DS Forums

 
 

Hutchison takes legal action against EU over failed O2 & Three merger


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-08-2016, 14:42
clewsy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,860
That's not true.

For millions O2 / VF / Three are perfect for their needs.

It's just picking a network that works for you.
clewsy is online now   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 02-08-2016, 14:50
Stereo Steve
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,377
That's not true.

For millions O2 / VF / Three are perfect for their needs.

It's just picking a network that works for you.
No network works for me at the moment and I'm sure that is the same for many. All those millions you mention ever go on holiday? I guess not. Never travel on business? I guess not. Never visit friends in far flung places? I guess not.

The simple answer is if any of them did, the best bet by far is to be on EE and you know it. THAT is a failure of regulation. VOD could be up there but for some reason are not. O2 nope. 3, maybe, if 3G reaches but it's flaky as 3G itself is flaky. I would bet on 3 over the other 2 out of sheer experience if I wanted a workable data connection.

Now, put O2 for calls and 3 for data together and you have a very nice customer experience ie. one which actually works.

But we'll hold the principle above that and F%&^ everyone who wants to get anything done. We aren't interested in the UK. Closed shop. Vote Remain. Vote Herr Juncker.
Stereo Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 15:13
jchamier
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: This forum
Posts: 3,389
No network works for me at the moment and I'm sure that is the same for many. All those millions you mention ever go on holiday? I guess not. Never travel on business? I guess not. Never visit friends in far flung places? I guess not.
I worked in some remote places in the North East last year, and I'd say more remote than you are in the south west. Vodafone and EE were both excellent, O2 and Three were disappointingly awful. I note a year later than O2 have caught up and that three are still awful. Quite different to where you are.

THAT is a failure of regulation.
Not sure regulation can fix poor business plans, regulation doesn't mean we have 4 networks everywhere in the UK that are the same.

But we'll hold the principle above that and F%&^ everyone who wants to get anything done. We aren't interested in the UK. Closed shop. Vote Remain. Vote Herr Juncker.
Ha ha.
jchamier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 15:21
de525ma
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 787

Now, put O2 for calls and 3 for data together and you have a very nice customer experience ie. one which actually works.
But both parties have sharing deals with their competitors. It's anti-competitive to have de-facto access to all the masts in the UK. This is not some simple problem that can be overcome, simply because you want better coverage.

It's also not the only solution. You could advocate nationalising the infrastructure, as some do with Openreach.

But we'll hold the principle above that and F%&^ everyone who wants to get anything done. We aren't interested in the UK. Closed shop. Vote Remain. Vote Herr Juncker.
Oh change the record. Seriously. If I wanted to be lectured about the EU and its decisions by the ignorant, I'd buy The Sun.
de525ma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 15:22
moox
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 14,641
Again BT invested in installing this. Just like other companies have.

This whole debate comes down to "investment".

Most organisations = Investment
Three = Don't Invest
BT had a nationwide network of buildings, ducts and poles to shove the fibre down. Other companies don't, and it makes "investing" much more difficult

Comparing BT to its competitors rarely works - they occupy a special, unique position
moox is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 15:25
de525ma
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 787
BT had a nationwide network of buildings, ducts and poles to shove the fibre down. Other companies don't, and it makes "investing" much more difficult

Comparing BT to its competitors rarely works - they occupy a special, unique position
Not really - they occupy a similar position to most of those running the privatised national infrastructure in other sectors. Most of which disadvantage the consumer.
de525ma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 15:33
d123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,987
I now have a 20gb plan with Vodafone costing me £30, in order to actually be able to use some data when I need to I'm looking at EE who only do 15gb max sim only for roughly the same cost.
It's entirely possible to get cheaper with EE, I currently have 16GB for £19.99.

Sign up on a 30 day plan, decide it's not enough and phone retentions and haggle, they offered the £15 off the 16GB plan without any argument.
d123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 15:37
clewsy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,860
Ok BT had an advantage but they still had to invest into he fibre.

It's bazzare how some people really just judge a deal on what they think they will get from it. Who knows if it would have meant a merger of best of both? Who knows which sites they had access to? Who knows how long it all would take? Who knows how much prices would increase by?

However this was a good decision by the EU and UK regs.
clewsy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 15:39
Stereo Steve
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,377


Not sure regulation can fix poor business plans, regulation doesn't mean we have 4 networks everywhere in the UK that are the same.
But it can make sure that only 2 can reasonably compete, fully accepting that one of them has been on drugs for the last 30 years and doesn't seem to understand the concept of a 'mobile phone'.

That is what it has done. Bravo.
Stereo Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 16:23
Gigabit
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,876
There seems to be this idea that Vodafone has "given up". I can assure you they are determined to not repeat the mistakes of the past, it's one of the big pushes of Group now. They're aware the UK isn't up to the standards of the rest of the Group Cos.

Mark my words, Vodafone are aiming to have a truly great network and I think it's pretty obvious where it is available, that it beats EE in many cases.
Gigabit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 16:51
Aye Up
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: North West
Posts: 4,884
There seems to be this idea that Vodafone has "given up". I can assure you they are determined to not repeat the mistakes of the past, it's one of the big pushes of Group now. They're aware the UK isn't up to the standards of the rest of the Group Cos.

Mark my words, Vodafone are aiming to have a truly great network and I think it's pretty obvious where it is available, that it beats EE in many cases.
At the risk of sounding like a parrot, I have to echo your words. In the longterm Vodafone will have a network that will broadly offer the same coverage and to a point the same service as EE.

EE are way out in front, Vodafone still have a bit of catching up to do, however they have said publically they want to at least match if not beat EE by 2020. Any improvements Vodafone make will also have a knock on effect for O2, they are sharing the costs of 4G/3G/2G upgrades across the country.

Three only have MBNL and 3G, their 4G rollout is light years behind that of the other MNO. I can't see that changing until they get gobbled up by another company from outside the UK market.
Aye Up is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 16:54
jchamier
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: This forum
Posts: 3,389
I think it's pretty obvious where it is available, that it beats EE in many cases.
Depends how you measure, rather than just "beats EE" - but if you mean 4G indoor coverage yes (today, thanks to 800mhz), speeds no (10mhz 800 can't compete with 20mhx) - but its great to see proper competition. If Voda rolled out 20mhz @ 2600 instead of playing around turning off 3G for 5/10mhz at 2100 this would also help.
jchamier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 16:54
Gigabit
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,876
I think Three's problem is they still don't see 4G as a necessity. It's seen I think, as a backup almost. Why else would they make 800MHz so low priority?
Gigabit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 16:56
Stereo Steve
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,377
Same old, same old. Towns and motorways. Nothing to see here.
Stereo Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 16:56
jchamier
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: This forum
Posts: 3,389
But both parties have sharing deals with their competitors. It's anti-competitive to have de-facto access to all the masts in the UK. This is not some simple problem that can be overcome, simply because you want better coverage
This is why national roaming wasn't going to happen, despite David Cameron being upset he couldn't receive a call when on holiday.

The Govt sold the spectrum for a profit on the basis we would have competition, that basically means not all the companies work in all places of the UK where there is less population. The only solution would be state run telecoms, probably much worse.
jchamier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 17:11
lightspeed2398
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,307
I think Three's problem is they still don't see 4G as a necessity. It's seen I think, as a backup almost. Why else would they make 800MHz so low priority?
Site density isn't high enough. I imagine they'd love to have it at the proper density but they've got to make choices as to where they invest.

And yes if you read this @Thine Wonk I agree with you that Three's investment is limited here (think they forecast 4G rollout for £500m compared to the billions of the others) but there were other options the management could have possibly chosen or Ofcom could have forced/nudged for competition.
lightspeed2398 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 17:40
jaffboy151
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Woore, Cheshire/Shropshire
Posts: 1,675
There seems to be this idea that Vodafone has "given up". I can assure you they are determined to not repeat the mistakes of the past, it's one of the big pushes of Group now. They're aware the UK isn't up to the standards of the rest of the Group Cos.

Mark my words, Vodafone are aiming to have a truly great network and I think it's pretty obvious where it is available, that it beats EE in many cases.
That just seems like words at the moment I'm afraid, like a corporate mission statement, in reality no matter how many billions is been spent they're not Turning around the again network quick enough to keep pace in my opinion. At present outside London, by 2020 Vodafone may have network coverage equivalent to that of EE last year, but speed equivalents to EE of 2014.. There simply not keeping pace..
Data at the moment is a bit like running up a downwards escalator, you have to go like a bat out of hell just to keep pace.. EE are managing just about to keep at the top by slowing it down (data caps) three were near the top but have now stopped and are going backwards.. Vodafone/O2 are on the bottom few steeps limping forward with a broken leg with a 4g 1800mhz & 2100mhz splint attached..
jaffboy151 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 17:45
clewsy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,860
Surly stage 1 is to get coverage.

Then once you have that coverage you can address the capacity issues that may arise. So long as people have coverage and it works, then I think that will buy time before speed becomes the main focus.
clewsy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 17:59
lightspeed2398
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,307
Surly stage 1 is to get coverage.

Then once you have that coverage you can address the capacity issues that may arise. So long as people have coverage and it works, then I think that will buy time before speed becomes the main focus.
Vodafone's priorities for Project Spring / 4G network overhaul were 90% population coverage for 4G, 90% of all data sessions above 3mbps and an improved dropped call rate (can't remember what it was off the top of my head). The UK didn't meet the 90% sessions thing when they formally finished Project Spring (was Europe wide).

From then I presume they'll upgrade the whole network to 4G but with slightly refreshed priorities. Might be why we've begun to see a focus on capacity in some places in the last few months.
lightspeed2398 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 18:14
Thine Wonk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,547
Voda had a dropped call rate of 8% in some cities at one stage about 18 months ago.

They also have repeatedly won the crown of most complained about, I think nearly a full year now every quarter they come out as that.

They also have very little 4G data coverage outside of main towns and cities.

BT have inherited a good footing from EE, but whether they continue to invest over the years under BT is still to be determined. If they don't see Three and O2 as a threat then they won't be under so much pressure.

I notice the usual 2 members have started name calling and getting rude and abusive rather than discussing the topic, so I've reported those posts, D123 is on his 4th ban, the last one was a week long as was for exactly the same thing, maybe this one will be the permanent one. There's absolutely no need for it, my concerns are in good faith and I suspect my views now will become more widespread as we see what happens to the market over the coming years.
Thine Wonk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 18:20
Gigabit
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,876
But I can make calls indoors with Vodafone, whereas Three Super-Voice isn't rolled out to anything like a reasonable number of sites. I've travelled around the south of the UK and never had an 800MHz signal on Three that was actually good, it's always from a mast miles away.

Three's coverage checker is just a complete lie. I'm amazed they haven't been pulled up on it yet.
Gigabit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 18:22
Thine Wonk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,547
Swings and roundabouts with all networks though it depends on the area, you'll often find better data reliability on other networks than on Voda, and to me that's equally if not more important.
Thine Wonk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 18:24
d123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,987

They also have very little 4G data coverage outside of main towns and cities.
.
By your metric then Three must have no 4G coverage as Vodafone has a shedload more 4G than Three.

Three
63%

Vodafone
85%

Anyone need help with the maths?
d123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 18:27
Thine Wonk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,547
Data coverage I meant to post, I see you're still being rude and disrespectful.

Three was 75% as of March.
Thine Wonk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 18:33
lightspeed2398
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,307
Voda had a dropped call rate of 8% in some cities at one stage about 18 months ago.

They also have repeatedly won the crown of most complained about, I think nearly a full year now every quarter they come out as that.
Agree with you on the most complained about, that was shocking of them. They were so bad that they were the only ones above the average, everyone else came below the average.

Just asking if you've got a breakdown of the DCR rates in the cities, sounds interesting?
lightspeed2398 is online now   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 17:45.