UK MNOs set to claw back £200+ million in licence fees

A UK court has ruled in favour of the telcos in an on-going battle with regulator Ofcom over licence fees paid on spectrum assets between 2015 and 2017.

The legal battle concerns the process which was undertaken by Ofcom prior to increasing licence fees paid by each of the telcos for access to the airwaves. The decision to increase the licence fees was met by much criticism during the initial announcement, and you can see why.

The licence fees concern 900 MHz and 1800 MHz spectrum assets awarded to each of the telcos during a 2013 auction.

Telco Fee paid (post-2015) Fee paid (pre-2015) Difference
Vodafone £76,245,025.10 £21,865,536 £54,379,489.10
O2 £76,245,025.10 £21,865,536 £54,379,489.10
Three £44,390,398.53 £17,463,600 £26,926,798.53
EE/BT £139,823,997 £57,380,400 £82,443,597

While telcos are constantly complaining about regulation, as well as the amount paid to regulators around the world, the drastic difference in licence fees was too much to stomach here.

Following the decision to increase licence fees, EE was first to act, challenging the ruling in the courts in 2017. The other UK MNOs were quick to follow, with Ofcom being named as a defendant in the lawsuit.

“We welcome the court’s decision that finds in favour of the mobile operators,” said an O2 spokesperson. “We are however disappointed that Ofcom has been granted leave for appeal and we will strongly defend any future appeal brought by Ofcom.”

Ofcom will most likely appeal the decision.

The argument from the telcos is one which we have heard before. The more money which is demanded from Ofcom, the less which is available to invest in networks to ready the UK for the digital economy.

Following EE’s decision to challenge the changes to licence fees in 2015, a move which was supported by the other MNOs, Ofcom decided to revert back to the licence fees which were paid in the previous regime. There has been another consultation since, resulting in an increase to licence fees paid moving forward, though this case is focused on the period between 2015 and November 2017.

Aside from clawing back the payments made during this period, the parties have agreed simple interest be applied on whatever sum is due, calculated at 2% above the Bank of England base rate during the period.

For the MNOs, this news will be very much welcomed considering the financial burden they face ahead of the 5G era. With billions set to be spent rolling out the networks, a bit of financial relief will go a long way.

Don’t ignore Huawei’s ban on buying US components

While everyone is focusing on the ban on selling in the US, the ban on buying US components is a much more interesting chapter of the Huawei saga.

President Donald Trump has dropped the economic dirty bomb on China and it’s dominating the headlines. Although Huawei, or China, are not mentioned in the text, the Executive Order is clearly a move to stall progress made in the telco arena. China is mounting a challenge to the US dominance in the TMT arena, and this should be viewed as a move to combat that.

There are clearly other reasons for the order, but this should not be ignored. The security argument, albeit an accusation thrown without the burden of concrete evidence, is a factor, but never forget about the capitalist dream which underpins US society.

However, although most are focusing on Huawei’s inability to sell components, products and services in the US market, there might be an argument the ban on purchasing US components, products and services is more important, impactful and influential.

“This action by the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security, with the support of the President of the United States, places Huawei, a Chinese owned company that is the largest telecommunications equipment producer in the world, on the Entity List,” said Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross. “This will prevent American technology from being used by foreign owned entities in ways that potentially undermine US national security or foreign policy interests.”

While we will focus on the ban on purchasing US components, products and services for this article, it is worth noting the ban on Huawei selling in the US will have an impact.

Rural telcos in the US have mostly been against any ban on Chinese companies. In October 2018, Huawei made a filing with the FCC arguing its support for rural telcos is underpinning the fight against the digital divide and a ban would be disastrous for those subscribers. Michael Beehn, CEO of MobileNation, was one of those who argued against the ban, suggesting the cost-effectiveness of Huawei allowed his firm to operate. Without the advantage of nationwide scale, these organizations will always struggle when the price of networks is forced north.

While the US is a massive market, with huge opportunities to maximise profits, not being able to sell in the US is not going to have a significant impact on Huawei. Its customers are the rural telcos not the national ones. Huawei has not managed to secure any major contracts with the big four, therefore it is missing out on something which it never had. Huawei has still managed to grow sales to $105 billion without the US, therefore we believe this ban is not going to be a gamechanger.

However, it is the ban on purchasing US components, products and services which we want to focus on here.

Huawei is not outrightly banned from using US technologies and services, however, those companies who wish to work with the dominant telco vendor will have to seek permission to do so beforehand. The US can now effectively how strategically it wants to twist the knife already dug deep into Huawei’s metaphorical chest.

Although we’re not too sure how this will play out, Huawei’s business could be severely dented by this move.

Huawei recognises 92 companies around the world as core suppliers to the business. It will have thousands of suppliers for various parts of the business, but these 92 are considered the most important to the success of operations. And 33 of them are US companies.

Some are small, some are niche, some are more generic, and some are technology giants. The likes of Qualcomm, Intel and Broadcom all have interests in keeping the US/Chinese relationship sweet, though more niche companies like Skyworks Solutions, Lumentum and Qorvo have much more skin in the game. Firms like NeoPhotonics, who are reliant on Huawei for 46% of its revenues, might well struggle to survive.

Huawei will be able to survive this move, it has been preparing for such an outcome, but you have to wonder what impact it will have on its products and credibility.

HiSilicon, the Huawei-owned semiconductor business, has been ramping up its capabilities to move more of its chip supply chain in-house, while the firm has reportedly been improving the geographical diversity of its international supply chain. According to the South China Morning Post, not only has Huawei been moving more operations in-house, it has also been stockpiling US components in the event of the procurement doomsday event.

A similar ban on procuring US components, products and services was placed on ZTE last year and it almost crippled the firm. Operations were forced to a standstill due to the reliance on US technology. Huawei has never been as dependent on the US, though it seems the lessons were learned from this incident.

The big question is what impact a ban would have on the quality of its products.

Huawei might preach the promise of its own technology and the new suppliers it will seek/has sought, but there is a reason these 33 US companies were chosen in the first place. Either there is/was a financial benefit to Huawei in these relationships, or they were chosen because they were best in class.

Huawei is a commercial organization after all, it wants to make the best products for the best price. There will certainly have been compromises make during these selections, either paying more for better or sacrificing some quality for commercial benefits, and having to make changes will have an impact. Huawei, and its customers, will have fingers and toes crossed there is no material impact on the business.

The other aspect to consider is disruption to operations. ZTE found out how detrimental dependence on a single country can be, and while Huawei has mitigated some of this impact, it remains to be seen how much pain could be felt should the ban be fully enforced. Might it mean Huawei is unable to scale operations in-line with customer deployment ambitions? Could competitors benefit through these limitations? We don’t know for the moment.

The ban on selling in the US might sound better when reeling off headlines, but don’t forget about Huawei’s supply chain. We think there is much more of a risk here.

Loyalty penalties for broadband, mobile and TV finally tackled

Ofcom has introduced rules which will aim to tackle ‘penalties’ imposed on renewing customers by broadband, mobile and content providers.

As part of the new rules, providers will have to inform customers 10 to 40 days prior to the end of the customers contract, the period where financial penalties would be applied for changing providers. In the notification, customers will be told the end date of the contract, differences in contract pricing moving forward, termination conditions and availability of cheaper deals.

Although customers will still have to be proactive in contacting rival competitors for better deals on the market, the hope is a more transparent approach with spur consumers into finding the best possible option. Telcos will have a year to ensure the right business processes and technologies are in place to action the rules.

“We’re making sure customers are treated fairly, by making companies give them the information they need, when they need it,” said Lindsey Fussell, Ofcom’s Consumer Group Director.

“This will put power in the hands of millions of people who’re paying more than necessary when they’re no longer tied to a contract.”

The initial idea was put forward back in December, with the belief as many as 20 million UK consumers have passed their initial contract period and could be paying more than necessary. The Department of Digital, Culture, Media and Sport escalated the issue in February with a public consultation aimed at moving the industry towards a position where loyalty was rewarded, ending aggressive cultures towards customer acquisition.

In September last year, the UK Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB) launched a super-complaint with the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) suggesting service providers over-charging renewing customers to bring in an extra £4.1 billion a year. Research commissioned by Broadband Genie has found many over 55s could be paying too much for their broadband service but lack the knowledge or confidence to choose a new package.

“Pre-emptive alerts and information about broadband and TV contract periods are good news for consumers since many have in effect been paying a premium for their loyalty once out of contract,” said Adrian Baschnonga, EY’s Telecoms Lead Analyst. “Today’s rules pave the way for a more proactive dialogue between service providers and their customers, which can unlock higher levels of satisfaction in the long term.”

While it will certainly take some work to bed in, such rules have the potential to move attitudes in the industry to prioritise customer retention over acquisition to meet profitability objectives. Much research points to this being a more rewarding approach to business, though few in the telco space practice this theory.

“uSwitch’s research found that the aggregate cost of out-of-contract charges to telecoms consumers is £41 a second,” said Richard Neudegg, Head of Regulation at uSwitch.com. “This is why time is of the essence – everyday spent waiting for these notifications to be rolled out, another £3.5 million is overspent on these services – meaning that more than £350 million has already been wasted since the consultation closed in February.

“While it has been a long time coming, this is an important step by the regulator to address what has long been a clearly unacceptable gap in the rules, penalising consumers to the tune of millions.”

This is a step in the right direction, but it will take more to ensure telcos shift their culture. The idea of customer acquisition over retention is deeply engrained in every aspect of the business and will define how the business operates. That said, progress is progress.

Faster isn’t always better – O2

With a new Opensignal report suggesting O2 has the slowest download speeds of the UK MNOs, the telco has hit back suggesting experience is about more than just speed.

According to the report, O2 has the largest proportion of customers experiencing slower speeds across the UK. This is down to a number of different factors, one of which is how spectrum holdings have shaped 4G deployment strategies.

The image below outlines what percentage of customers are experiencing different speeds across all the UK MNOs.

Openreach 1

While this might not paint the prettiest of pictures for O2, the telco has pointed out faster is not necessarily better.

“O2’s network deployment is focussed on customer experience and demand rather than maximum capabilities of certain aspects of network performance such as download speeds,” an O2 spokesperson said. “Some of the most popular mobile applications such as playing the game Fornite or streaming high definition content from Netflix require around 3-5 Mbps.”

Such is the obsession with speed, the entire telco industry is built on the concept of ‘bigger, faster, meaner’. Performance of telcos are measured on average speeds, however, one should perhaps question what speeds are necessary to produce the desired customer experience. Sometimes 10 Mbps is all that is required.

“We continue to invest £2m every day to improve the network experience for our customers as well as using a combination of technical and customer insight to gauge how well the network is performing and how satisfied customers are with their service. For the second year running O2 recently won uSwitch’s 2019 award for best network coverage as voted by the public and continues to have among the lowest levels of churn in Europe.”

In fairness to O2, you can’t argue with the numbers. In terms of market share, O2 is the leading telco in the UK. It must be doing something right otherwise how would it maintain this position? It isn’t the cheapest, the fastest or one which can offer any sort of convergence offering.

This second image from Opensignal indicates the spectrum holdings which are being utilised by each of the telcos.

Openreach 2

As you can see O2 is heavily reliant on the sub-1 GHz bands. The advantage of this band is greater range and better indoor coverage, though there is a trade-off when it comes to speed. And while some might complain about the lack of horse-power, it doesn’t seem to matter than much at the end of the day.

In the last financial results, O2 boasted of year-on-year revenue growth of 5.3%, a total subscription increase of 2.3% and customer churn of 0.9%, the lowest in the market, it claims.

What is worth noting is this is relevant for today. This might seem like an incredibly obvious statement, but developers are constantly bringing out new applications which test the boundaries of acceptability. Video and more immersive gaming content are ensuring demands on the network, and capable speeds, are a constant threat.

For the moment, this position from O2 seems perfectly sustainable, but how long the status quo lasts remains to be seen. Speed is not necessarily the defining factor of experience today, as long as fast is fast enough.

UK rural collaboration back on the table

Getting competitors to work together for the greater good is a complex and often failed task, but the latest effort to address ‘not spots’ in the UK is holding steady.

Following a meeting with the Department of Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, the CEOs of the four major UK MNOs have agreed, in theory, on a collaboration plan which will address the not spots in the UK. For those languishing in the rural regions of the UK, this news will come as a welcome boost to digital ambitions.

However, what is worth noting is this is not a done deal. Collaboration plans have fallen apart in the past, and there is still plenty of room for error.

The plan itself is one which is built on the idea of reciprocation. Instead of forcing the telcos to open up infrastructure to competitors, an idea which would be more beneficial to certain parties, or imposing a ‘national roaming’ initiative, the telcos are discussing two separate and parallel paths forward.

Firstly, one competitor would open up infrastructure to another should the same be done in return. This would reward telcos for (1) investing in the rural communities and (2) working alongside a rival. Building a mast could compound coverage gains with reciprocal agreements. This is more for the areas where users have limited choice in providers.

Secondly, the areas which do not fall into the footprint of any telco. The four telcos are proposing the creation of a new company which would focus on building infrastructure in the not-spots. This infrastructure would be accessible to all telcos, potentially filling-in the digital voids throughout the countryside.

The new Emergency Services Network is a predictable mess

The National Audit office has delivered a scathing assessment of the UK’s latest public project failure.

The delayed Emergency Services Network (ESN) is yet another waste of public funds, according to the National Audit Office (NAO). Designed to replace the legacy Airwave system run by Motorola with a new ESN using EE’s 4G network, the whole thing was delayed last year due to reasons and the NAO has just got around to working out what this is costing Joe Public. Here’s the summary table from the NAO report.

NAO ESN summary

“The success of the Emergency Services Network is critical to the day-to-day operations of our emergency services that keep us all safe,” said Amyas Morse, head of the NAO. “The Home Office needs a comprehensive plan with a realistic timetable that properly considers risks and uncertainties. It has already been through one costly reset and is in danger of needing another unless it gets its house in order.”

How likely is that? The NAO seems pessimistic, stating that the revised target date is likely to slip, which would result in even more expenses. The NAO notes that EE seems to have raised its game since it last checked in on the project, but basic bits of technology such as the ability to communicate with aircraft are still not up to scratch. The following statements from the NAO announcement show just how unimpressed it is with how this project is being handled.

“The NAO does not think the Home Office has demonstrated that it understands the challenges emergency services face in introducing ESN, such as incurring extra costs by having to switch,” said the announcement. “Emergency services do not yet know how much money they will need to invest in infrastructure to improve the coverage or to make control rooms compatible. Some worry that this could place further financial pressure on other services they provide.

“There are also a number of commercial risks to ESN. The Home Office is currently renegotiating the programme’s main contracts with Motorola and EE, but these are behind schedule. Motorola needs to be carefully managed as it is both a main supplier to ESN and the owner of Airwave. It could therefore benefit financially from further delays if Airwave is extended. The Home Office is also yet to agree who will be responsible for running the ESN service once it is launched.

“The Home Office does not currently have the capability it needs to integrate and test ESN, which comprises multiple pieces of technology that must be made to work together. The Home Office is planning to let a new contract to provide programme advisory and delivery services in 2019.

“The Home Office expects ESN to be cheaper than Airwave in the long run, but the savings will not outweigh the costs until at least 2029. This is already seven years later than originally intended. The Home Office believes that ESN will bring £1.5 billion in financial and economic benefits by 2037. The largest economic benefit (£643 million) is  associated with increases in police productivity. Police representatives told the NAO that they had not agreed these figures with the Home Office.

“The NAO recommends that the Home Office test its overall programme plan to determine whether the new schedule for launching ESN and shutting down Airwave is achievable. The Home Office should also develop a contingency plan that sets out what it will do if the technology it is relying on does not work.”

The sad thing is that this is all entirely predictable and the only time UK public sector technology projects are surprising is when they deliver on time and on budget.

A weak France overshadowed Orange’s Q1

The telecom operator Orange reported a flat Q1, with a weak performance in its home market partially compensated by the strength in Africa and the Middle East.

Orange reported a set of stable top line numbers in its first quarter results. On Group level, the total revenue of €10.185 billion was largely flat from a year ago (-0.1%), and the EBITDAaL (earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation after lease) improved by 0.7% to reach €2.583. Due to the 8% increase in eCAPEX (“economic” CAPEX), the total operating cash flow decline by 10.2% to €951 million.

Orange 2019Q1 Group level numbers.pdf

Commenting on the results, Stéphane Richard, Chairman and CEO of the Orange Group, said that “the Group succeeded in maintaining its high quality commercial performance in spite of a particularly challenging competitive context notably in our two principal countries of France and Spain. Our strategy is paying off since EBITDAal is continuing to grow while revenues remain stable, allo wing us to reaffirm our 2019 objectives”

On geography level, France, its home and biggest market is going through a weak period. Despite registering net gain in the number of customers, the total income dropped by 1.8% to €4.408 billion, the first quarterly decline in two years. The company blamed competition, a one-off promotion of digital reading offer towards the end of the quarter, and “a weaker performance on high-end equipment sales in the 1st quarter of this year”. The move to “Convergence” was positive, but not fast enough to offset the lose in narrowband customers. The competition pressure is still visible. The Sosh package (home broadband + mobile) Orange rolled out to combat Free is gaining weight among its broadband customers, which resulted in a decline of revenues despite the growth in customer base.

Orange’s European markets, including Spain and the rest of Europe, reported modest growth, with strength in Poland (+2.6%) and Belgium & Luxembourg (+3.8%) offset by a weaker Central Europe (-1.9%). The bright spot was Africa and Middle East, which registered a 5.3% growth to reach €1.349 billion revenue, taking the market’s total revenue above Spain and just marginally behind the rest of Europe. The company’s drive to extend its 4G coverage in Africa is paying off, with mobile data service contributing to 2/3 of its mobile growth. Orange Money also saw strong enthusiasm, with the revenue up by 29% and total number of monthly active users totalling 15.5 million.

Both the Q1 results and outlook to the rest of the year spelled mixed messages for the wider telecom market and Orange’s suppliers, but negatives look to outweigh positives. On the consumer market side, the slowdown of high-end smartphone sales and prolonged replacement cycle has once again been demonstrated in the weak numbers in France. On the network market side, Orange predicts more efficiency. This includes both the network sharing deal signed with Vodafone Spain, which is expected to deliver €800 million savings over ten years, and an overall reduction in CAPEX this year.

As the CEO said, “while the level of eCapex for this quarter is higher, it should reduce slightly for 2019 as a whole, as predicted, excluding the effect of the network sharing agreement with Vodafone in Spain announced on 25 April.” This means, to achieve the annual target of reduced CAPEX, the spending will drop much faster in the rest of year. There is no timetable to start 5G auction in France yet, but it will be safe to say that any expectations of 5G spending extravaganza will be misplaced.

On the positive side, Orange has seen its efforts to diversify its business gaining traction, especially in IoT and smart homes. But these areas, fast as the growth may be, only make a small portion of Orange’s total business.

Apple capitulates to end war with Qualcomm

Qualcomm and Apple agreed to settle all the ongoing litigations with the iPhone maker paying the chipset maker an undisclosed amount and signing a six-year licensing agreement.

On Monday, Qualcomm and Apple went to court over the allegation that Qualcomm has been abusing its monopoly position to over-charge for its chips. The stakes could have run up to tens of billions of dollars, with the OEMs Foxconn and Pegatron already demanding compensation of $9 billion dating back to 2013. The case at the Southern District Court of California in San Diego was meant to last for five weeks.

On Tuesday, the two companies released a brief statement to announce a settlement. “Qualcomm and Apple today announced an agreement to dismiss all litigation between the two companies worldwide. The settlement includes a payment from Apple to Qualcomm. The companies also have reached a six-year license agreement, effective as of April 1, 2019, including a two-year option to extend, and a multiyear chipset supply agreement.”

This is definitely good news for the two companies especially for Qualcomm, and good for the industry and consumers. Specifically, for Qualcomm it means its business model will remain intact and the company can put an end to a multi-year legal saga; for Apple, in addition to avoiding the punitive $31 billion penalty, this settlement will be able to quicken its steps to launch a 5G iPhone, making up the gap already expanding between itself and the leading pack.

A few hours later, Intel announced that it intends “to exit the 5G smartphone modem business and complete an assessment of the opportunities for 4G and 5G modems in PCs, internet of things devices and other data-centric devices. Intel will also continue to invest in its 5G network infrastructure business. The company will continue to meet current customer commitments for its existing 4G smartphone modem product line, but does not expect to launch 5G modem products in the smartphone space, including those originally planned for launches in 2020.”

It must have been a blow to Intel’s mobile ambition, especially after it announced only late last year that it would bring the launch of its first 5G modem forward by half a year to the second half of this year, an act to prove the doubters wrong. That originally planned 5G modem to be launched in 2020 referred to in the announcement, presumably a second generation, was supposed to power the first 5G iPhone, after Apple all but officially declared that it would enter into an exclusive relationship with Intel.

Putting the two things together it may be reasonable to infer that Apple agreed to settle after it had realised that it does not have other options than coming back to Qualcomm for the supply of 5G modems (assuming Intel had updated Apple about its imminent decision to withdraw from the market).

In addition to leaning in on Intel, Apple has also been reported to be strengthening its in-house modem development capability, ultimately aiming to rid itself of reliance on external suppliers. Based on the terse announcement released together with Qualcomm, it looks Apple does not believe the home-grown modems will be good enough to compete with Qualcomm in the next few years. Huawei is another supplier that has launched its own 5G modem, but it may be safe to estimate that the chance of Apple going for Huawei chips is slim.

In keeping with the normal practice of settlement cases like this, the companies did not disclose the amount Apple will pay. However, Qualcomm updated the SEC shortly after the settlement announcement was made, as the settlement would have material impact on the earnings. The company expected an EPS incremental of about $2 “as product shipments ramp” without giving a specific timespan. As a reference, in the quarter ending 30 December 2018, Qualcomm delivered an EPS of $0.87 on the back of a total revenue of $4.8 billion. Therefore, assuming Qualcomm’s operational efficiency remains largely constant, the payment Apple will make could run into the $10 billion range.

Payment aside, there must be some soul-searching going on inside Apple, including by Tim Cook, the CEO, who came from a supply chain management background: how could Apple have let itself be cornered so badly in the first place? It’s hard to view this as anything other than complete humiliation for Apple, especially when you consider how aggressively it pursued this case.

On top of the millions it will have paid to lawyers Apple’s negotiating position in arriving at this settlement, considering what was widely assumed about its 5G modem situation, must have been very weak. So it’s quite possible Apple has ended up paying considerably more for Qualcomm’s chips than it would have if it had never initiated this war. Having said that, Apple’s share price seems completely unaffected by the news, probably indicating offsetting relief that it’s back in the 5G game. Qualcomm’s share’s however, surged 23% on the news.

French council gets sick of waiting for MNOs so goes it alone

The local government in Eure-et-Loir has seemingly got tired of waiting for the MNOs to end not-spots in the countryside, deciding to construct its own masts in the region.

Announced via Twitter, the local authority approved funding for the ‘Eure-et-Loir Mobile Networks’ project in an effort to bridge the digital divide. The scheme will create a new company, which will have a budget of €10 million and aim for 100% geographical 4G coverage, through building its own mobile infrastructure.

“The @eurelien department is the first in France to create a project company to accelerate the deployment of the #4G throughout its territory, for 2021,” Eure-et-Loir Department Advisor Remi Martial said on Twitter.

In claiming to be the first Department in France to take such action, with the move somewhat undermining government plans to tackle the rural connectivity problem. Announced back in January 2018, the ‘New Deal Programme’ was designed to tackle not-spots across the country, though it appears the Eure-et-Loir local authority has little confidence in the scheme.

Two firms bid to be part of the project, with ATC winning. ATC will now enter into a public-private-investment scheme with the Eure-et-Loir authority to improve mobile coverage. Reports have previously suggested the region is short of 100 mobile masts to provide adequate 4G coverage.

When you consider the environment, it starts to make sense why the Eure-et-Loir region is not necessarily a priority for the MNOs. With a population of 432,967 (2013) it is the 55th largest region across France, with a population density of 74 citizens per km2. Compared to Paris, 21,234 per km2 or Hauts-de-Seine, 9,042 per km2 the business case is less convincing.

That said, should the hard work be done for the MNOs, renting space to place mobile equipment is a small price to pay for meeting government demands and improving coverage. With the vast majority of capital being allocated into civil engineering aspects of the project, few will complain, even if it does give the impression of mediocrity.

 

EE wins the grand slam in latest OpenSignal UK report

The latest OpenSignal report shows EE has come on top in all five categories, though the winning margin in video experience was narrow.

The latest report on the UK’s mobile network experience published by the network rating firm OpenSignal pitted the country’s four nationwide operators against each other on five measurements: 4G Availability, Video Experience, Download Speed, Upload Speed, and Latency. EE has won every category.

Although EE has been in a leading position in delivering mobile experience, the competition was closer in previous OpenSignal assessments. A year ago EE and Vodafone tied in two out of four categories. Half a year ago, Vodafone was still on par with EE on delivering the lowest latency. But the BT-owned operator has opened up a gap over its competitors in most measurements lately.

The one area that EE was not a comfortable winner was video experience. As we reported earlier, higher download speed does not necessarily deliver the best video experience, according to OpenSignal’s analysis. Other technologies including traffic management and latency minimisation also feature in the evaluation. Therefore although EE’s download speed is more than 40% faster than its closest competition (Vodafone) and it also has registered the lowest latency, EE only marginally beat Vodafone in video experience. It actually came the last if video experience had been judged on 3G only (3 came on top). But thanks to the superior 4G availability EE customers would not need to fall back on 3G much when streaming video.

The report also provides regional comparison, with the country broken down to twelve regions: Eastern, East Midlands, London, North East, Northern Ireland, North West, Scotland, South East, South West, Wales, West Midlands, Yorkshire and Humber. The report dismissed the so-called “North/South divide” as a myth, with some of the “top scores appearing in the North East, North West, West Midlands and Yorkshire and Humber regions”. In an earlier report measuring 4G speed, the firm also noted that London was only mid-table, with the highest 4G download speeds registered in places like Bristol, Cardiff and Birmingham.

Here are the countrywide results:

OpenSignal_chart 4G Availability April 2019

OpenSignal_chart Video Experience April 2019

OpenSignal_chart Download Speed April 2019

OpenSignal_chart Upload Speed April 2019

OpenSignal_chart Latency April 2019