O2 wins largest spectrum share in latest auction

[Chris_K]

We're proud to announce our £500M+ investment in the latest spectrum auction. That’s what powers a network, and ours is about to get even better. How, exactly? Our spectrum acquisition means more 4G for you as well as being 5G ready for the future, and help boost connectivity in the UK.

Welcome to a new Mobile Britain. See our full press release here.

Headlines:

• Telefónica UK (O2) wins largest spectrum share in latest auction, investing £523.6 million in 80MHz and further demonstrates Telefónica’s commitment to the UK Market.
• The company obtained 40MHz of immediately useable spectrum (2.3GHz) and 40MHz of spectrum expected to be used in the launch of 5G (3.4GHz).
• New 4G airwaves to be switched on for customers within 24 hours of ability to deploy

[Cleoriff]

I expect it's a wait and see scenario then. I just hope O2 listen to their customers  and are fair to all

[adamtemp64]

From the press release in first post 

“O2 will initially utilise its 2.3GHz spectrum in London, with other UK cities to follow in the coming months, including Edinburgh, Newcastle and Leeds.”

[Cleoriff]

---

@adamtemp64wrote:

From the press release in first post 

“O2 will initially utilise its 2.3GHz spectrum in London, with other UK cities to follow in the coming months, including Edinburgh, Newcastle and Leeds.”

---

Yes I read that in the opening statement Adam, which shows they aren't listening to a lot of customers complaints.. Hopefully they will 'have a bit left' over for Manchester

[jonsie]

---

@adamtemp64wrote:

From the press release in first post 

“O2 will initially utilise its 2.3GHz spectrum in London, with other UK cities to follow in the coming months, including Edinburgh, Newcastle and Leeds.”

---

As I said before Manchester was way down the list for 4G. Waiting.....

[Anonymous]

Network build out/upgrade programmes always start in the cities for one main reason, Business customers.

I'm not for one moment saying Consumers aren't important but Businesses tend to spend far more than a Consumer does by taking packages with more minutes, having more connections and also purchasing other services such as landlines or a leased line(s) (fibre or copper nased EFM) from that provider to reduce the administrative burden by having one bill.

This is an approach operators have also been trying to adopt with consumers.

Cities tend to have more large Businesses or branch offices of large multinational Corporates so they get the coverage right there first and then extend it out.

Can be annoying but that is why and if you think about it, it does make sense.

[jonsie]

But we know not in which order the cities will be upgraded after London....

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymouswrote:

Network build out/upgrade programmes always start in the cities for one main reason, Business customers.

I'm not for one moment saying Consumers aren't important but Businesses tend to spend far more than a Consumer does by taking packages with more minutes, having more connections and also purchasing other services such as landlines or a leased line(s) (fibre or copper nased EFM) from that provider to reduce the administrative burden by having one bill.

This is an approach operators have also been trying to adopt with consumers.

Cities tend to have more large Businesses or branch offices of large multinational Corporates so they get the coverage right there first and then extend it out.

Can be annoying but that is why and if you think about it, it does make sense.

---

But if one company, just one.. filled in the 2% that don’t have any coverage.. just think of how much custom they’d get.. people would flock.. 

So yeah businesses might want it but if these mobile companies weren’t so shortsighted they could scoop up a big portion of a previously untapped source!

[adamtemp64]

@Anonymous The 2% is not 2% of the UK land mass but very rural postcodes with few residents in as per the ofcom calculation method so 98% is the more densely populated postcodes (not land mass) with many people living there . 

Full ofcom methodology here https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0026/58292/4gcov-verification.pdf  Updated version here https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/108209/4g-coverage-methodology.pdf

Also ofcom confirmation here https://www.ofcom.org.uk/spectrum/information/cellular-coverage

[Anonymous]

So 2% of the population who live in rural areas who aren’t covered, could be...

I make that 1,329,713 potential customers who would rave about a company that was willing to shell out for the infrastructure & give them a mobile service..
This in turn could/would make the area more attractive to future residents, businesses and holidaymakers.

What’s that old adage.. speculate to accumulate?

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymouswrote:
So 2% of the population who live in rural areas who aren’t covered, could be...

I make that 1,329,713 potential customers who would rave about a company that was willing to shell out for the infrastructure & give them a mobile service..
This in turn could/would make the area more attractive to future residents, businesses and holidaymakers.

What’s that old adage.. speculate to accumulate?

---

@Anonymous

Provided the local populace signed up to long term contracts so the operator could be a sure of a return on it's investment.

If they all said yes please and the majority signed up to PAYG or one month SIM only the risk of making a loss would be quite high as they have to run services such as a fibre leased line (which can cost thousands in civil engineering costs alone) if there is no line of sight for a microwave link to a macrocell or mobile exchange isn't feasible.

In the areas you speak of broadband coverage also tends to be bad or non existent, I'm not convinced that mobile is the solution to these 'not spots' as the government (and to a certain extent the industry) seem to believe.

I've been interested in the technology for a number of years and it seems to go through the same cycle:

1. Equipment vendors come up with equipment that provides higher capacity/is quicker.
2. Standards get discussed and ratifed at the European Telecom Standards Institute (ETSI)
3. Vendors go on the hard sell to CTOs of mobile operators, meanwhile governments flog spectrum.
4. Operators set up test beds and invite industry writers and technology bloggers to come and have a look.
5. Bloggers go back and write about how great the transfer speed is.
6. Network build out/upgrades start, all delivers as planned at first, customers encouraged to move across so old kit can be decomissioned and spectrum refarmed.
7. Stuff starts to slow and people start to complain.

Of course managing a mobile network is harder than fixed as the users move around, but I do wish they'd under promise and over deliver, don't you?