Ofcom oppose 3 buying o2

colinicky

Oh come on, every company shafts their customers in the end ! I was shafted by O2 when they stopped the old one rate contract I was on, then again when they stopped their loyalty bonus scheme. I moved to Tmobile & then was thrown off the contract I was on when all the joining of Tmobile, Orange & EE happened. Now I am waiting the letter from Three as everybody else has had. When it arrives I shall stay or go depending on what is on offer at the time.
As has been said I am out of contract but that works both way & Three are out of contract as wel;l so have no obligation to continue supplying a service to me on the current terms .

diamonds

d123 wrote: »

Of course it's a merger, 3 aren't buying o2, CK Hutchison want to buy o2 and then merge it with their UK subsidiary, 3UK.

Perhaps take 5 minutes and go see how OFCOM, the Government, the EU Commision, o2 and CKH describe the deal.

You'll discover that word again, merger...

Here, I'll help you with the first one.


https://www.gov.uk/cma-cases/ck-hutchison-holdings-ltd-ckhh-telefonica-europe-plc-o2-uk-merger

That does not give the full terms 3 offer, a merger would indicate keeping all 3 and o2's licences, which HWL, Ofcom and EU and anyone knows it will not get. So unless Telefonica and 3 share the company shareholding like Vodafone Hutchison Australia then it wont be a merger either.

Cayman Islands CK Hutchison Holdings made a public offer 'merger' with known refusal which keeps its cards close to its chest and stops details being public. Obviously CKHH know it cant merge all licences as per EU rules, its the o2 customer base acquisition it wants, when licences are removed by Ofcom or EU as a requirement it buys o2 at a cheaper new negotiated price, much cheaper as the price drops more substantially than negotiations ever could with competition body requirements enforcing assets be off hived. HWL/CKHH didnt become a humongous international conglomerate by not playing parties off each other to its own gain.


Smoke and mirrors...

System

They want the network and customer base (particularly business customers). The closest analogy would be Ireland not Australia or Cayman Islands. IMO it will be waived through.

Neither EE or Vodafone especially need the spectrum.

O2s cup & string network really needs 3s investment.

diamonds

Heng_Leng wrote: »

They want the network and customer base (particularly business customers). The closest analogy would be Ireland not Australia or Cayman Islands. IMO it will be waived through.

Neither EE or Vodafone especially need the spectrum.

O2s cup & string network really needs 3s investment.

o2 2G is solid, shame they nearly missed 3G obligation, to then get the 4G licence with a massive obligation...you think what idiot at Ofcom allowed that to happen with past history of 3G.


I do wonder how bad it will get from a customer service point with separate third party contracts in India and the UK.

A UK licence is worth money ongoing to another party, the strong currency...wish they would hurry up and make a decision :rotfl:

corf999

Why does a merger indicate keeping all licences, when T-Mobile and orange merged they were made to reduce spectrum as part of the deal.

d123

corf999 wrote: »

Why does a merger indicate keeping all licences, when T-Mobile and orange merged they were made to reduce spectrum as part of the deal.

He's making up his own definition, check the .gov terminology, the Cabinet Office, the EC, OFCOM, CMA, even Telefonica and CKHH reflect it is a merger.

CKHH who own 3UK are buying o2 UK and are then merging the 2 UK networks into a single UK network.

It can't be any plainer than that.