Newly merged VodafoneThree vows to eradicate mobile ‘not spots'
VodafoneThree, the newly-merged telecoms giant, has vowed to banish weak mobile phone signals across Britain this year as it pours £11bn into 5G.
The company, formed by a £15bn tie-up between Vodafone and Three this month, vowed to fix 16,500 sq km of so-called mobile 'not-spots' over the next six months so people can get better phone signals.
The area targeted for improvement is 10 times the size of London. Bosses have also set a target of reaching 95pc geographic coverage and total population coverage by 2034 under ambitious plans revealed as part of the merger.
Max Taylor, the chief executive of VodafoneThree, said the tie-up would 'set a new benchmark for mobile quality' and encouraged rivals, including BT's EE, to follow suit.
He said: 'For too long we've been languishing behind on the global connectivity stage and quite frankly the industry needed a change.
'This will set a new standard and it will be great for consumers and the country if the others follow.'
Mobile network operators have come under increasing pressure from ministers amid concerns about patchy signal and misleading coverage maps.
VodafoneThree has promised to invest £11bn in its 5G network over the next decade – including £1.3bn in its first year – as part of a package of remedies agreed with competition regulators.
The company said the merger would initially help to tackle not-spots in rural areas as the merger brings together mobile masts belonging to Vodafone and Three into a single network.
Three customers are expected to enjoy an upgraded service 'within weeks', while the remainder of the group's 27m customers will see the benefits in the coming months and years.
VodafoneThree is also aiming to boost its coverage in the most remote regions through a new satellite venture.
It will launch trials of the service, which will beam broadband connections directly to smartphones, within the next year – after inking a deal with Texas-based AST Space Mobile.
VodafoneThree will continue to operate with multiple consumer brands, including Voxi and Smarty. However, analysts expect the company to gradually phase out the Three brand.
It has already scrapped the Three brand for business customers, while Vodafone will be the only brand for customers buying both mobile and broadband services.
Bosses said the combined company will create a major new challenger in the broadband market. It has struck a partnership with London-based broadband firm Community Fibre, adding to its existing agreements with BT's Openreach and CityFibre.
The company has also pledged to improve customer service, opening new call centres in Belfast and Sheffield and launching a new policy it calls Just Ask Once that will allow subscribers to leave without a penalty if they are not satisfied.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
19 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Rachel Reeves has lost control
On Tuesday, Sir Keir Starmer told the nation that the Government's U-turn on cuts to winter fuel payments was the result of 'better growth'. On Wednesday, Rachel Reeves felt able to announce billions of pounds of new spending on public services and infrastructure. And on Thursday, April's GDP figures showed the biggest monthly drop since 2023 as Labour's tax hikes came home to roost. It is hard to think of a better summary of the mess this Government has made of its messaging and this nation. After less than a year in office, Rachel Reeves and Sir Keir Starmer appear to have run out of ideas entirely. As Paul Johnson of the Institute for Fiscal Studies has pointed out, the notion that this was a careful exercise in cutting the waste in state spending is without merit. There is no 'particular area of spending' where the Government has decided to 'withdraw', with virtually every department facing 'exactly the same cut in its administration budgets'. Moreover, the plan for dealing with the NHS – an organisation that has translated massive rises in the number of hospital doctors and nursing staff employed into an 8 per cent fall in productivity since 2019 – is to simply throw more money onto the furnace. Yet while Sir Keir and Ms Reeves feel ready to start splashing the cash on the Government's favoured causes, the underlying state of Britain's finances remains parlous, with any knock to growth likely to trigger further tax rises. The blunt truth of the matter is that this country is on an unsustainable fiscal course, and that tough decisions will need to be faced if we are to rectify this. The evidence to date is that this Labour Government is unwilling and unable to take them.
Telegraph
19 minutes ago
- Telegraph
People daring to buy a home are being taxed to oblivion
Angela Rayner was the big winner from this week's spending review, where ministers battled it out to convince the Treasury they are most deserving of the billions of pounds they want. Rayner, the Deputy Prime Minister, who is also in charge of housing, secured £39bn to fund the building of social and affordable homes. This, coupled with attempts to loosen planning red tape, is part of Labour's grand plan to build 1.5 million new homes to help ease the housing crisis that has kept a generation stuck in a renting doom loop. Britain's housebuilders will be licking their lips, said Anthony Codling of investment bank RBC Capital Markets. Oodles of cash guaranteed for a decade should, in theory, release the shackles that have been holding back building for a generation. Whether or not there are enough construction workers to actually build those houses remains to be seen. But as Codling says, while the housing market isn't fixed,'it is less broken'. Except it isn't. People who actually want to buy a property, as opposed to rent, are being milked by the state via stamp duty. This is a tax pretty much everyone agrees is terrible – it prevents people moving somewhere bigger when they have families, and downsizing when their nests are empty. Moving is not only good for society (it makes sense that people in the right-sized homes feel more settled and content), but also the economy. Every transaction generates income for conveyancers, surveyors, builders and so on. People with room to house growing families are creating the next generation of taxpayers. No wonder the birth rate is worryingly low when it's so hard for young people to buy. It seems quite clear to me that there should not be stamp duty on property purchases, but politicians are addicted to the roughly £14bn it generates per year. Labour will also be worried about what happened in the pandemic, when a stamp duty 'holiday' caused a surge in purchases and pushed prices through the roof. You can understand the caution – pumping prices further into the stratosphere doesn't help the next generation take their first steps. But Sir Keir Starmer et al went further, making it dramatically more expensive for anyone to buy a house from April – and first-time buyers were badly hit. Before April, first-time buyers were exempt from stamp duty on the first £425,000 of a home. Now that has dropped to £300,000, meaning some buyers went from paying £300 in tax, to £7,000 overnight. This betrayal is all the more cruel because this group of (largely) young people desperately getting on the property ladder, are highly likely to have voted Labour into an enormous majority just last year. Apart from the pathetic Lifetime Isa (a confusing gimmick that barely helps anyone), there is now no real financial help for people trying to own their own home. Perhaps the Government's grand plan will come off and there will be a glut of homes available to buy in a decade's time. But that doesn't help people today. Labour has chosen, again, to prioritise one group of society over another. But Sir Keir and the Chancellor should remember that they were lent votes at the last election, as the end-of-cycle Tories ran out of steam. Those aspiring to claim their own little piece of England today may not feel like giving Labour another chance next time around. Aiming to boost the number of social and affordable housing is all well and good, but achieving it by taxing the life out of those who dare to buy now is neither fair nor an election winner.
Telegraph
19 minutes ago
- Telegraph
There's no hope for the high street if even Poundland can't survive
The uncomfortable truth is that Poundland's fate remains firmly in the balance despite finding new owners seemingly willing to give it another chance, which tells you everything you need to know about the sorry state of the high street. Seriously, if a business flogging everyday household products for a quid during a time of prolonged financial hardship for millions can't be sure of its future then perhaps the high street's decline is irreversible. If that sounds excessively bleak then consider the extraordinary lengths that Poundland feels it must go to in order to stand any chance of surviving the coming months. True, the business has been saved, but at what cost? A sweeping restructuring plan is expected to result in between 150 and 200 shop closures at the cost of thousands of jobs. Landlords to a further 500 are likely to have steep rent reductions imposed upon them, meaning huge financial pain. Cash-strapped councils – already out of pocket because Poundland stopped paying business rates in recent months – face being forced to accept a freeze on business rate payments. That is, of course, if a High Court sanctions the proposals. If not, then where does that leave the chain? Such extreme measures are a reflection of how perilous Poundland's financial state has become. In December, Pepco bosses carried out their annual valuation of the business and came to the conclusion that it was worth £650m less than they previously thought. The spectacular writedown was blamed on a 'significant decline in performance' and spiralling costs. No wonder chairman Andy Bond rushed for the exit months later, despite promising that he was looking 'forward to working with' the recently appointed Borchert. Since then, trading has worsened further, leaving the chain in the grip of a shocking financial squeeze. Poundland has amassed a trail of unpaid debts, largely business rate payments, and is now being chased by a growing army of creditors – most of them local councils – in the courts over the arrears. It's a shocking indictment of how badly the business has been run in recent years. The outstanding bills are said to run into the many millions of pounds – not a great look for Pepco given that it posted more than £5bn of turnover last year, and somehow managed to find the capital to open nearly 400 new shops, including – bizarrely – 13 Poundland ones. Shouldn't the company have set aside sufficient funds to pay its creditors before embarking on such a dizzying round of expansion? The decision to dole out £30m in dividend payments in March now looks like an act of serious largesse. As an aside, surely there comes a point when the world is overwhelmed with soulless sheds selling cheap gear – much of it of questionable quality? It is a reminder that you truly do get what you pay for. Maybe that's the chief reason for Poundland's sharp decline – a familiar tale of wild overexpansion at the hands of greedy owners obsessed with conquering the world. But there has to be more than an element of fatigue about the pile 'em high, sell 'em cheap model on the part of shoppers too. There's something unavoidably miserable about the mountains of cheap tat that can be found in these places and many towns have become overwhelmed by the sheer number of supposedly different cut-price chains hawking more or less the same forgettable fayre. Poundland bosses have to accept some of the blame for its fate. Founded by Dave Dodd and Steven Smith in 1990, it was at the forefront of the 'everything for a pound' model that quickly became popular with cash-strapped shoppers. But fierce competition from the likes of other pound chains as well as Aldi and Lidl, and so-called variety retailers such as B&M and Home Bargains, persuaded management to abandon the long-held £1 price point. Poundland's chances of survival will be boosted by a new £30m loan from Pepco, yet surely some of that will disappear quickly out the door into the pockets of unpaid creditors? On the face of it, the promise of 'up to £80m in financing to support the management team's proposed restructuring and turnaround plan' sounds even more encouraging. However, the careful use of the words 'up to' stand out like a sore thumb – does that mean the funding is conditional, or worse that Gordon Brothers could restrict or even withdraw access to the facility at any moment? Even its new owners seem to harbour serious doubts about Poundland's prospects. Personally, I find myself with conflicting feelings about its future. On the one hand, the high street has become cluttered with pound-shop emporiums and their plastic Chinese junk. On the other, be careful what you wish for. One less pound store probably means yet another vape kiosk, Turkish barbers or nail studio gangmaster getting rich on the back of indentured labour.
