Home
 » ISP News, Key Developments » 
Sponsored Links

Mobile Giant Vodafone Confirms Merger Talks with Three UK

Monday, Oct 3rd, 2022 (11:45 am) - Score 7,320
vodafone uk sim holder

After months of speculation, mobile network operator Vodafone UK has today confirmed that they are officially in “discussions” with Three UK’s parent (CK Hutchison Holdings) about the possibility of a merger. Such a deal would give the combined business the “necessary scale” to boost their 5G rollout and “expand” rural broadband connectivity.

According to today’s the market statement from Vodafone, the envisaged transaction would involve both companies combining their UK businesses, with Vodafone owning 51% and their partner CK Hutchison owning 49% of the combined business. The relative ownership would be achieved “through a differential leverage contribution at closing“, and no cash consideration being paid.

The merged business would, claims Vodafone, challenge the two already consolidated players (i.e. BT + EE and Virgin Media + O2) for all UK customers and bring “benefits through competitively priced access to a third reliable, high quality, and secure 5G network throughout the UK“.

However, the operator warned “there can be no certainty” that any transaction between the two companies will ultimately be agreed, although these talks have been going on behind closed doors for several months now (here) and today’s announcement suggests the two sides are serious about trying to establish a workable agreement.

Vodafone’s Full Market Announcement

Vodafone Group Plc (“Vodafone”) notes the recent press speculation in relation to Vodafone UK and Three UK.

Vodafone confirms that it is in discussions with CK Hutchison Holdings Limited (“CK Hutchison”) in relation to a possible combination of Vodafone UK and Three UK.

The envisaged transaction would involve both companies combining their UK businesses, with Vodafone owning 51% and our partner CK Hutchison owning 49% of the combined business.

The relative ownership would be achieved through a differential leverage contribution at closing, and no cash consideration will be paid.

The UK Government rightly sees 5G as transformational for the economy and society and critical to the UK becoming more competitive in an increasingly digital world.

The conditions to ensure thriving competition in the market need to be nurtured, otherwise the UK is at risk of losing the opportunity to be a 5G leader. As Ofcom has identified, some operators in the UK – Vodafone UK and Three UK – lack the necessary scale to earn their cost of capital (1).

By combining our businesses, Vodafone UK and Three UK will gain the necessary scale to be able to accelerate the rollout of full 5G in the UK and expand broadband connectivity to rural communities and small businesses.

The merged business would challenge the two already consolidated players for all UK customers and bring benefits through competitively priced access to a third reliable, high quality, and secure 5G network throughout the UK.

There can be no certainty that any transaction between the two companies will ultimately be agreed.

If required, a further announcement will be made when appropriate.

This announcement contains inside information for the purposes of Article 7 of the Market Abuse Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 as it forms part of domestic UK law as defined in the Market Abuse (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations (SI 2019/310).

(1) Ofcom’s Discussion Paper (February 2022) described Vodafone UK and Three UK as sub-scale operators

In the past, Ofcom has tended to object to big mobile-only mergers, which is partly because they wanted to protect consumer and wholesale (MVNO) competition in the market. But a 2020 ruling by the European Court of Justice (here) made it harder to adopt that position, although the regulator is no longer beholden to such rulings post-Brexit, but is still believed to have softened their stance (we’ll find out soon enough).

However, the benefits of such a merger aren’t quite as clear-cut as they were in the case of BT and EE or O2 and Virgin Media, which predominantly reflected a tie-up between fixed line businesses on one side, and mobile businesses on the other. By comparison, Three UK doesn’t have a fixed line business and Vodafone has some of its own business fibre, but their consumer base largely reflects partnerships with Openreach and CityFibre.

In short, the main benefit from such a deal appears to be the extra support they’d get for their 5G deployments, which would not only boost the pace of their UK rollout but also help to extend coverage deeper into rural communities. Lest we forget the need to look ahead toward 6G. All of this stuff is getting very expensive for operators, particularly as the networks need to be increasingly dense.

On the other hand, such a deal would not be without its challenges, and the market regulators may well require concessions (e.g. how much spectrum would the merged company be allowed to retain? It may well need to redistribute some of that to other operators to balance the competitive impacts). The markets’ many virtual operators (MVNO) may also have some big concerns about the loss of a competitive supplier.

The fact that Vodafone has a network sharing agreement with O2 (VMO2), while Three UK has a similar agreement with EE (BT), is another area that will require careful unpicking to avoid upset. One other issue is the fact that Three UK has tended to be more of a low-cost brand, while Vodafone tends to be a bit more premium in its pricing. Balancing that and keeping customers happy in the process will be tricky.

The other big question mark will be over whether consumer prices will be more likely to rise (over the longer-term) in a market with three MNOs versus one with four, and how much that matters. Ofcom and the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) will have a difficult task in assessing all this, but it does seem like there are fewer roadblocks to such a deal today than a few years ago.

Finally, it’s possible that the Government may also raise security concerns, given that Three UK’s parent – CK Hutchison – is a Hong Kong firm and these days that tends to be associated with direct influence from China. The UK government is currently trying to avoid scenarios in which countries like China secure a key position in critical national infrastructure. But CKH may well point out that it already controls some UK ports and power networks.

Share with Twitter
Share with Linkedin
Share with Facebook
Share with Reddit
Share with Pinterest
Mark-Jackson
By Mark Jackson
Mark is a professional technology writer, IT consultant and computer engineer from Dorset (England), he also founded ISPreview in 1999 and enjoys analysing the latest telecoms and broadband developments. Find me on X (Twitter), Mastodon, Facebook and .
Search ISP News
Search ISP Listings
Search ISP Reviews
Comments
70 Responses
  1. Avatar photo sam says:

    Wonder if Vodafone customers will get access to Three 5G? I’d imagine so?

    1. Avatar photo donald says:

      ha! I hope not!

      On Holiday right now – 3 has no signal and Vodafone is the saving grace with 20mbps down – And literally there is a cell tower on the site!.

      If they do merge I will dump Three and Voda and go to O2 – hoping they don’t share towers too – Three has become rubbish for travelling

    2. Avatar photo BB says:

      Donald… You’ll dump Three and Voda and go to O2? O2 are worse than Three. Don’t get me wrong, Three is absolutely shocking and I think they got their name from how long in minutes it takes to open Google. But O2 is not the answer!

  2. Avatar photo Anon says:

    I personally would like this not to happen as this is not good for competition. If we look at the market there is only a few actual Mobile operators in UK.

    Vodafone
    Three
    O2 / Virgin
    EE (BT)

    It would be less competition and it would be worse for consumers. The question i like to ask them is “Why do you want to merge your business? What is the value to the consumer?”

    1. Avatar photo Guest says:

      I disagree about your claim that having just 3 operators is bad for the consumer and hampers competition simply because other countries just have 3 operators and they don’t seem to have a issue with competition indeed by just having the three means better infrastructure investment and there is still competition between the 3 operators even if you add or don’t add the various virtual operators that exist.

      Countries like Austria, Germany, Ireland, USA etc all just have three operators and competition exists.

    2. Avatar photo Richard says:

      Totally agree

  3. Avatar photo Matt says:

    Three have had quite a lot of bad flack for their performance over the past few years. Speaking as a Three customer, there has been some truth in this but since the launch of their 5G network, things have seriously improved and the reliability has been rock solid. My work supplied Vodafone phone has been the complete opposite. Terrible signal, terrible speeds and awful latency. I really hope this potential merger doesn’t impact the great work 3 have done to turn around their network.

  4. Avatar photo Antwan says:

    4 MNO has always proven to be way better for competition than 3 MNOs. If that happens expect the prices to soar.

    1. Avatar photo Ell says:

      False, nowhere has it been proven that 4 operators offers more competition then just 3 operators.

      Other countries manage with just 3 including Ireland so there’s no reason why the UK needs to be different.

      Having just three operators means more efficient infrastructure investment being delivered and a much faster rollout of services such as 5G etc.

      Personally this joint venture should go ahead subject to conditions being met.

  5. Avatar photo Mike says:

    Only question is will they be called VodaThree or ThreeFone?

    1. Avatar photo Jayce says:

      Most likely “Three – Vodafone (3 VF or Three VF)”

    2. Avatar photo Bob says:

      V3 or 3V

    3. Avatar photo Gareth says:

      With Vodafone stating it will take a 51% majority stake. It will have majority voting rights. Maybe it would do a full rebrand to Vodafone as it’s been around a long time.

      Personally, I’ve been a Three customer on and off since 2006 and I would miss the name and deals associated with it.

      Maybe they would keep them as seprate brands like Virgin/O2?

    4. Avatar photo John says:

      It will be Vodafone – CK Hutchinson have wanted to exit for years, and undoubtably will eventually if this goes through. Every other merger/acqusition Vodafone have been involved in they have kept the Vodafone brand, its even been kept for networks they have sold.

    5. Avatar photo Gareth says:

      That’s true. I remember holding shares in Vodafone in the late 90s when they merged with AirTouch to become Vodafone AirTouch….from what I remember, that didn’t last long before they reverted back to simply Vodafone.

    6. Avatar photo Laurence 'GreenReaper' Parry says:

      Three will go away now because it’s a reminder of the past, we’re onto 4G and 5G now.

  6. Avatar photo Anthony says:

    Every time these stories come up. They always get so far along, everyone gets so eager about the prospect and then the competition commission comes in and stops it.

  7. Avatar photo Matthew says:

    Honestly I thought this deal would never happen, I would of expected Vodafone buying CityFibre before this if I am honest.

    1. Avatar photo Anthony says:

      I might be wrong but I think CityFibre would more likely buy Vodafone than the other way around. Its financed by very rich Saudi backers.

    2. Avatar photo Gareth says:

      Wow! I didn’t know that, although it’s not surprising! They have got their fingers in lots of pies.

    3. Avatar photo John says:

      CityFibre is a tiny fraction of the size of Vodafone, and is owned by a huge mix of random investment funds and venture capitalists. It will get hoovered up by one the big players eventually, not the other way around.

    4. Avatar photo MilesT says:

      Cityfibre buying Three would be interesting.

  8. Avatar photo Jack says:

    So if this is allowed I’m assuming that both operators would maintain their brand name much like O2 have with Virgin.

  9. Avatar photo anonymous says:

    100% not good for competition AT ALL.

    A dinosaur company wanting to take a rival over that is known for value priced contracts just so it can keep prices high.

    Although had problems on the 4G service with Three as it was appalling in my area, it’s not true of all areas where upgrades have happened or 5G implemented. I also had the same level of data speeds on Vodafone in my area; so they aren’t technically any better.

    This is a big player wanting to squash any cheaper rivals out of the market. It should be stopped.

  10. Avatar photo Anuraj says:

    It’s not good for competition. Prices may go up.

    BUT

    If they merge each operators voda/3 will have more spectrum and can provide faster and reliable 5g.

    Uk highly populated and need large amounts of spectrum to get good speed.

    Most of EU countries have only three operators and provide high speed 5g.

    1. Mark-Jackson Mark Jackson says:

      This may depend upon how much spectrum they’re allowed to keep post-merger.

    2. Avatar photo Anthony says:

      Prices couldn’t go up any more than what Three are doing it anyway. It used to be the case about 6 years ago they had 321 – 3p per minute, 2p per text, 1p per MB. Now its 35p per minute, 15p per text and 10p per minute. Literally 1995 style rates

    3. Avatar photo Kushan says:

      Not quite a fair comparison Anthony, their business model has changed to you buying data packs instead of loading credit. The data packs, even the cheapest one, comes with unlimited mins and texts.

      We’re long past the era of charging for SMS and voice minutes, it’s all about data in our modern, connected world.

    4. Avatar photo Sonic says:

      A merger can only improve things IMO. I live in an area with rubbish coverage from both (and ZERO 5G) so a merger would, at least in theory, double the masts and combine the spectrum. And hopefully accelerate the 5G deployment. I’m not holding my breath though.

      For people who already get excellent 5G coverage from 1 or both, probably not such a big deal but for the rest of us who live in one of these “forgotten” cities, it could be a lifesaver.

  11. Avatar photo RIP Three says:

    Guess the fun is over then. RIP three, possibly THE best network for data and 5G. Vodafone will absolutely ruin it, just look at their lacklustre 5G implementation. It was such a shame when T-Mobile took over Orange; we had high hopes when the mast sharing was enabled, only to watch T-Mobile kill off Orange and then hike the prices through the roof and kill off the decent unlimited contracts people used to have. I guess I would have to fork out a lot more money for less service via EE (caps, CGNAT etc). In fact, I think I’d have to give up mobile internet entirely as I rely on three for no CGNAT and being able to port forward etc or look into something like Zerotier. Really sad news, I hope Ofcom or the competition commission can put a stop to it.

    1. Avatar photo Dave says:

      Are you sure about it being “the” best? Most of the third party reports put either Vodafone or EE in top spot for speeds. I’m typically getting speeds of 200-350Mbps on Voda 4G, and up to 800Mbps on 5G.

      In some places its a tad slower, but overall it’s been really good.

    2. Avatar photo RIP Three says:

      Dave. I should have said best for me. 800mbits at home, 400-500 at work. Yeah I do see H+ a lot on three but for what I want to use it for nobody else comes close. Vodafone haven’t even bothered to put 5G around my work or home. O2 5G is a joke getting 10-30 mbit. EE works, but expensive and capped.

      For me, no CGNAT, unlimited at £18 a month and no caps and getting 800mbit is just fine. I have little faith that this will continue if Vodafone gobble them up. I had their Vodafone red for 1 year when I lived in London and it was unbearable. 1-5mbit on 4G and 5G that either didn’t work (wouldn’t complete speed test) or was 0.something megabits (I still have all the speedtest images saved, went to Vodafone with it and they ignored me so I left).

      I never once saw the speeds you see. Not even in London. Maybe they’ve improved? but their rollout sure hasn’t.

    3. Avatar photo Lee says:

      who needs 800mbits download for a non commercial private residence. This whole obsession with download or upload speeds is a scam and makes no diffence. After a certain point, how fast a download is done is determined by the source website and nothing to do with isp speeds. For the most part 30mbits is more than enough for households (4k streaming, gaming, multiple same time users, etc). Anyone paying extra for more is being scammed. Thats not to say if higher speeds are offered at no extra cost, you should’nt take it.

    4. Avatar photo El Guapo says:

      >who needs 800mbits download for a non commercial private residence.

      Answer: people who don’t want to wait 8 hours for GTA:V or CoD to download.

      Why are people so against people having high speed internet. None of you need internet as a human being. You need food, shelter, water. The mobile company doesn’t care if they give me 5 megabits or 1000, I pay the same. Why would you be against people having faster internet.

      Contrary to your statement, it absolutely makes a difference. Literally ALL of the gaming places like steam, ubisoft, battle.net etc can all give me 800mbit. No problem. I’d imagine they could probably do a lot more too if I had faster internet.

      Never understood why people have to come along and say … you don’t need this or that. Yep thanks. You’ll be popping back to 20mbit when ? since that’s enough apparently.

    5. Avatar photo Lee says:

      You can do what you want. Nobody is asking anyone to do anything. This is a forum right?
      People voice their opinions regarding internet and ISP issues and from my experience, unless you are sharing your connection with 50 or more people high speed internet has made no difference and is comparable to the 30 mbits speed I had before as far as 4k streaming, downloading, and gaming is concerned

    6. Avatar photo bob says:

      I don’t need to pay £300 a month for a leased line – but I want one and can afford one so I do – I don’t affect anyone else with my download addiction, and no one bothers me – it’s a win win at my expense and I don’t see it as the joke being on me. I grew up when I left school

      As humans people don’t need to Smoke or drink but they do.. I don’t so this at like £9 a day is my habit – and to me that’s fine

    7. Avatar photo t4n0n says:

      @Lee

      In fact, high speed internet is likely to be critically important for Web 3.0, as internet infrastructure moves from the current centralised model to a more decentralised model, where end-users collaboratively connect to deliver distributed content.

      Even now, with Web 2.0, 30Mbps is only “sufficient” if all you use the internet is watching cat videos on YouTube and some light forum browsing i.e content consumption.

      An internet connection faster than 150-200Mbps can prove to be make or break for more “productive” internet users, whether it’s downloading large source code repositories in software development, digital assets for 3D design and engineering applications, or data telemetry for complex industrial/scientific research.

      You shouldn’t assume that just because something is good enough for you, that means it’s good enough for everyone else.

      It (of course) always comes down to the individual’s usecase and all of the trends indicate the average data consumption of people going up rapidly, rather than staying the same, as you seem to suggest.

  12. Avatar photo Kushan says:

    I’m in two minds about this one. More competition is better, but there’s a limited amount of spectrum out there and it’s getting more and more expensive to deploy networks to cover the same area.

    I almost feel like there shouldn’t even be separate major operators, rather we should have a publicly owned company deploying the entire network and allowing the use of all spectrum, which the major providers then license like an MVNO. Essentially the Openreach model.

    That’s not without its own flaws, of course, but the current model is equally as flawed. It’s not really competition if only 1 or 2 providers actually have a signal where you need it.

    1. Avatar photo Rallyracer says:

      Shared RAN should be a legal requirement yeah. Not just for middle of nowhereland.

  13. Avatar photo Ben says:

    Still won’t beat ee as three are rubbish in my area and across the uk .

    I left three as they were crap and three unlimited data is also rubbish slow 4g compared to ee unlimited data 450 MBPS and there might be a 650GB soft cap fup but I already used 4 TB this month using a 5G router heard nothing from EE .

    1. Avatar photo El Guapo says:

      interesting. it’s the opposite for me. I really thought they’d be identical too since it’s an MBNL shared mast near me. But nope, three is more than twice as fast as EE for me. Hence why i’m now with three and no longer with EE. Plus three doesn’t put “fair use” caps on unlimited contracts.

      But I suppose each mobile network is different for different people. Some people love vodafone. others hate it. same with three. For me, I’ve yet to see a Vodafone mast that can give me beyond 100 megabits and a ping below 50. I’m sure there are places where vodafone can do it, but those places aren’t anywhere near me.

    2. Avatar photo Rob says:

      3 are also awful in my area (North Norfolk). I moved from EE to 3 and regret it, often shows I have 4g but does nothing or is very very slow. My wife is still on EE and has no trouble at all in the same locations.
      So often I’m on 3G and she’s on 4G as well.

    3. Avatar photo Buggerlugz says:

      I agree Ben. I didn’t realise how bad three’s coverage was until I moved to plusnet (EE) for my mobile, its like chalk and cheese. That and the fact EE is constantly fast 4g, unlike Three.

  14. Avatar photo John says:

    Three same as O2 has still roaming included in their post paid plans – this will disappear for sure once they merge.

    1. Avatar photo John says:

      …this is not true, there is a charge for it. nothing to worry about, one sh*t network acquires another.

    2. Avatar photo Patrick says:

      I’m with 3 and due to contract being take out pre Oct ’21 I still get free roaming in EU, USA , AUS to mention some. Though this might change.

    3. Avatar photo anon says:

      I’m with three and they wanted £2.50 a day for roaming in the EU. I decided to get a lebara sim with 12GB of data for £6 a month then cancelled it when I got back. If that or giffgaff PAYG wasn’t an option, then i’d take a local sim instead of paying three for roaming. I don’t see why O2 can do it but nobody else wants to.

    4. Avatar photo Dave says:

      I’m on an older Vodafone SIM only contract that includes international roaming, it is kinda handy.

      I’ve seen people spending thousands on a holiday, then complaining that it’s going to cost them £2.50 or £5 per day to use their allowance. £60 on top of a several thousand pound holiday – if things are that tight, maybe they shouldn’t be booking such an expensive holiday ….

    5. Avatar photo MilesT says:

      @Rob Elsewhere in North Norfolk i.e. Holt, Three/EE are better than VM02/Voda. Better positioned and taller antenna, on which recently (and surprisingly) Three has enabled 5G (I wonder if an executive has a second home in Holt, or whether it was just a lucky place to test something). VM02 and Voda can’t even cover all the town of Holt for decent indoor service inside very modest houses.

      It’s all about location.

  15. Avatar photo Barricade says:

    Three and Vodafone have been the worst networks for me in my area and at work (0 reception. Can’t even receive texts). Loss of competition would be sad, especially since EE no longer sells contracts via third party resellers. It’s hard to find a decent cashback deal nowadays, but Sky seem alright on VMO2.

    1. Avatar photo Gregowski says:

      uSwitch? still has all 4 networks.

    2. Avatar photo Buggerlugz says:

      Plusnet mobile is on EE and offering contracts far far cheaper than EE too. Which makes complete sense……

  16. Avatar photo Declan m says:

    Be good if the merger includes mast sharing with the 3/EE and Vodafone/ 02 don’t know if that is possible but would be great for all mobile users in the UK

    1. Avatar photo Guest says:

      Don’t see that happening to be honest, rather I see existing mast sharing agreements to be closed and instead Vodafone and Three entering into a new mast sharing agreement using each others infrastructure.

  17. Avatar photo Tom says:

    How long will this take to happen or not happen if agreed?

  18. Avatar photo Hector says:

    As someone who works in Three retail, all I care about is whether we get to move into the Vodafone store down the street. It’s a lot bigger than our Three store. Well, that and pay.

    1. Avatar photo Buggerlugz says:

      Really selling your employer well there Hector……hehe

    2. Avatar photo bob says:

      Our Three shop became a newsagents – like we don’t have enough already…

  19. Avatar photo Brian says:

    Would drastically limit choice, at least for us. Through the various generations O2 have never felt fit to serve us (despite claiming to) and when tried EE was prone to being very sketchy.

  20. Avatar photo Derico says:

    Good

  21. Avatar photo Buggerlugz says:

    I think Vodafone is making a huge mistake with this merger. Three simply doesn’t have an infrastructure that provides anywhere near the reliability and robustness that is anywhere near on par with voda’s own network. Voda would be doing themselves and their customers a disservice.

    1. Avatar photo Anon says:

      I disagree, Vodafone’s current offering of 5G is slow and unfit for purpose unlike Three’s 5G offering which is fast, reliable and offers much more faster speeds then Vodafone.

      As to claiming that Vodafone’s 4G network offers far better reliability and robustness then Three, that’s a laugh as the only time I see more then 7MB speeds is when I stand less then 20m from a Vodafone mast, they really are crap where bandwidth is concerned.

      Vodafone needs to kick it up a gear and invest in infrastructure like Three is doing indeed the only reason why Vodafone wants to merge with Three is to take advantage of their 5G rollout programme.

  22. Avatar photo Leonard. King says:

    This merger would suit me completely by (hopefully) allowing a switch from Vodafone phone line broadband to 3 5G Home Broadband with no exit penalty (currently standing at 20 months)

  23. Avatar photo Carl O says:

    I feel it’s a good step forward. Introduce more flexible data packages, 10/15/20/50/100gb tariffs with no speed caps.

    Force the unlimited tariffs on fair pricing speed caps.

    5meg/15meg/50meg/unlimited to ensure stability in the Networks and those who download TB on tb for no reason other than trying to see how much mobile data they can consume each month, forced to pay more for the unnecessary consumption.

    It’ll make people think twice of what actually needs to be used and rid the greed and hogging of bandwidth.

    Certainly mobile plans need nothing more than 20-30meg to function everything a phone is required to do, even watching HD YouTube videos.

    1. Avatar photo Bitcoin millionaire says:

      “Force the unlimited tariffs on fair pricing speed caps.”

      ᕦ(ò_óˇ)ᕤ

      I’m unhappy people pay £18 a month for unlimited when I pay £50. Bad. lmao.

  24. Avatar photo Duncan says:

    Vodafone just seem lazy or not interested in updating their signal in some places. Where I am in Kent, the 4G is the same as the signal that was deployed nearly 10 years ago! Band 20 and sub 4mbps performance.

    Three on the other hand have 5G here at around 400mbps and their 4G is no slouch either. If they combine networks then I’ll be interested and things would improve for many.

    I was thinking of going with Three from EE next year but I might see how this rides out first. I love EE but I’m tired of still not getting much of a signal indoors when I can with all the other networks now.

    Experts seem to predict this has a less than 55% chance of happening…

    1. Avatar photo Ell says:

      I agree with what you have said, Three really are stepping it up a notch where their infrastructure is concerned eg a village in Cambridgeshire I used to visit regularly was lucky to get a passable 3G signal with Three, now that village is now enjoying 5G from Three.

      As to Vodafone, I tried their 5G offering within London and it was like chalk and cheese with Three performing so much better.

      My concern is if the merger goes ahead, the new management team will undo all the excellent work Three has achieved so far and reduce infrastructure investment to the minimal Vodafone style.

      I just hope that infrastructure investment is sped up with faster 4G speeds equal to EE, continuous 5G rollout and 3G is turned off sooner to reuse the spectrum for both 4G and 5G.

  25. Avatar photo t4n0n says:

    I’m all for free markets, but I can’t help but feel that a lot of people get too tied up with the idea that a broader market of competitors is *necessarily* better or that monopolies are *necessarily* bad.

    The driver of efficiency in free markets is the quantity of *competition*, not the quantity of *competitors*.

    The most obvious illustration of this is the limiting case – if the latter were true, the most efficient market would be one where every individual was their own ISP – clearly this is nonsense.

    If the CMA can find objective evidence that shrinking the market from 4 competitors to 3 will dramatically reduce competition, then by all means, it should block the merger.

    From where I stand, though, the way the market is currently structured is not 4 cellular providers, but rather 2 large, fully-fledged internet infrastructure providers, in addition to 2 far smaller cellular providers.

    If the idea is that combining fixed broadband internet providers with cellular providers is meant to drive efficiencies due to synergies between those two businesses (as the CMA seems to have declared, ipse facto the mergers of EE and BT, as well as VM and O2), why would the merger of two smaller cellular providers not provide exactly the same kind of synergies, in a future where cellular connections are increasingly becoming the “fixed” internet infrastructure of choice?

    The arguments about MVNOs seem completely beside the point in my opinion – in fact, generally pointless, to go even further. Costs are always ultimately going to be tied to infrastructure, so the idea that the consumer will pay less due to virtual network operators, seems to have as much merit, to me at least, as the idea that you could have a highly efficient computer industry with only one hardware manufacturer (say Intel), but many third-party vendors like Dell, HP etc. which anyone with a brain and a memory longer than 5 minutes can tell you was a complete disaster for the consumer in the mid-1990’s to late 2010’s.

    1. Avatar photo t4n0n says:

      Sadly, most government departments and quangos are run by clueless morons – more often than not, appointed either by the greasing of certain palms by big business, or worse, political fiddling.

      They should have all been scrapped after 2010.

  26. Avatar photo Paywall? What paywall?.. says:

    If anyone wishes to read the Bloomberg article in full (or any other paywalled news), Archive Today helps:

    https://archive.ph/LLHUJ

Comments are closed

Cheap BIG ISPs for 100Mbps+
Community Fibre UK ISP Logo
150Mbps
Gift: None
Virgin Media UK ISP Logo
Virgin Media £26.00
132Mbps
Gift: None
Shell Energy UK ISP Logo
Shell Energy £26.99
109Mbps
Gift: None
Sky Broadband UK ISP Logo
100Mbps
Gift: None
Plusnet UK ISP Logo
Plusnet £27.99
145Mbps
Gift: None
Large Availability | View All
Cheapest ISPs for 100Mbps+
Gigaclear UK ISP Logo
Gigaclear £17.00
200Mbps
Gift: None
YouFibre UK ISP Logo
YouFibre £19.99
150Mbps
Gift: None
Community Fibre UK ISP Logo
150Mbps
Gift: None
BeFibre UK ISP Logo
BeFibre £21.00
150Mbps
Gift: £25 Love2Shop Card
Hey! Broadband UK ISP Logo
150Mbps
Gift: None
Large Availability | View All
The Top 15 Category Tags
  1. FTTP (5525)
  2. BT (3518)
  3. Politics (2541)
  4. Openreach (2298)
  5. Business (2264)
  6. Building Digital UK (2246)
  7. FTTC (2044)
  8. Mobile Broadband (1975)
  9. Statistics (1789)
  10. 4G (1666)
  11. Virgin Media (1621)
  12. Ofcom Regulation (1463)
  13. Fibre Optic (1395)
  14. Wireless Internet (1390)
  15. FTTH (1382)

Helpful ISP Guides and Tips

Promotion
Sponsored

Copyright © 1999 to Present - ISPreview.co.uk - All Rights Reserved - Terms , Privacy and Cookie Policy , Links , Website Rules , Contact
Mastodon