|
||||||||
O2 UK Results |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#26 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 248
|
Quote:
No, they or any MVNOs are not included in the totals.
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: London, UK
Posts: 8,759
|
Quote:
As you say, no 4G customer totals, only a coverage figure (38% outdoor with a target of >60% by the end of the year).
I think the service revenue fall probably looks worse than it is. Whilst they are hit by regulation (termination rates, roaming) like the others, in O2's case the way Refresh is accounted for also hits service revenue as you get higher handset revenues initially but lower service revenues. My estimate was +700k so technically you win but after a stewards enquiry you lose due to changing your mind. ![]() Where I went wrong and what surprises me is how they hang on to their PAYG base. No net change at all in the quarter and less than 200k drop YoY. They now have more PAYG customers than EE. I guess this big PAYG proportion has something to do with the low smartphone figure. They could raise it just by shedding a load of PAYG customers! ![]() And yeh, surprised as well to see PAYG customers not drop even slightly. I was expecting Voda, EE and O2 to lose PAYG customers slightly and Three to gain some customers. Three are tomorrow so lets see if they do as well as last year. I'm once again expecting growth in both revenue and customer numbers + smartphone penetration. |
|
|
|
|
|
#28 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,662
|
Quote:
Well I changed my prediction before today. So.... technically I was closer
![]() And yeh, surprised as well to see PAYG customers not drop even slightly. I was expecting Voda, EE and O2 to lose PAYG customers slightly and Three to gain some customers. Three are tomorrow so lets see if they do as well as last year. I'm once again expecting growth in both revenue and customer numbers + smartphone penetration. OK, I've looked at your estimates in the EE results thread and it seems your final estimate was the same as your first one so your appeal is accepted and you win a 300Mb/s 4GEE PAYG sim with no inclusive data ![]() Also in that thread are the estimates for Three which for the record are: Me: +750k You: +650k (unless you change your mind again) ![]() enapace: +450k-490k (saying a range means automatic disqualification) ![]() Anyone else? |
|
|
|
|
|
#29 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 248
|
Quote:
Even though giffgaff is owned by Telefonica ?
Telefónica has other virtual mobile brands in several countries, including giffgaff (UK), fonic (Germany), tuenti móvil (Spain) and quam (Argentina)." http://www.telefonica.com/en/about_t...d_marcas.shtml |
|
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,662
|
Quote:
No, they or any MVNOs are not included in the totals.
I did ask a question recently in another thread as to whether giffgaff should be regarded as an MVNO or just another O2 brand. |
|
|
|
|
|
#31 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 248
|
Quote:
Yes I think giffgaff is included in the O2 UK customer numbers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#32 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,662
|
Quote:
That may go some way to explain the prepaid customer numbers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the future....
Posts: 11,257
|
Quote:
CEO Ronan Dunne "We’re also building a faster, smarter and stronger network which is bringing tangible benefits to our customers every day, whether that’s We’re also building a faster, smarter and stronger network which is bringing tangible benefits to our customers every day, whether that’s better call quality, faster download speeds or greater network coverage. In 2014, we’ll be even more relentless in giving customers more reasons to join and stay with O2.’, faster download speeds or greater network coverage. In 2014, we’ll be even more relentless in giving customers more reasons to join and stay with O2.’
Are they going to do HD Voice Doubt it but you never know.http://www.mobiletoday.co.uk/news/in...p_in_2013.aspx |
|
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,662
|
Quote:
Are they going to do HD Voice
Doubt it but you never know.http://www.mobiletoday.co.uk/news/in...p_in_2013.aspx Don't know if it's correct or not. |
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: London, UK
Posts: 8,759
|
Quote:
According to that it says "O2 also announced that it had reached the milestone of one million customers paying for and using 4G"
Don't know if it's correct or not. But its misleading. Because o2 enabled all those customers for 4G for free. O2 had 1m customers on contract with a 4G phone. How many had paid extra for 4G before January though? We don't know. I'm guessing it was a very poor number. Hence why they made it free and got all 1m customers with 4G phones on contract to migrate over. Anyway, o2 are aiming for 60% 4G population coverage by the end of the year which isn't that great actually. I'd expect Three to overtake them by then. Also another interesting this to note is that there is now a difference of 1125k between EE and O2's customer base. Someone will tell me the exact figure but I'm fairly certain the gap was around 4000k+ a few years ago. |
|
|
|
|
|
#36 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,662
|
Quote:
That is indeed correct.
But its misleading. Because o2 enabled all those customers for 4G for free. O2 had 1m customers on contract with a 4G phone. How many had paid extra for 4G before January though? We don't know. I'm guessing it was a very poor number. Hence why they made it free and got all 1m customers with 4G phones on contract to migrate over |
|
|
|
|
|
#37 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: London, UK
Posts: 8,759
|
Quote:
I know but if they said previously one million had a 4G phone how could they all be 'using' 4G. A lot of them won't be in 4G coverage.
The article is just PR talk. |
|
|
|
|
|
#38 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,662
|
Quote:
Also another interesting this to note is that there is now a difference of 1125k between EE and O2's customer base. Someone will tell me the exact figure but I'm fairly certain the gap was around 4000k+ a few years ago.
OK, when Orange and T-Mobile merged at the end of Q1 2010, they had 27.021m. At that point O2 had 21.356m so the diff was 5665k. EE did initially increase numbers to 27.2m at the end of 2010 but O2 had increased theirs even more so I think the gap was at its largest when the merger took place. |
|
|
|
|
|
#39 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the future....
Posts: 11,257
|
Here is last weeks results from EE with this weeks O2 results fop side by side comparison. Thanks to japaul.
EE Mobile Customers - Total: 24.774m (2013 Q3: 25.123m, 2012 Q4: 26.148m) Mobile Customers - Postpaid: 14.350m (2013 Q3: 14.156m, 2012 Q4: 13.594m) Mobile Customers - Prepaid: 10.424m (2013 Q3: 10.967m, 2012 Q4: 12.554m) Smartphone penetration (postpaid only): 88% (2013 Q3: 85%, 2012 Q4: 78%) O2 Mobile Customers (Total): 23.649m (2013 Sep: 23.427m, 2012 Dec: 22.864m) Mobile Customers (Contract): 12.884m (2013 Sep: 12.662m, 2012 Dec: 11.901m) Mobile Customers (Prepay): 10.765m (2013 Sep: 10.765m, 2012 Dec: 10.963m) Smartphone penetration: 49% (2013 Sep: 48%, 2012 Dec: 45%) |
|
|
|
|
|
#40 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,286
|
Quote:
That is indeed correct.
But its misleading. Because o2 enabled all those customers for 4G for free. O2 had 1m customers on contract with a 4G phone. How many had paid extra for 4G before January though? We don't know. I'm guessing it was a very poor number. Hence why they made it free and got all 1m customers with 4G phones on contract to migrate over. Anyway, o2 are aiming for 60% 4G population coverage by the end of the year which isn't that great actually. I'd expect Three to overtake them by then. What's dubious though is *when* they reached 1m customers on 4G. They announced it with the Q4 2013 results, but they did not start giving customers free 4G until Q1 2014. As for 60% population coverage, that's not a lot lower than EE's 70% coverage after the same amount of time, but O2 are also covering larger geographical areas and rural locations with low population over large cities where you can get huge population figures with very few transmitters. So you might get a lower population figure but a much larger geographical figure even with the same number of masts. Case in point dozens of towns and suburbs around Edinburgh launched with 4G coverage last November on O2, most of which still have no 4G coverage on EE well over a year after they launched. Another example being Polmont/Grangemouth/Livingston, it took EE a full year before they had any coverage there whereas O2 brought coverage to the same area using the same masts 2 months after launch. They'll be contributing very little to O2's population coverage figures despite the geographical coverage area being much larger. |
|
|
|
|
|
#41 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: London, UK
Posts: 8,759
|
Quote:
he he that someone might be me.
OK, when Orange and T-Mobile merged at the end of Q1 2010, they had 27.021m. At that point O2 had 21.356m so the diff was 5665k. EE did initially increase numbers to 27.2m at the end of 2010 but O2 had increased theirs even more so I think the gap was at its largest when the merger took place. And just to clear up what I said before, I expect Three's revenue and profit to grow, but I expect their growth to decline. It'll still be a very positive number, but I have a feeling that O2 will have gained more customers this year and that Three's growth is under last years growth of +833k.(Japaul, can you verify this number for 2012 me?) But hey, I could be wrong. We'll find out tomorrow. Just to expand on everything goes post, here is all major networks figures all in one post Quote:
[LIST][*]UKTelecoms Q4 results-[/LIST]
EE Mobile service revenue: £1445m (2013 Q3: £1446m, 2012 Q4: £1467m) Mobile Customers - Total: 24.774m (2013 Q3: 25.123m, 2012 Q4: 26.148m) Mobile Customers - Postpaid: 14.350m (2013 Q3: 14.156m, 2012 Q4: 13.594m) Mobile Customers - Prepaid: 10.424m (2013 Q3: 10.967m, 2012 Q4: 12.554m) 4G Customers: 2.0m Smartphone penetration (postpaid only): 88% (2013 Q3: 85%, 2012 Q4: 78%) O2 Mobile service revenue: £1124m (2013 Jul-Sep: £1168m, 2012 Oct-Dec: £1197m) Mobile Customers (Total): 23.649m (2013 Sep: 23.427m, 2012 Dec: 22.864m) Mobile Customers (Contract): 12.884m (2013 Sep: 12.662m, 2012 Dec: 11.901m) Mobile Customers (Prepay): 10.765m (2013 Sep: 10.765m, 2012 Dec: 10.963m) 4G Customers (Q1 14): 1.0m (free upgrade scheme from Feb) Smartphone penetration: 49% (2013 Sep: 48%, 2012 Dec: 45%) Vodafone Mobile service revenue: £1045m (2013 Jul-Sep: £1058m, 2012 Oct-Dec: £1107m) Mobile Customers (Total): 19.368m (2013 Sep: 19.469m, 2012 Dec: 19.544m) Mobile Customers (Prepaid): 7.849m (2013 Sep: 8.141m, 2012 Dec: 8.514m) Mobile Customers (Contract): 11.519m (2013 Sep: 11.328m, 2012 Dec: 11.030m) 4G Customers: 0.37m Smartphone penetration: 60.5% (2013 Sep: 57.9%, 2012 Dec: 53.3%) |
|
|
|
|
|
#42 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,286
|
Quote:
Where I went wrong and what surprises me is how they hang on to their PAYG base. No net change at all in the quarter and less than 200k drop YoY. They now have more PAYG customers than EE. I guess this big PAYG proportion has something to do with the low smartphone figure. They could raise it just by shedding a load of PAYG customers!
EE's smartphone penetration on contract being 88%, that gives them 12.6m smartphone customers on contract and an unknown number on PAYG or in total. O2's smartphone penetration overall being 49%, that gives them 11.6m overall. Even if 3's smartphone penetration were 100%, which it is not, it'd still give them less smartphone customers in total. Since the birth of the modern-day smartphone in the mid 2000's 3 still hasn't gained as many smartphone customers as O2, which seems odd. |
|
|
|
|
|
#43 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: London, UK
Posts: 8,759
|
Quote:
O2's smartphone penetration overall being 49%, that gives them 11.6m overall. Even if 3's smartphone penetration were 100%, which it is not, it'd still give them less smartphone customers in total. Since the birth of the modern-day smartphone in the mid 2000's 3 still hasn't gained as many smartphone customers as O2, which seems odd.
It's quite hard for a network with under 10m users to have over 11.6m users with smartphones. So there is nothing odd about that. Once again you're being negative for no reason. |
|
|
|
|
|
#44 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,286
|
Once again you're being an ignorant bully and missing the point. Try reading posts without your tunnel-visioned tactic of trying to deliberately construe every post by certain members as negative and you might realise nothing I have said is negative towards any network outside of your own imagination.
The whole point is they've gained less smartphone customers over the last seven years as O2 irrespective of the total. |
|
|
|
|
|
#45 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: London, UK
Posts: 8,759
|
Quote:
The whole point is they've gained less smartphone customers over the last seven years as O2 irrespective of the total.
Maybe my explanation isn't good but you should know what I mean. It's not surprising at all that O2 have more smartphone users. They are growing as well. Why would you be surprised that Three have less smartphone users? Pretty much all phones on sale these days are classed as smartphone. It's not just something that Three sell. |
|
|
|
|
|
#46 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,286
|
Once again missing the point.
If 3 are such a great network for smartphone users, and O2 such a terrible network for smartphone users - as many people repeatedly like to make out - why are O2 gaining more smartphone users over the same time period than 3? If O2's network is so terrible for data how come they've gained over 11m smartphone customers over the last 8 years, while competitors such as 3 have gained less than 7m in total? You do like to repeatedly criticize their low smartphone penetration after all, but the underlying figures show they're actually acquiring more smartphone customers than 3 are - for whatever reason. |
|
|
|
|
|
#47 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 514
|
Quote:
Once again missing the point.
If 3 are such a great network for smartphone users, and O2 such a terrible network for smartphone users - as many people repeatedly like to make out - why are O2 gaining more smartphone users over the same time period than 3? If O2's network is so terrible for data how come they've gained over 11m smartphone customers over the last 8 years, while competitors such as 3 have gained far less? |
|
|
|
|
|
#48 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,286
|
Wouldn't being premium make people move away from a network, if people cared about price or value?
Or do you mean premium in terms of perceived service rather than pricing? Because if this forum is anything to go by that doesn't seem to be the case. |
|
|
|
|
|
#49 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: London, UK
Posts: 8,759
|
Quote:
Once again missing the point.
What you're saying is like this. That 50% of the American population have smartphones And that 80% of the UK population have smartphones. So in the USA that's around ~150m people, and in the UK that's ~50m people. Depsite the UK having a lower number, the percentage is higher which shows that in the UK, a higher percentage are more likely to buy a smartphone. So in this case, more people on EE, Voda and Three are more likely to get a smartphone than those on O2. It's nothing to do with how many customers a network have. And why are you painting me with the same paintbrush as "others". It's clear that people will buy smartphones on all networks, not everyone will just join Three. All networks sell smartphones. It's just clear that the uptake on O2 is much lower compared to other networks. For Three customers, the number of smartphone users in relation to total customers is probably fairly high. Your logic is flawed. |
|
|
|
|
|
#50 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 514
|
Quote:
Wouldn't being premium make people move away from a network, if people cared about price or value?
Or do you mean premium in terms of perceived service rather than pricing? Because if this forum is anything to go by that doesn't seem to be the case. But you're a troll anyway so there's never any getting through to idiots like you. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 17:42.





Doubt it but you never know.