Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Should Vodafone be designated aa 'Near Monopoly'

Options
  • 20-12-2002 1:55pm
    #1
    spongebob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,143 ✭✭✭


    and forced to amend its pricing practises accordingly.

    In order to do so it must be first designated an operator with

    Significant Market Power

    and then it can be forced to knuckle under with a

    Universal Service Obligation

    It had a (weak) USO for 2 years till Eircom spun it off to Vodafone and has been orphaned from its wider social obligations since.

    Time it was brought to heel.

    See this document on regulation Here at Comreg, you have till Feb 11th to say yer piece.

    M


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    This thread may be more appropriate to the IOFFL board.

    Moved.


  • Options
    #3
    MagicBusDriver
    Closed Accounts Posts: 234 ✭✭MagicBusDriver


    Why do vodafone need a USO?

    Greater competition is required in the mobile telecoms market. The licenses need to be awarded to those how want them at zero cost. Less regulation rather than more is required.


  • Options
    #4
    Dustaz
    Registered Users Posts: 9,046 ✭✭✭Dustaz


    Not really an Ioffl thing untill they offer decent broadband.

    Hmmmm, since Corinthian doesnt want it......

    Here ye go boys :)


  • Options
    #5
    spongebob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,143 ✭✭✭spongebob


    FFS :(


  • Options
    #6
    highlight
    Closed Accounts Posts: 96 ✭✭highlight


    Both Vodafone and O2 are already designated with SMP


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,370 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Originally posted by highlight
    Both Vodafone and O2 are already designated with SMP
    Isn't it something like 55% / 43% / 2% (Meteor). Methinks there definitely needs to be improvements in (a) price transparency (b) price (c) more licences (d) Meteor need to work on their act.


  • Options
    #8
    MagicBusDriver
    Closed Accounts Posts: 234 ✭✭MagicBusDriver


    Why does the government/regulator need to restrict licenses, other than for technical reasons. The 3G licenses should have been free and unlimited in the number that are available.


  • Options
    #9
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,370 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Yes there are obvious bandwidth allocation issues, but having (the possibility of) too many operators in the market would discourage investment and the creation of the networks in the first place.


  • Options
    #10
    MagicBusDriver
    Closed Accounts Posts: 234 ✭✭MagicBusDriver


    too many operators in the market would discourage investment and the creation of the networks in the first place. [/B]

    Do you work foe Eircom? (j/k)

    Free Market is the ideal, That should be the aim of the regulator.


  • Options
    #11
    Balfa
    Registered Users Posts: 1,709 ✭✭✭Balfa


    Originally posted by Victor
    Yes there are obvious bandwidth allocation issues, but having (the possibility of) too many operators in the market would discourage investment and the creation of the networks in the first place.

    how would that discourage investment?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Moriarty
    Registered Users Posts: 6,007 ✭✭✭Moriarty


    Originally posted by Balfa
    how would that discourage investment?
    Presumeably because investors would see so many companies entering into such a small market. The end result of this being that everyone has the same massive capital expense rolling out a network (and it is fairly massive), but each company will only get a fraction of the overall customer base as there is so much competition, hence making it unfeasable for all new companys.

    Licences are basically a way to guarentee the mobile companys that if they build out their network, in return they know how the market is going to be in the short-medium term and are more or less guarenteed to be able to make back the money that was invested in the intial network build out. Its the only real way to get mobile phone companys to enter into such a small market.


  • Options
    #13
    jd
    Registered Users Posts: 5,695 ✭✭✭jd


    Originally posted by Muck
    In order to do so it must be first designated an operator with

    Significant Market Power

    and then it can be forced to knuckle under with a

    Universal Service Obligation


    M
    USO for vodafone? If that is the case, the 02 should suffer the same obligation.
    What are you looking for - 100% network coverage?
    TBH, I don't have much sympathy for people who live in remote areas and expect the same degree of services as everybody else-the general populatation shouldn't have to subsidise the nice view from your window..


  • Options
    #14
    spongebob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,143 ✭✭✭spongebob


    :D as if.

    If they manage 96-97% after 15 years in operation they are doing well. 100% is probably feasible for a 900Mhz operator as it happens. I would never expect it from an 1800Mhz operator owing to the number of cells required to achieve the coverage. That is not a realistic objective IMO.

    One year validity per sim per topup is more like a USO objective.

    Of interest is the ridiculous cost of terminating calls on their network as compared to the UK where the regulator IS on the ball.

    We also give them the highest average revenue per user in europe .....not a record I would care to maintain for ever as it is yet another shad of proof that we have become one of the most expensive countries in Europe in which to 'do business'.

    M


Advertisement