Is it still a long-term plan to have those "all but a handful of sites" carrying G1800 & U2100? Or is it possible there could be G1800-only/U2100-only sites when the consolidation is complete?

All of them except ~30.

If mine is one of the 30 I'm going to fecking kill someone!!!!
Hahahahahahahahahahaha

you already know it isn't as it has got some decent speeds in the past. Only reason those 30 aren't getting upgraded is backhaul issues.

Good to know, so there is hope for the Green Park area of Reading after all! (patchy G1800, and poorly-performing U2100)

I'm guessing those 30 sites are geographically remote then.. and that we're talking 2G only rather than 3G only.

Drove past Green Park yesterday on the M4 and sure enough I lost my solid EE 4G connection in exchange for a strong 3G signal only for 4G to return about half a mile past the turbine. Really odd. Was the only time I noticed losing 4G on the whole of my M4 journey. Considering Green Park is what it is it's all rather strange!

Vodafone used to be iffy there too, the company I used to work for has an office there and people frequently complained about dropped calls (signal strength was fine). This is good, considering the company's corporate contract was with Vodafone.

At least EE has company (although I don't remember having issues with the then T-Mobile when I worked there 5 days a week)

Something interesting is happening. We have been wondering what is in it for the mobile networks. Well it looks like they will get cheaper easier access to put up masts. This hasn't gone down well with land owners or the CLA for that matter.

http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php...rage-deal.html

Important Update

There may be trouble ahead as the song goes. Labour aren't happy with the proposals and are threatening to vote against them. Why? Well the mobile networks will get a nice cut in the licence fees that Ofcom were threatening to hike from £65 Million to £247 Million at last count and will now remain at £65 Million

Personally I see the licence fee cut as a good thing that will encourage investment. WTF Ed Miliband is thinking


http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/01...to_fall_apart/

Labour seems to think that high licence fees is good because it means a better short-term boost for the treasury. Like the billions they got in the 3G auction, that meant no one could actually be bothered to build a 3G network using them and pushed prices up so no one wanted 3G either. Like 50p/min video calling.

Billions that probably got spent in seconds on some wonderful wheeze like NHS IT failures or Iraq

If Labour really do vote against this then it is basically saying that they don't care about better Mobile connectivity in the UK. 1 Billion extra over 5 years isn't going to be a massive boost to the economy at all but better Mobile connectivity is going to be a boost.

They love spending money on wars which aren't in the least bit counter productive and make the world a more peaceful, and a safer place free from terrorism (sarcasm).

Ed Miliband doesn't think. He just eats bacon sandwiches really badly : )
My politics are right of centre but I always listen to the other point of view.
Labour are doomed luckily as they can't seem to see he is unelectable.
Forget the politics, just him. You can't have a slightly strange guy as your Prime Minister. End of.
Now if they got Alan Johnson in I would almost be able to vote for him.
Like him a lot. Political Heavy weight but a real nice guy with it.
Cameron would be in real trouble no doubt!

I think you need to visit the politics forum on here, consensus generally says Labour will be the largest party after the next election (though not a majoirty I might add). Now I could go on all day about politics but thats for elsewhere.

I think Labour are shooting an own goal here, I think its right to expect licensees to pay a fair amount for the spectrum they have. Though I don't think it should be to the hundreds of millions that was originally proposed prior to this fudge setup by the current administration. Relative to the amount of spectrum and crucially more advantageous it is, should be priced accordingly. So the lower range frequencies should carry a premium compared to that of say 2600 and soon.

I am sure it will all balance out sooner or later though, I think the current government has apporached the situation as sensibly and reasonable as can be expected. I suppose that rural roaming proposition was what brought the networks to heel and to the table.

I would assume it will get voted through as a fast track measure before the election. Though my spies tell me, the tories might push for the snoopers charter by the back door........that will fail quite frankly.

I think when all is said and done, the apporach by networks and the government will be viewed as most progessive considering the alternatives. I

Yes I like Alan Johnson too. I can't ever see Milliband getting elected unless there's a conservative scandal just before the election or something and we end up with a lib-lab.

Our economy is improving, deficit halved, unemployment down and new industry starting to come on-line, plus the boost from Obama support has all helped Cameron. I suspect Labour will see a crushing defeat and then it'll cause them to have a complete re-organisation, find a new leader and possibly make themselves electable in 4 years.

If Cameron wins it won't be because he's liked.. It will be because the other guy is unelectable. This is going to be one strange election. With the Greens, Scottish (SNP landslide or not) and UKIP all having a potentially huge input into the next Govt indirectly. If what the pollsters are saying ends up happening it could be a fun and horrible 4 years for the country.

Alan Johnson would be ok with me too, however even with him in charge I couldn't vote for Labour because of the new Scottish Labour leader Murphy, He's such a shyster, rated worse than Miliband & Cameron even..

Ed.. Poor Ed, I feel for him, he's not done anything drastically wrong per say but just couldn't vote for him, he's not a PM.

Cameron is the least bad option out of all of them.

It is a shame how we vote based on who is the least crap, as opposed to voting for the best.

Jim Murphy makes Ed Miliband look a serious contender for PM
He's a real boost for the SNP as Jim is a complete and utter buffon which is confirmed every time he opens his mouth (which he does all too often sadly).

At any rate in Scotland we have a decent choice so it's SNP for me!

Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if there was a hung parliament come May. I can't see anyone getting a majority I think Labour will get close to one. Liberal Democrats will probably lose a lot of there seats but will hold on to some of them. Greens will likely gain a small amount and expect UKIP to as well goes without saying SNP will gain some as well.

whatever happens I hope the current government approves the Geographical Coverage agreement as it is very good we might finally be able make a call in a national park.

I hope not. I don't want my beautiful view ruined by a mobile phone mast thank you very much!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'll have you know that I live near a national park and I'm sure you probably live in some big rich city or something where you don't have beautiful views like we do. Well let me tell you that the national park near me has a great landscape and is a really amazing place to visit, just wish we could get a phone signal here...

You can't have signal and not have a mast lol and what's wrong with having a Tree mast or something. Plus not sure how you could even get 90% geographical without including National Parks I think they probably make up a good percentage of that last 20%.

Yeah, I think that's quite likely. The outcome will be another coalition, perhaps Con/Lab - as there is still a huge job to do in the finances that neither big party really wants to be 'tarred' with permanently. Whatever the "talk" leading up to the election (e.g. improving the deficit) the countries debt is immense and we haven't started to repay that.

So to try and bring back to topic, would 90% 4G/LTE geographical coverage entice more businesses into the UK that would be paying tax and helping the finances? Who knows

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSy5mEcmgwU

I was taking the mick out of certain groups who are against masts in these areas. Surely you don't think I can be that stupid enapace

Ah I particularly like the groups who complain about putting in masts in villages and then complain about lack of signal in those villages.

I quite like it when the NIMBYs try to argue with Network Rail over GSM-R mast placement, and all NR does is say "sorry, we can do what we want, it's a safety critical network, sorry".

They don't seem to like cabinets either. When BT tried to install its FTTC network in one London borough (Kensington and Chelsea I think) they walked away after the local NIMBYs gave them too much hassle