• 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
<<
<
4 of 20
>>
>
japaul
05-12-2015
Originally Posted by MTUK1:
“It's decided by decision makers who work for the elected government of this country. Nobody voted for the EU to have rights to overturn or supersede British laws.”

The primacy of European Competition law and the Commission's role in enforcing it has always been fundamental even if you go back to the 'Common Market' days as it would never work otherwise.

So even if you don't accept the stuff that came later this was a fundamental aspect when our democratically elected Government agreed to join (after campaigning at a General Election to negotiate entry) and the people voted to remain a part of the only time the question has ever been put in a referendum.

So you should argue on this particular aspect it's more democratic to the follow the existing rules given that's what the people decided.
MTUK1
05-12-2015
Originally Posted by d123:
“Why not just say you don't understand the law? You have 2 companies proposing a merger of 2 telecoms networks with the obvious ramifications to competition. One of the companies has operations in the UK, Spain and Germany, the other has operations in the UK, Italy, Sweden, Denmark, Austria and Ireland.”

Rather patronising aren't you?

Originally Posted by d123:
“And yet you still don't understand why it's an EU matter?”

No. It doesn't affect competition in those other countries, only the UK. Are we that sad as a country, we have to give away powers to regulate in this area to non entities overseas?

Originally Posted by d123:
“Just out of curiosity, you do realise the EU is also an elected government? Or have you never voted in a European election for your local MEP?”

The EU is not an elected government. MEP's have very little power in the EU. It is unelected bureaucrats who make and propose law. And that is not democratic at all. The EU's aim is to become a government, which is why we need to leave.
MTUK1
05-12-2015
Originally Posted by japaul:
“The primacy of European Competition law and the Commission's role in enforcing it has always been fundamental even if you go back to the 'Common Market' days as it would never work otherwise.

So even if you don't accept the stuff that came later this was a fundamental aspect when our democratically elected Government agreed to join (after campaigning at a General Election to negotiate entry) and the people voted to remain a part of the only time the question has ever been put in a referendum.

So you should argue on this particular aspect it's more democratic to the follow the existing rules given that's what the people decided.”

Nobody voted on this present day titanic called the EU. They voted for the EC which was just a common market. The voters back then were lied to by politicians like Ted Heath. There were no rules that said the EC had the final say on Mergers and competition back in the Seventies.
d123
05-12-2015
Originally Posted by MTUK1:
“The EU is not an elected government. MEP's have very little power in the EU. It is unelected bureaucrats who make and propose law. And that is not democratic at all. The EU's aim is to become a government, which is why we need to leave.”

The o2/3 merger involves companies operating in multiple EU countries so it is a EU matter, it's quite logical and the proper place to be investigated.


I would also add, rather than just having an ignorant rant maybe go and have a read about how the EU works?

You could start at:

Quote:
“The European Parliament (EP) is the directly elected parliamentary institution of the European Union (EU). Together with the Council of the European Union (the Council) and the European Commission, it exercises the legislative function of the EU. The Parliament is composed of 751 (previously 766) members, who represent the second largest democratic electorate in the world (after the Parliament of India) and the largest trans-national democratic electorate in the world (375 million eligible voters in 2009).

It has been directly elected every five years by universal suffrage since 1979. However, turnout at European Parliament elections has fallen consecutively at each election since that date, and has been under 50% since 1999. Turnout in 2014 stood at 42.54% of all European voters.

Finally, the European Commission, the executive body of the EU, is accountable to Parliament. In particular, Parliament elects the President of the Commission, and approves (or rejects) the appointment of the Commission as a whole. It can subsequently force the Commission as a body to resign by adopting a motion of censure.”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament

But then, from your attitude I would presume you are more amenable to what Britain First or UKIP have to say about it?

Oh, and to add, the current Competition Commissioner was voted into office unanimously in the European Parliament, including by the UK's MEP's. So your representatives voted for her .

Quote:
“European Commissioner for Competition, 2014–present

On 31 August 2014, Prime Minister Thorning-Schmidt nominated Vestager as Denmark's EU Commissioner in the Juncker Commission. Despite her repeated denials of campaigning for the Environment portfolio, eventually she was designated the Competition dossier in the Juncker Commission.

On 3 October 2014, she won the European Parliament's unanimous backing following her confirmation hearing.”

wilt
05-12-2015
MTUK1, I think you are looking for this forum.
Gigabit
06-12-2015
Funnily enough one of the first threads in that forum is about Ukip making up things
jaffboy151
06-12-2015
Ahh.... Two and a half weeks away from the forum and when I return and open the 1st thread it's nice to see things haven't changed much.. Still like the board room scenes in the apprentice
japaul
06-12-2015
Originally Posted by MTUK1:
“Nobody voted on this present day titanic called the EU. They voted for the EC which was just a common market. The voters back then were lied to by politicians like Ted Heath. There were no rules that said the EC had the final say on Mergers and competition back in the Seventies.”

The first bit is irrelevant as I said they are only doing what they have always done i.e before the UK joined. Your last sentence is factually wrong. I could provide a landmark case reference if you were really serious but I suspect you're not interested in accuracy so I'll leave it there. In any case, you could get them yourself in about two minutes on Google.
MTUK1
06-12-2015
Originally Posted by japaul:
“The first bit is irrelevant as I said they are only doing what they have always done i.e before the UK joined. Your last sentence is factually wrong. I could provide a landmark case reference if you were really serious but I suspect you're not interested in accuracy so I'll leave it there. In any case, you could get them yourself in about two minutes on Google.”

There are some incredibly rude people on this board. Anyway, please do provide me with the landmark case reference?
MTUK1
06-12-2015
Originally Posted by d123:
“The o2/3 merger involves companies operating in multiple EU countries so it is a EU matter, it's quite logical and the proper place to be investigated.


I would also add, rather than just having an ignorant rant maybe go and have a read about how the EU works?

You could start at:



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament

But then, from your attitude I would presume you are more amenable to what Britain First or UKIP have to say about it?

Oh, and to add, the current Competition Commissioner was voted into office unanimously in the European Parliament, including by the UK's MEP's. So your representatives voted for her .”

Their not my representatives.

Cheeky Barsteward. I know very well how the EU works. Most laws are decided by faceless bureaucrats. Then the parliament itself has certain rights to veto. Who are these bureaucrats? No EU citizen ever voted for them. Same with our "president" Jean Claude Juncker. Nobody voted for him. A guy that gets paid more than Barack Obama. And the EU's accounts haven't been signed off by auditors for 21 years. If it were a business, the people in charge would be in jail.

Back to the original topic, there is no reason whatsoever why decisions on this cannot be taken over here and it means we've lost our right to call ourselves a democracy when the EU tells us to sod off and let them make a decision.
DevonBloke
07-12-2015
Originally Posted by jaffboy151:
“Ahh.... Two and a half weeks away from the forum and when I return and open the 1st thread it's nice to see things haven't changed much.. Still like the board room scenes in the apprentice ”

Where the hell have you been man.
You can't stay away that long. I mean, good God, nothing might happen!!
Then where would we be??
d123
07-12-2015
Originally Posted by MTUK1:
“Their not my representatives.

Cheeky Barsteward. I know very well how the EU works. Most laws are decided by faceless bureaucrats. Then the parliament itself has certain rights to veto. Who are these bureaucrats? No EU citizen ever voted for them. Same with our "president" Jean Claude Juncker. Nobody voted for him. A guy that gets paid more than Barack Obama. And the EU's accounts haven't been signed off by auditors for 21 years. If it were a business, the people in charge would be in jail. ”

"Their" are your elected representatives, even if you didn't personally vote they still represent your constituency.


You couldn't even read one linked page? You might be slightly less ignorant if you had. Just so you know, it's the elected Parliament that will approve or reject proposed legislation prepared by the Commission.

Do yourself a favour, go and read at least the Wikipedia page and stop relying on Britain First or UKIP (or whatever other organisations you follow) for your info.

Originally Posted by MTUK1:
“Back to the original topic, there is no reason whatsoever why decisions on this cannot be taken over here and it means we've lost our right to call ourselves a democracy when the EU tells us to sod off and let them make a decision.”

If you can't even understand how the EU works I suppose it's not surprising why you fail to see why this is an EU matter.

Suffice to say, it is, and it's likely to get far more intensive scrutiny from the EU than the quango that is the CMA.
MTUK1
07-12-2015
Originally Posted by d123:
“"Their" are your elected representatives, even if you didn't personally vote they still represent your constituency.


You couldn't even read one linked page? You might be slightly less ignorant if you had. Just so you know, it's the elected Parliament that will approve or reject proposed legislation prepared by the Commission.

Do yourself a favour, go and read at least the Wikipedia page and stop relying on Britain First or UKIP (or whatever other organisations you follow) for your info.



If you can't even understand how the EU works I suppose it's not surprising why you fail to see why this is an EU matter.

Suffice to say, it is, and it's likely to get far more intensive scrutiny from the EU than the quango that is the CMA.”

I understand exactly how the EU works. I noticed you convienently ignored my points on the lack of accountability and democracy in the EU.

Your only retort is to say I am a follower of Britain First or UKIP. One is a right wing extremist organization, and the other is a valid political party which is the 3rd biggest by vote in the UK. So they are not the same, and there is nothing wrong with wanting decisions to be made in your own country rather then overseas. It's what the 190 or so sensible nations not in the EU do. We are no longer a democracy in the EU. Personally, I like Europe, but I dispise the EU. That's probably beyond your brain power to comprehend the difference. Anyway. on ignore you go.
d123
07-12-2015
Originally Posted by MTUK1:
“Anyway. on ignore you go.”

Good, hopefully those who actually want to discuss the forthcoming investigation can now do so in peace from the anti-EU protest.
Everything Goes
02-03-2016
Telefonica and Hutchison to meet EU on 7th March

Telefonica and Hutchison to meet EU commission on Monday 7th March in a closed door meeting to discuss the proposed merger of Three and O2.

http://www.mobiletoday.co.uk/news/in...s-reports.aspx
japaul
04-03-2016
Decision deadline has been put back a month to May 19th following the submission of commitments by Hutch on Wednesday.

Some sources are saying that in addition to the usual suspects, Iliad (Free Mobile in France) will also be at the closed door meeting mentioned above. If true, this is interesting as there were rumours at the end of January that Iliad had held meetings with Ofcom regarding a possible entrance into the UK market if assets became available as a result of any forced divestiture the EC might impose on 3O2.
Everything Goes
04-03-2016
Originally Posted by japaul:
“Decision deadline has been put back a month to May 19th following the submission of commitments by Hutch on Wednesday.

Some sources are saying that in addition to the usual suspects, Iliad (Free Mobile in France) will also be at the closed door meeting mentioned above. If true, this is interesting as there were rumours at the end of January that Iliad had held meetings with Ofcom regarding a possible entrance into the UK market if assets became available as a result of any forced divestiture the EC might impose on 3O2.”

I guess HWL's commitments were the same BS they trotted out recently? Especially the bit about the price freeze. Three have already made themselves less competitive and are on par with the other networks.

I guess any possible divested spectrum would be up for grabs so im sure there will be some interested parties.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/n...ger-plans.html
japaul
04-03-2016
They'll put up a fight against divesting assets but the commitments will be more far reaching than the ones trotted out by Canning Fok. I think these actually harmed their case as the price one was easy to see through given they expressed it in terms of unit prices (which no one expects to rise in any case).

They also need to come up with something on the network sharing arrangements that Vodafone can live with.
Everything Goes
07-03-2016
Hutchison will review its UK spending if deal is blocked

Hutchison will review its UK spending if deal is blocked by the EU. It has been widely suggested before that they will exit the UK market if the deal doesn't go through. This could mean the withdrawal of investment while they look for a new buyer? With Telefonica looking for a buyer for O2 this will mean two UK network could still be up for grabs. Given this has already taken well over a year with no decision made yet it could easily drag out for another year or two before anything is sorted out. It would seem possible that Hutchinson and Telefonica may both decide to stop investing in their networks until new owners are found.

http://www.mobiletoday.co.uk/news/in...s-reports.aspx

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/busine...cle4706094.ece
clewsy
07-03-2016
It is all talk and bluff to try and make out this is the best deal.

They won't run the network down as that devalues the asset. They will just look to offload again to someone else like Sky (I suspect).

Let's be honest they are probably annoyed to be investing now knowing the business could be sold.
Aye Up
07-03-2016
Originally Posted by Everything Goes:
“Hutchison will review its UK spending if deal is blocked

Hutchison will review its UK spending if deal is blocked by the EU. It has been widely suggested before that they will exit the UK market if the deal doesn't go through. This could mean the withdrawal of investment while they look for a new buyer? With Telefonica looking for a buyer for O2 this will mean two UK network could still be up for grabs. Given this has already taken well over a year with no decision made yet it could easily drag out for another year or two before anything is sorted out. It would seem possible that Hutchinson and Telefonica may both decide to stop investing in their networks until new owners are found.

http://www.mobiletoday.co.uk/news/in...s-reports.aspx

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/busine...cle4706094.ece”

If the merger doesn't go through then I should expect both Three and O2 operations will be sold at a steep discount, it may even be possible for Sky or Liberty Global to gobble one of them. The richest man in mexico has been on the hunt for some operations outside of North America, he may look at the UK.

Seeing as Sky has a wholesale agreement in place with O2, depending on the price I think they would be a shoe in. It will be interesting to see how the relationship between Virgin Media and EE fairs over the coming months and years, I don't think they ever envisaged having a commerical relationship with BT.
d123
07-03-2016
Originally Posted by Everything Goes:
“Hutchison will review its UK spending if deal is blocked”

So moved on from the "we promise to be really nice and not put prices up" to threats...
Everything Goes
07-03-2016
Originally Posted by d123:
“So moved on from the "we promise to be really nice and not put prices up" to threats...”

They will probably use a number of different strategies to see which one works best.
Everything Goes
07-03-2016
Originally Posted by clewsy:
“It is all talk and bluff to try and make out this is the best deal.

They won't run the network down as that devalues the asset. They will just look to offload again to someone else like Sky (I suspect).

Let's be honest they are probably annoyed to be investing now knowing the business could be sold.”

They wont run the network down as such but they will probably minimise capital expenditure. They will probably have to sell Three off at below the rate they would ideally want.
rasseru16
07-03-2016
*If* Three does buy O2, what's gonna happen to the masts? I mean EE & Three are in MBNL and O2 & Vodafone are in Cornerstone
<<
<
4 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