Write a case summary for a case: How did TeliaSonera leverage alliances and acquisitions to

grow in Eurasia markets, which are not known to be $$easy$$

markets?

Today, climbers can have $3$G access on Mount Everest to

brag about their experience on top of the world. How

ever, not many people know that it is a Nordic company

providing this service in such an alien environment.

The company is TeliaSonera, which provides telecom

munications services in a wide geographic area, from

Nordic countries to Nepal, which includes the emerg

ing and highly valued Eurasian markets. TeliaSonera

is the fifth$-$largest telecom operator in Europe. It has

operations in Azerbaijan, Belarus, Denmark, Estonia,

Finland, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania,

Moldova, Nepal, Norway, Russia, Spain, Sweden, Tajiki

stan, Turkey, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan.

How could a Nordic company with roots in highly

developed markets in Europe expand in such politically

risky and institutionally ambiguous settings? Savvy use of

alliances and acquisitions throughout Eurasia appeared

to be a key. Itself the result of the merger between Telia

of Sweden and Sonera of Finland in $2002,$ TeliaSonera

certainly understood the importance of alliances and

acquisitions. Its alliances and acquisitions throughout

Eurasia resulted in enviable performance in many host

countries, often commanding either the number$-$one or

number$-$two position shown in Exhibit $1.$

To overcome its liability of foreignness, Telia

Sonera leveraged its decades of telecom expertise

developed in Nordic countries in Eurasia. It was the

world$$s first operator of $4$G networks first deployed

in Europe. Although it did not offer $4$G in Eurasia,

the generally better$-$quality network investments pro

vided TeliaSonera a leading edge in Eurasia, com

pared to local competitors. This high investment

cost turned into a larger and more satisfied customer

base, upgrading TeliaSonera into leading positions

in most countries.

TeliaSonera faced certain challenges due to weak

institutional settings, especially in former Soviet Union

countries in Eurasia. Although each country was in a

different phase of transition to become a market econ

omy, the economic, legal, and regulatory systems were

still highly bureaucratic and risky. The ambiguity in

the institutional frameworks brings additional risks for

businesses, significantly increasing the costs of invest

ments. The telecom industry has further liabilities in