic assets to unlock new capital while still holding an influential stake.
READ ALSO: FTSE 100 Gains Reveal Airtel Africa Telecom Sector Strength and Future
The valuation of roughly KES 204.3 billion ($1.6 billion) shows the level of confidence investors continue to place in Safaricom. Kenya is selling its stake at a 20% premium, KES 34 per share, which brings much-needed revenue into government accounts at a time when debt repayments are weighing heavily on the budget. Despite the sale, the state still keeps a meaningful share, maintaining a place in a company that has become one of Africa’s most successful corporate stories.
Safaricom’s importance is easy to see. It is Kenya’s biggest company, a major driver of activity on the Nairobi Securities Exchange, and home to M-Pesa, the mobile money platform used by more than 38 million Kenyans. For global investors, this blend of telecom strength, fintech dominance, and steady profits is a rare combination. Strong revenue growth and a recent 52% jump in net income continue to reinforce Safaricom’s appeal.
Across Africa, the deal may inspire similar thinking. If a government can sell part of its stake while keeping a voice in operations and still attract serious global buyers, other countries with high-performing telecom firms might consider the same path. With more capital and deeper technical expertise, partnerships like the Vodacom–Safaricom structure could help boost mobile money access, expand regional digital services, and raise the quality of telecom infrastructure across East and Southern Africa.
However, the move does raise important questions. When foreign owners gain majority control of key national infrastructure, concerns naturally arise about pricing power, competition, and data protection. Regulators will need to stay alert and ensure the market remains open, fair, and responsive to the needs of ordinary users. There is also the risk that investment could focus heavily on major cities while rural areas continue to lag, an issue many African countries are still struggling with.
There is a historical dimension too. Safaricom has always been a mix of public interest, private investment, and broad shareholder participation. But Africa’s digital economy is changing quickly. Demand for fast internet, mobile payments, cloud services, and digital tools keeps rising. Telecom companies need far larger capital investments to keep up with expanding 4G and 5G, and to upgrade fibre lines. Kenya’s decision to partially sell its stake reflects this new reality: to strengthen the wider economy, the government is choosing liquidity and financial breathing room over maintaining a larger holding.
Vodacom’s majority control could lead to new digital products, smoother cross-border mobile money services, and stronger collaboration across African markets where Vodacom already operates. It may also encourage more global investors to take African telecoms seriously, helping fund the infrastructure needed to support the continent’s growing digital ambitions. If handled responsibly with steady regulation and transparent operations, this deal could serve as an example of how African countries use partnerships to build more resilient, innovative, and inclusive telecom systems.
