Sponsored Links

Vodafone / Three - Merger Discussion

Do you approve of a merger between three and Vodafone?

  • Yes

    Votes: 113 34.3%
  • No

    Votes: 117 35.6%
  • Don't Care

    Votes: 33 10.0%
  • With Restrictions (Please Specify)

    Votes: 25 7.6%
  • Prefer As Is

    Votes: 35 10.6%
  • Yes the merger will get the go ahead

    Votes: 19 5.8%
  • No the merger will be blocked

    Votes: 2 0.6%

  • Total voters
    329
You say this but it's not true about every location. For me, it's quite the opposite experience. I've seen more new VF masts up (Roughly 15 in the space of 18 months) and running and pumping out decent 5G speeds and coverage than I have Three. (Around 5 at the most)

Three seem to apply for planning and sit and do nothing for months, (in some cases we've tipped over the 12 month line.) Vodafone apply and within 6 months, give or take, the mast is up and live.
If we take London as a example, I've found Three to be performing 3 times better then Vodafone within Inner London.

As to Vodafone's rollout, their own coverage map barely seems to be updated although it does have the excellent idea of showing coverage for 3 months later.

Three seems to be applying for planning permission everywhere regardless indeed locally for me they seem to be the majority asking for planning permission.

Then again, maybe I'm just happen to be connecting to Vodafone infrastructure that's full to capacity or I'm in areas where Vodafone has no appetite to invest in the infrastructure.

Either way, I will be reviewing my service with Voxi in the spring so hopefully by then I be proven wrong and you be proven right and we will know if the merger talks were successful or not but we see.
 
Sponsored Links
I went to O2's website and checked their 30 day plans... the cheapest one costs £20 and comes with 1GB of data. On Three, you get 4GB and unlimited calls for £1 less. 20GB costs £26 on O2, while on Three you get 30GB for £24.

To me this doesn't look like a network ready to step into Three's shoes. So unless something dramatic happens, O2 will be a "Three 4G" network with higher prices and as a customer I don't see any benefit in that.

The new Vodafone will be closer to EE. From a business point of view, I don't see why they need to be much cheaper or offer more than EE when the only other alternative is crap.

Regarding Ofcom... I guess you have more faith in them than I do.

Well I found out that 99% of the time going directly with the network is more expensive than finding a middle man like uSwitch or buymobiles and get a way better deal.

Only reason to be careful is that sometimes at the end of those contracts you discount disappears and monthly bill can sometimes double if you don't upgrade in time.
 
eouyRqk.png

Coincidence? They seem to match eachother on the 4 bottom plans 1:1

technically the vodafone resell deal is cheaper as there’s a £50 lower upfront cost.
 
Buy Three out to gain their 5G bandwidth and infrastructure. The purchase is likely less than placing their own 5G equipment everywhere hence they've slowed down.

Investors will be happy Vodafone spending less and getting a huge positive result for the short term spend, long term gain.

Makes sense really.

Also shed the overseas dead weight, even more less expenditure. Makes sense from a business perspective.
 
Sponsored Links
Buy Three out to gain their 5G bandwidth and infrastructure. The purchase is likely less than placing their own 5G equipment everywhere hence they've stopped.

Investors will be happy Vodafone spending less and getting a huge positive result for the short term spend, long term gain.
Corrected it for you ;)

Btw the new company will still need to spend money to expand its 5G network which hopefully it will continue to do.

With regards to Three's and Vodafone's existing 5G bandwidth though, that would depend if they were forced to give up some of it by Ofcom as I'm not sure they be allowed to keep it all?

As to taking over Three's 5G to me that means either having a 5G presence where it didn't exist before or boosts existing 5G presence.

In any case, hopefully having Vodafone and Three merge will mean decent speeds and coverage to rival EE as the latter has long held No1 place.

The other point is with the shutdown of 3G and reallocation, won't this cost money because correct me if I'm wrong but its not just a case of flicking a switch and the infrastructure that was providing a 3G signal is now providing a 4G or 5G signal? Surely they would need to upgrade the 3G infrastructure to be able to provide 4G/5G?
 
Corrected it for you ;)

Btw the new company will still need to spend money to expand its 5G network which hopefully it will continue to do.

With regards to Three's and Vodafone's existing 5G bandwidth though, that would depend if they were forced to give up some of it by Ofcom as I'm not sure they be allowed to keep it all?

As to taking over Three's 5G to me that means either having a 5G presence where it didn't exist before or boosts existing 5G presence.

In any case, hopefully having Vodafone and Three merge will mean decent speeds and coverage to rival EE as the latter has long held No1 place.

The other point is with the shutdown of 3G and reallocation, won't this cost money because correct me if I'm wrong but its not just a case of flicking a switch and the infrastructure that was providing a 3G signal is now providing a 4G or 5G signal? Surely they would need to upgrade the 3G infrastructure to be able to provide 4G/5G?
I'm not sure if it's a simple process for 3G to go to 4G, but adding 5G is something else due to frequencies and hardware required.

Someone here will likely know more about that.

Vodafone is still going, my source said it's due to swapping out all Huawei kit which is a tedious spenny process, but still rolling out across the country very slowly.
 
What are the chances of Three and Vodafone getting approval and merging before the end of the year?
 
Sponsored Links
hope it doesn't go ahead. will be an uneasy future for three if it does.
I disagree and I shall explain why it should go ahead and why there is no such thing as a uneasy future for Three or Vodafone:

1. It makes sense as they serve different parts of the market eg Three serve the inexpensive part like Plusnet does while Vodafone serves the more expensive part like EE does.

2. For Three to scale up to the demands of its own customers to the scale of VMO2 or BT will involve a lot of investment which will be difficult on it's own hence working with Vodafone makes it simpler.

3. Merging the two would allow Three to accelerate the roll-out of 5G and super fast broadband throughout the UK.

4. The UK market isn't big enough now for 4 or more major players eg VMO2 and BT/EE are what I call major players with Three and Vodafone being minor players compared to the former.

5. It will allow shared usage of infrastructure and expand 5G coverage nationwide considering the headstart Three has, this is easily possible.

6. Having Three and Vodafone as one company would mean savings by not duplicating unnecessary areas such as retail stores, seperate back of house systems etc.

Also this article provides a another view:

 
I disagree and I shall explain why it should go ahead and why there is no such thing as a uneasy future for Three or Vodafone:

1. It makes sense as they serve different parts of the market eg Three serve the inexpensive part like Plusnet does while Vodafone serves the more expensive part like EE does.

2. For Three to scale up to the demands of its own customers to the scale of VMO2 or BT will involve a lot of investment which will be difficult on it's own hence working with Vodafone makes it simpler.

3. Merging the two would allow Three to accelerate the roll-out of 5G and super fast broadband throughout the UK.

4. The UK market isn't big enough now for 4 or more major players eg VMO2 and BT/EE are what I call major players with Three and Vodafone being minor players compared to the former.

5. It will allow shared usage of infrastructure and expand 5G coverage nationwide considering the headstart Three has, this is easily possible.

6. Having Three and Vodafone as one company would mean savings by not duplicating unnecessary areas such as retail stores, seperate back of house systems etc.

Also this article provides a another view:

2. Three doesn't have any concerns in cost of investment considering it is backed by CK whatshisname. Vodafone don't have the money for investment therefore it's voda who benefits here from money already spent by Three.

3. It's Vodafone that needs to accelerate here, not Three as they've done pretty well. Vodafones Huawei replacement and shareholders really hold them back.
 
2. Three doesn't have any concerns in cost of investment considering it is backed by CK whatshisname. Vodafone don't have the money for investment therefore it's voda who benefits here from money already spent by Three.

3. It's Vodafone that needs to accelerate here, not Three as they've done pretty well. Vodafones Huawei replacement and shareholders really hold them back.
Sounds to me like it's three users loosing out on their currently very very good 5G services to Vodafone customers with their sub par 5G. Better for voda customers, worse for three.
 
Sounds to me like it's three users loosing out on their currently very very good 5G services to Vodafone customers with their sub par 5G. Better for voda customers, worse for three.
Would it even make it better for Vodafone customers though?

No doubt Three would end up having to sell off a good proportion of it's spectrum to O2 to allow the merger to go through.

Lack of competition is always bad, does anyone really think Vodafone would have launched Voxi if it wasn't for Three?

Vodafone and Three are the only major networks that have reasonable pricing, albeit through their fully owned MVNOs, giffgaff has been crap value for years now.

If they merge, what's the incentive for them to keep pricing down?
 
Sponsored Links
Sounds to me like it's three users loosing out on their currently very very good 5G services to Vodafone customers with their sub par 5G. Better for voda customers, worse for three.
I dont think the impact from gig speeds (not needed) down to reasonable 200-300 speeds realistically (also not needed, just wanted) isnt going to be the be all end all result.

Three would have much better 4G coverage available to them too.

Also considering the current spectrum for both. Even reducing it a bit to share with the other networks, specifically O2 as it's really needed on their part. Everyone wins.

Nobody ever really complains about O2 other than the speeds, and an increase in bandwidth would absolutely make them a go to option for some.
 
I dont think the impact from gig speeds (not needed) down to reasonable 200-300 speeds realistically (also not needed, just wanted) isnt going to be the be all end all result.

Three would have much better 4G coverage available to them too.

Also considering the current spectrum for both. Even reducing it a bit to share with the other networks, specifically O2 as it's really needed on their part. Everyone wins.

Nobody ever really complains about O2 other than the speeds, and an increase in bandwidth would absolutely make them a go to option for some.
I wouldn't want to end up on the Vodafone single B20 carrier here. It's god awful compared to EE or Three. Do you think we'd be able to lock onto one network or the other?
 
I dont think the impact from gig speeds (not needed) down to reasonable 200-300 speeds realistically (also not needed, just wanted) isnt going to be the be all end all result.

Three would have much better 4G coverage available to them too.

Also considering the current spectrum for both. Even reducing it a bit to share with the other networks, specifically O2 as it's really needed on their part. Everyone wins.

Nobody ever really complains about O2 other than the speeds, and an increase in bandwidth would absolutely make them a go to option for some.

At least where I am, Three's 4G network is far, far better than Vodafone's. Half of the time Vodafone is virtually unusable, with speeds slower than Three's 3G network!
 
Look at how EE started with Orange and T-Mobile bandwidth, and look where they are today.

That all started as a roam between the two, you could switch roaming off on the host network IE if you were orange, just switch off roaming and you'd stay on orange, not jump to T-Mobile when it was better.

Today's tech likely just allows to merge the band's together instead meaning one big network, just two different names, so where Three/Vodafone are stronger/weaker than the other, you'd likely have a good level of coverage across the board thus ee today for the most part.
 
Top
Cheap BIG ISPs for 100Mbps+
Community Fibre UK ISP Logo
150Mbps
Gift: None
Virgin Media UK ISP Logo
Virgin Media £22.99
132Mbps
Gift: None
Vodafone UK ISP Logo
Vodafone £24.00 - 26.00
150Mbps
Gift: None
NOW UK ISP Logo
NOW £24.00
100Mbps
Gift: None
Plusnet UK ISP Logo
Plusnet £25.99
145Mbps
Gift: £50 Reward Card
Large Availability | View All
Cheapest ISPs for 100Mbps+
Gigaclear UK ISP Logo
Gigaclear £17.00
200Mbps
Gift: None
Community Fibre UK ISP Logo
150Mbps
Gift: None
Virgin Media UK ISP Logo
Virgin Media £22.99
132Mbps
Gift: None
Hey! Broadband UK ISP Logo
150Mbps
Gift: None
Youfibre UK ISP Logo
Youfibre £23.99
150Mbps
Gift: None
Large Availability | View All
Sponsored Links
The Top 15 Category Tags
  1. FTTP (6024)
  2. BT (3638)
  3. Politics (2720)
  4. Business (2439)
  5. Openreach (2405)
  6. Building Digital UK (2330)
  7. Mobile Broadband (2143)
  8. FTTC (2083)
  9. Statistics (1899)
  10. 4G (1813)
  11. Virgin Media (1762)
  12. Ofcom Regulation (1582)
  13. Fibre Optic (1467)
  14. Wireless Internet (1462)
  15. 5G (1404)
Sponsored

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