Vodafone not happy about Everything Everywhere’s 2012 4G

Vodafone not happy about Everything Everywhere’s 2012 4GAround a month ago, Everything Everywhere revealed that it hopes to provide 4G to its customers in the UK before the end of the year, subject to Ofcom approval.

Last week, we heard that Ofcom was pretty much cool with it, but you know who ain’t? Vodafone.

If Everything Everywhere obtains the necessary approval, it’d be the first (ok, first and second) of the Big Five to offer 4G in the UK, undoubtedly giving the network an unfair advantage over its competitors – O2, Three and Vodafone.

In an interview with the Sunday Times, Vodafone’s UK CEO, Guy Laurence, was openly opposed to the move, suggesting that Ofcom was “taking leave of their senses,” and “all but agreeing to grant the largest player in the market a head-start on the next generation of mobile internet services."

Of course, Ofcom will entertain formal objections from O2, Three and Vodafone before any decision is made final. The regulator said: "In particular, we have considered the extent to which the benefits to consumers and citizens which we believe will arise from the availability of new LTE services might be outweighed by any temporary or longer term distortion of competition in such services to the detriment of citizens and consumers."

Read more about: OrangeT-mobileVodafone3 MobileO2

Add a comment
13 comments

matt101101 / MOD  Mar. 20, 2012 at 11:37

Boohoo, the other networks need to stop crying about it.

CTPAHHIK  Mar. 20, 2012 at 12:13

If you can't beat them - regulate them? :p

jmarcelino  Mar. 20, 2012 at 12:13

This will never fly unless the other carriers are compensated in some way.

The only purpose of this d*** move by Ofcom is to make it seem like the UK isn't that behind LTE deployment, but do it by using a pointless frequency that no one outside Australia and Lithuania uses or supports properly. That's not a good way to start.

Pondlife  Mar. 20, 2012 at 12:20

Obviously different as they weren't the biggest at the time but didn't 3 have some time as only 3g network?
Does it also mean we are going to have 2,3 and 4 all around? Seems bit odd

CTPAHHIK  Mar. 20, 2012 at 12:46

Frequency does not make any difference. Build a network and phones will come. It's not that difficult to add another baseband modulator to a chip.
AT&T has 850Mhz and T-Mobile 1700Mhz - not compatible with each other and not compatible with any European band. Anyone cares?

jmarcelino  Mar. 20, 2012 at 12:56

Obviously different as they weren't the biggest at the time but didn't 3 have some time as only 3g network?

No, the five 3G licenses were auctioned and made available at the same time.

Three managed to deploy broader 3G network coverage faster, because it made financial sense - they didn't have 2G spectrum so every time someone made a call outside their network Three had to pay roaming to their 2G partner.

jmarcelino  Mar. 20, 2012 at 13:02

Frequency does not make any difference. Build a network and phones will come. It's not that difficult to add another baseband modulator to a chip.
AT&T has 850Mhz and T-Mobile 1700Mhz - not compatible with each other and not compatible with any European band. Anyone cares?


The US mobile market - even one carrier - is far, far larger than Australia+Lithuania.

It is hard and a costly to add another LTE frequency when you already have to support all 3G frequencies and especially when no large market uses that new frequency.

Case in point is that only HTC seems to make a few select phones for LTE 1800. There's just not a lot of interest.

LTE in the UK only makes sense when we can have frequencies in common with the rest of Europe, not before.

DarthBlingBling  Mar. 20, 2012 at 15:30

Sorry for shamelessly plugging but I've just written a few tit bits about 4G and even 5G here.

You'd think they'd want to have something in place by the Olympics

jmarcelino  Mar. 20, 2012 at 16:58

You'd think they'd want to have something in place by the Olympics

I'm not sure this would do help with the Olympics since EE's plan is to launch in Bristol.

London would only come later in year, after the Olympics.

Xebec  Mar. 20, 2012 at 20:11

Frequency does not make any difference. Build a network and phones will come. It's not that difficult to add another baseband modulator to a chip.
AT&T has 850Mhz and T-Mobile 1700Mhz - not compatible with each other and not compatible with any European band. Anyone cares?


The US mobile market - even one carrier - is far, far larger than Australia+Lithuania.

It is hard and a costly to add another LTE frequency when you already have to support all 3G frequencies and especially when no large market uses that new frequency.

Case in point is that only HTC seems to make a few select phones for LTE 1800. There's just not a lot of interest.

LTE in the UK only makes sense when we can have frequencies in common with the rest of Europe, not before.


And Vodafone is bigger then the entire US phone market.

AT&T is compatible with Europe. T-Mobile is not, this mainly due to the lack of regulation in the US in concern with spectrum and technology. Where as carriers are forced to use certain spectrum's and GSM in the EU.

Thats why in the EU, when you go abroad you can roam nearly anywhere, not the same in the US if you want to roam abroad, most phones there don't roam AT ALL.

jmarcelino  Mar. 20, 2012 at 23:18


And Vodafone is bigger then the entire US phone market.


Erm yes, but that's across several countries all of which with their own mobile policies and regulations.

Vodafone will never have a common LTE implementation across the entire group.

Xebec  Mar. 20, 2012 at 23:28


And Vodafone is bigger then the entire US phone market.


Erm yes, but that's across several countries all of which with their own mobile policies and regulations.

Vodafone will never have a common LTE implementation across the entire group.


But then the US dosent even have a common LTE implementation nationally. Verizon uses a non standard voLTE, where as other carriers have agreed internationally on the standard.

Vodafones GSM networks are mostly all compatible with eachother.

CTPAHHIK  Mar. 21, 2012 at 08:59

Frequency does not make any difference. Build a network and phones will come. It's not that difficult to add another baseband modulator to a chip.
AT&T has 850Mhz and T-Mobile 1700Mhz - not compatible with each other and not compatible with any European band. Anyone cares?


The US mobile market - even one carrier - is far, far larger than Australia+Lithuania.

It is hard and a costly to add another LTE frequency when you already have to support all 3G frequencies and especially when no large market uses that new frequency.

Case in point is that only HTC seems to make a few select phones for LTE 1800. There's just not a lot of interest.

LTE in the UK only makes sense when we can have frequencies in common with the rest of Europe, not before.


And Vodafone is bigger then the entire US phone market.

AT&T is compatible with Europe. T-Mobile is not, this mainly due to the lack of regulation in the US in concern with spectrum and technology. Where as carriers are forced to use certain spectrum's and GSM in the EU.

Thats why in the EU, when you go abroad you can roam nearly anywhere, not the same in the US if you want to roam abroad, most phones there don't roam AT ALL.


AT&T is not compatible with Europe. AT&T uses 850MHz, which European phones do not support. GSM will work fine everywhere, but 3G has different bands. 850MHz is North American and 2100MHz is European. Everything Everywhere wants to do 1800MHz and T-Mobile in US is 1700MHz. AT&T LTE is 700MHz, so is Verizon, but I don't know if they are compatible.
You have one chip for GSM, one for 3G and one for LTE ( single package or discrete). Frequency band does not matter as long as underlying technology in signal modulation is the same.

Email:

You don't need an account to comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

Comment: