• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • Gadgets
  • Mobile Phones
CMA says Three & O2 merger is a Significant threat to competition
<<
<
2 of 20
>>
>
sdduk
10-10-2015
Originally Posted by Gigabit:
“But the merger haso already started. Three have started bringing their 3G speeds down to O2 levels.”

Rubbish you talking silly.
Gigabit
10-10-2015
Originally Posted by sdduk:
“Rubbish you talking silly.”

I wish I was.
clewsy
10-10-2015
Originally Posted by jonmorris:
“I don't think we'll ever see networks not sticking together and effectively operating like a cartel. If one introduces a new charge, they all follow.

But that doesn't mean there isn't still some competition on tariffs.

The problem with loads of networks is that some might end up not being very good, and as such aren't a good choice regardless of price. Having fewer networks that are all fairly equal now means you can consider all of them.

Frankly, three networks and countless MVNOs means I think we've got plenty of choice and won't be any worse off. Or better. It will be pretty much the same.”

However what we had pre EE was really perfect. You have networks starting to share sites (giving the coverage) and then enough players in the market to make it competitive. Now we are down to 4 the competition has dropped, that is clear and we will see even less if we go down to 3.

Remember the MVNO's can only operate if the price is right at wholesale, If they start wacking this up, then the price we pay as customers will increase, so its not as simple as hoping the MVNO's are going to be the solution to this.
Gigabit
10-10-2015
Originally Posted by clewsy:
“However what we had pre EE was really perfect. You have networks starting to share sites (giving the coverage) and then enough players in the market to make it competitive. Now we are down to 4 the competition has dropped, that is clear and we will see even less if we go down to 3.”

I don't see any evidence at all of reduced competition. Please provide evidence of your claim.
binary
10-10-2015
Originally Posted by Gigabit:
“I don't see any evidence at all of reduced competition. Please provide evidence of your claim.”

What, you mean before the EE merger compared to afterwards?

Well, for a start there used to be two networks you could choose from - Orange and T-Mobile - and now these are one. That in itself is a reduction in competition.
jonmorris
10-10-2015
Even with network sharing, there's a big difference because of spectrum and the number of users a network has.

I wonder if we'd done it all differently. One network, and a series of virtual operators charging different tariffs and offering different packages, but ultimately with the exact same network coverage.

People who were against privatising BT would presumably think one network was the best idea.
clewsy
11-10-2015
Well apart from the obvious less players into he market, just look at the deals that are on offer. They have all moved to cut the packages and increase prices. It's as clearly T-Mobile who were with Three being a disruption in the market, now Three have made the move to be more like the other networks and competition i s falling.

Yes someone has to pay for the investment, not doubting that, however investment was happening with the 5 players so that's not an agreement for cutting the number of players.

If anything all this talk of merging is putting off investment. There has been loads of talk about how EE should have replaced all the old 2g sites by now, however that seems to have gone on the back burner and EE making the move to 2g/4g sites where they are upgrading.
omnidirectional
29-10-2015
Quote:
“O2 Mobile Merger 'To Require Spectrum Sale'

Three's £10.25bn takeover of O2 is expected to require a substantial sell-off of mobile spectrum, Sky News understands.”

http://news.sky.com/story/1578535/o2...-spectrum-sale

It seems the spectrum could be used to create a new competitor in the market.

Quote:
“.... legal sources confirmed that work had already begun on assessing a carve-out of spectrum that could be sold to a third party in order to create a viable fourth player in the UK mobile market.”

jchamier
29-10-2015
Originally Posted by omnidirectional:
“It seems the spectrum could used to create a new competitor in the market.”

I wonder O2/Three could survive if required to divest spectrum?
clewsy
29-10-2015
Lol.

Well that just makes the whole merger pointless as they end up with a new competitor who will no doubt go cheap, gain market share and probably end up the size of three now.
enapace
29-10-2015
Originally Posted by jchamier:
“I wonder O2/Three could survive if required to divest spectrum?”

Thats a very good point they haven't really got a lot even as a combined entity.

2x15MHz of 800MHz
2x17.4MHz of 900MHz
2x20.8MHz of 1800MHz
2x25MHz of 2100MHz

Compared that to EE who has

2x5MHz of 800MHz
2x45MHz of 1800MHz
2x20MHz of 2100MHz
2x35MHz of 2600MHz

And with how the CMA seem be they may even let BT keep it's spectrum with buyout of EE they own.

2x15MHz of 2600MHz
20MHz unpaired 2600MHz TDD

Your talking 2x75MHz and 20MHz TDD. It would be a straight 2x50MHz of 2600MHz as well think EE had the upper part of band BT middle and Vodafone lower.

That is nearly more spectrum than a combined O2/3 would have in total just for LTE.

Feel free correct me if i'm wrong there.

Expect 2x5MHz of 800MHz is the amount they would need give up and maybe 2x10MHz of the 2100MHz that would be a nice amount of basic spectrum for a 4th entry to the market to get a basic 4G presence with.
Aye Up
29-10-2015
Originally Posted by enapace:
“Thats a very good point they haven't really got a lot even as a combined entity.

2x15MHz of 800MHz
2x17.4MHz of 900MHz
2x20.8MHz of 1800MHz
2x25MHz of 2100MHz

Compared that to EE who has

2x5MHz of 800MHz
2x45MHz of 1800MHz
2x20MHz of 2100MHz
2x35MHz of 2600MHz

And with how the CMA seem be they may even let BT keep it's spectrum with buyout of EE they own.

2x15MHz of 2600MHz
20MHz unpaired 2600MHz TDD

Your talking 2x75MHz and 20MHz TDD. It would be a straight 2x50MHz of 2600MHz as well think EE had the upper part of band BT middle and Vodafone lower.

That is nearly more spectrum than a combined O2/3 would have in total just for LTE.

Feel free correct me if i'm wrong there.

Expect 2x5MHz of 800MHz is the amount they would need give up and maybe 2x10MHz of the 2100MHz that would be a nice amount of basic spectrum for a 4th entry to the market to get a basic 4G presence with.”

Thats what is stupid though, why let two merge only forcing another to be created?

Surely someone, somewhere can notice how ridiculous this whole tie up is?
enapace
29-10-2015
Originally Posted by Aye Up:
“Thats what is stupid though, why let two merge only forcing another to be created?

Surely someone, somewhere can notice how ridiculous this whole tie up is?”

It does sound pretty stupid but least it's keeping consumers in mind imagine Sky or Virgin would be most likely to want to get in the market as the fourth entrant. To compete against BT and Vodafone and offer quad play.
lightspeed2398
29-10-2015
In an ideal world I'd say the best thing to do would be, make 3o2 sell 2x5 of 800, and some of their 2100 and make BTEE sell BT's spectrum. I can imagine if Vodafone picked that up then there would be a fair bit of competition.

With the 2300 I'm unsure what's best, but considering how little high band spectrum 3o2 would have they need to bid seriously, although Vodafone/EE may bid for part of it just to remind them who will have the serious money.
enapace
29-10-2015
Originally Posted by lightspeed2398:
“In an ideal world I'd say the best thing to do would be, make 3o2 sell 2x5 of 800, and some of their 2100 and make BTEE sell BT's spectrum. I can imagine if Vodafone picked that up then there would be a fair bit of competition.

With the 2300 I'm unsure what's best, but considering how little high band spectrum 3o2 would have they need to bid seriously, although Vodafone/EE may bid for part of it just to remind them who will have the serious money.”

I've just said near identical thing in the Three 4G Thread in regards to possible new fourth entrant into market. BT spectrum I would be surprised if they have give it up as its not effecting amount of operators and could easily say O2/3 could of got it in auction if they had actually tried which they didn't at all.
clewsy
29-10-2015
Thing is, someone will only enter the market if its worth the effort. So any sell off needs to give them value otherwise they wouldn't come and play.

Plus who's masts do they have access to? What costs or setup etc as all of this could put someone else off wanting to play.
enapace
29-10-2015
Originally Posted by clewsy:
“Thing is, someone will only enter the market if its worth the effort. So any sell off needs to give them value otherwise they wouldn't come and play.

Plus who's masts do they have access to? What costs or setup etc as all of this could put someone else off wanting to play.”

Check out my post in Three 4G thread. I gave a pretty good situation.
Redcoat
30-10-2015
The idea of a merger being conditional on having to sell significant spectrum off to a potentially new entrant when even a potential O3 network would still not have the largest share of FDD spectrum doesn't seem to make technical sense to me as you then end up with two well spectrum resourced networks in EE and Vodafone and then two hobbled networks in "O3" and an envisioned 4th network.

IMO it would be better for a condition of a potential merger to insist that a newly 3/O2 combined network would have to allow for fair access to MVNOs under Ofcom regulation for a minimum time (e.g. six years) relative to network capacity so that 3/O2 can still deliver speeds to help challenge EE & Vodafone, but that any new player into the UK market can come in as a MVNO (or indeed a current MVNO) in a similar way to LLU in the xDSL broadband market sets terms on Openreach.
Stereo Steve
30-10-2015
1400 must also be a factor medium term. Quite a useful frequency. Perhaps 3 bought that with a view to giving it away as a term of the merger?
The Lord Lucan
30-10-2015
Still a long way to go for both mergers.. BTEE's is far from simple I'm told.

Originally Posted by omnidirectional:
“http://news.sky.com/story/1578535/o2...-spectrum-sale

It seems the spectrum could be used to create a new competitor in the market.”

Well.. I did say awhile back everything wasn't as it seemed.
droogiefret
30-10-2015
This is my first real year as a data user and I chose a Three AYCE contract. My reasoning being that it would allow me to see just how much data I needed a month and if the merger went through my coverage might improve and AYCE contracts retained for existing Three customer even if not new ones.

I think Three needs a partner like O2 both to improve coverage and to supply more worldwide partners. I went to Germany recently and Three coverage was appalling.

I just wonder if the people saying that the merger is not needed or desirable, because a separate Three gives more customer choice are, or have any intention of being, Three customers.

As an existing Three customer, 3O2 looks a good thing to me.
clewsy
30-10-2015
I always think you should try not to look at these deals as an exisitogn customer of a business involved. Simply because a lot can change in time and mergers very really are done for the benefit of the customer, just the profit margin of those involved.

It will take years for customers or 3 / o2 to see any benefits from shared networks, however in this time you could see everyone having massive price hikes, data caps made lower etc. Once you rememove competition there is no need to be innovative to compete.

If this is correct about creating a 4th network, then so long as it is something that wants to compete, then its great news for the customers. This deal making 4 into 3 from a consumer point of view was always a rubbish one, as less players in the market, less competition.
interactiv-uk
30-10-2015
I don't get how they say another MVNO will help with competition if the "big" networks were to drop from 4 to 3. There are already 59 MVNOs operating in the UK (link below). That would mean a competitive market with customers able to choose from 62 brands. How is this not competitive for the customers??

There will only be 2 "grid" networks in MBNL and CTIL running all, but this is the same as the fixed market where you have Openreach and VirginMedia as main networks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...work_operators
enapace
30-10-2015
Originally Posted by interactiv-uk:
“I don't get how they say another MVNO will help with competition if the "big" networks were to drop from 4 to 3. There are already 59 MVNOs operating in the UK (link below). That would mean a competitive market with customers able to choose from 62 brands. How is this not competitive for the customers??

There will only be 2 "grid" networks in MBNL and CTIL running all, but this is the same as the fixed market where you have Openreach and VirginMedia as main networks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...work_operators”

They mean there will be a new MNO.
david16
30-10-2015
Originally Posted by clewsy:
“Well apart from the obvious less players into he market, just look at the deals that are on offer. They have all moved to cut the packages and increase prices. It's as clearly T-Mobile who were with Three being a disruption in the market, now Three have made the move to be more like the other networks and competition i s falling.

Yes someone has to pay for the investment, not doubting that, however investment was happening with the 5 players so that's not an agreement for cutting the number of players.

If anything all this talk of merging is putting off investment. There has been loads of talk about how EE should have replaced all the old 2g sites by now, however that seems to have gone on the back burner and EE making the move to 2g/4g sites where they are upgrading.”

Certainly fewer mobile operators in the market all offering much less data, far fewer minutes and far fewer texts at sky high extortionate prices would not be of any benefit to the consumer.

Network consolidation and price matching other competitors my a***.
<<
<
2 of 20
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map