Vodafone merger ‘could leave 1m Three customers unable to find cheaper deals’ | Mergers and acquisitions | The Guardian (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 3 weeks ago by fne8w2ah@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

10 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 10 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] 9point6@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

My view on this is that Ofcom fucked it on this long ago really and the horse has already bolted

We should have gone with an openreach style model for the infrastructure rather than doling out exclusive rights to chunks of spectrum in an entirely uneven manner.

This model can't really sustain more than a few companies because, using this as an example: three has a fantastic 3G network and the best 5G network, however they have no 2G network and got shafted on 4G spectrum. Vodafone has almost a polar opposite of the best 2G coverage (still useful for very remote customers) and 4G coverage comparable to EE.

The only way for these two companies to cover the patches in their service and complete with the market leader effectively is a merger, which is how EE came to exist in the first place.

I'm not sure I buy the pricing-people-out angle either tbh, we have a pretty rich market of MVNOs who act as an anchor on the MNO pricing, and it would look like anti-competitive market collision if suddenly the operating costs for these companies went up after a merger.

[-] sandbox@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

The OpenReach model fucking sucks too. It’s a private for-profit corporation with an effective monopoly. The infrastructure should be owned and operated by a publicly owned organisation and access to it should be covered by taxes and just force all the private operators out of business. Every single one of them sucks.

[-] frazorth@feddit.uk 2 points 3 weeks ago

No. OpenReach is a shit show, with shills all claiming that BT doesn't get preferential treatment whilst everyone I know has at least one anecdote where OpenReach gave preferential treatment to BT. After a while the strench of uncompetitive practice is unavoidable, and they are getting rings rum around them by the alt-nets. OpenReach is a bad example.

Infrastructure that is a natural monopoly needs to be spun out into a separate company, or government entity that's untouchable from the consumer facing sellers, not just an "untouchable other department".

[-] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 2 points 3 weeks ago

I'm not sure I buy the pricing-people-out angle either tbh, we have a pretty rich market of MVNOs who act as an anchor on the MNO pricing, and it would look like anti-competitive market collision if suddenly the operating costs for these companies went up after a merger.

Do you think that would change anything? After the merger it's hard to walk it back. People would scream about "losing jobs" or something.

The point of a merger is to make more money, both through improved pricing power and through lower costs.

[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 weeks ago

thanks, capitalism

[-] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

Three is a completely garbage network anyway

[-] ptz@dubvee.org 2 points 3 weeks ago

It's like when T-Mobile and Sprint merged in the US. Both were pretty garbage networks, and now it's a really big garbage network.

[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 3 points 3 weeks ago

one millions three is oddly specific.

[-] otp@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago

Well, the study said one million, but the author knew that they'd be affected along with two friends, but they were never asked. So the author just added the missing 3.

[-] MediaBiasFactChecker@lemmy.world -5 points 3 weeks ago

The Guardian - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)

Information for The Guardian:

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United Kingdom
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.News

https://www.theguardian.com/business/article/2024/aug/22/vodafone-merger-three-customers-unable-find-cheaper-deals

Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2024

35 points (94.9% liked)

World News

38529 readers

2303 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.