ACCC Blocks Vodafone + TPG merger

Accidentally published a day early but decision is not unexpected.
Consumers would have been worse off imho had the merger been allowed.

https://www.news.com.au/technology/accc-rejects-telco-merger…

Seems they not taking it lying down:

Vodafone Hutchison Australia (VHA) has announced that both it and TPG plan to take legal action in Federal Court as a response to the ACCC's decision of opposition.

“VHA respects the ACCC process, but we believe the merger with TPG will bring very real benefits to consumers. We have therefore decided that VHA should, together with TPG, pursue approval of the merger through the Federal Court," said VHA Chief Executive Officer Iñaki Berroeta

"VHA is an established mobile business with less than one per cent of the fixed broadband market, while TPG is the second largest fixed broadband player with no mobile network," said Mr Berroeta.

"Australia’s mobile market has delivered some of the best outcomes for consumers of any country in the OECD. The merger provides a unique opportunity for VHA and TPG to combine their complementary assets. The merger would create an entity that can compete more aggressively in this highly competitive market than either VHA or TPG could on their own. It is disappointing that the ACCC does not see it this way."

Related Stores

Vodafone
Vodafone
TPG
TPG

Comments

  • +1

    This is a surprise, even for someone who used to work at the ACCC!

    I had no involvement in this case personally. The ACCC started getting involved after I had already left, but I think it's a really interesting case. My feeling was that the merger would have been allowed to go ahead as it would have allowed TPG/Vodafone to compete with Telstra and Optus.

    Basically, as it stands, I think what will happen in the long run is that we'll see the decline of Vodafone (they've actually never made a profit since starting their operations here in Australia and luckily they didn't get into the landline business early on, they did overseas and got hammered - funny because they're starting to try and offer NBN products now). TPG has been gaining market share significantly and I suspect that most of that share is coming from Optus, given that they're basically playing the role that Optus were playing around 20 years ago (i.e. the cheaper underdog). Vodafone really has nothing more than their towers right now, the fact that, if the merger were to go ahead, the new company would have been called TPG Telecom really says it all about the importance of Vodafone in all of this.

    The article does rightly point out that TPG has been quite aggressive in rolling out their mobile division and that would have been accelerated significantly if they were allowed to merge with Vodafone, but that obviously will not happen now. They are already the second largest landline service provider in Australia and are only going to grow moving forward.

    My take on all of this is that the two shot themselves in the foot. Basically the reason why the ACCC didn't let them merge would have been because Vodafone has been trying to get a foot into the fixed line market with their NBN services (which won't do well) and TPG is aggressively expanding their mobile division (which is currently pretty small).

    • +2

      the decline of Vodafone (they've actually never made a profit since starting their operations here in Australia

      That's called tax evasion, my friend.
      https://thenewdaily.com.au/money/finance-news/2019/03/12/top…

      • -6

        They worked at the ACCC.

        This means they probably still believe in neoliberal and Chicago school economic theory instead of reality where these things just benefit the wealthiest at the expense of everybody else.

        • This means they probably still believe in neoliberal and Chicago school economic theory instead of reality where these things just benefit the wealthiest at the expense of everybody else.

          What do you mean? Economists at the ACCC are microeconomists who study things like auction theory, mechanism design, industrial organisation…etc., not macroeconomists, so adherence to any macroeconomic school of thought - neoclassical, Keynesian or otherwise, is completely irrelevant.

        • As if this dudes not on penalty box

      • Yes, they are tax evading, but it doesn't change the broader point which is that they're not really competitive with Telstra and Optus. They spent huge amounts of money putting up cellular towers, they have a much smaller market share and for every call they make, they have to pay fixed line fees to Telstra.

        On top of that, in Australia, calls are paid by where the call initiates, not where the call terminates, i.e. if someone on Vodafone calls someone on Telstra or Optus, Vodafone has to pay a fee to Telstra or Optus for terminating the call on their lines (not the other way around, which is the UK system). This is actually quite bad for competition because it biases against the small guy. When most of their calls are terminating on other networks, they're paying a lot in termination fees.

  • +3

    Consumers would of have been worse off.

    Otherwise, a good post. 7/10

    • -1

      Typed on mobile lol
      But thanks for pointing out my error.

    • -4

      Living English is fine with would of

  • -3

    The ACCC are not doing what is better for consumers and why are you spreading public relations garbage written for morons?

    • +2

      Well I guess based on your usual comments you would know when something is written for morons. I guess my not being one means I didn’t pick up on it. Thanks for enlightening us.

    • +1

      Don’t they say it takes one to know one :)

  • I shall say the same.

    Someone is protecting Telstra.

    https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/424706

  • +1

    This was a shock to my friends at TPG.
    In my opinion, TPG overspent on spectrum to get a seat at the mobile table and push Vodafone into the merger. That TPG was prepared to go ahead with 49.9% of the final company says all you need to know about who had the power in the merger (although in reality, it was neither - both had plenty to lose).

    Merging makes good sense for TPG and Voda, and probably harms the average consumer a little over time, as there are one fewer price driven competitor. Certainly the stock market believed combining the two made Telstra's future earnings billions higher.
    Without the merger, TPG will have to spend more than they want to get a return on the spectrum they own, and Voda will continue to be last cab off the rank, vulnerable to TPG undercutting mobile data where they build network and competing against Telstra and Optus for voice customers.

    • Certainly the stock market believed combining the two made Telstra's future earnings billions higher.

      How so?

      • I'm guessing the steep decline (over 2% in less than 15 minutes) in the Telstra share price that coincided with the early release of the ACCC advice, with nothing else really explaining such a movement indicated that not combining TPG and Vodafone was a 'bad deal' for Telstra.

        • Yes, when the merger was announced Telstra stock climbed, and fell again when it was refused.

  • +2

    They were both relying on cheap 5G hardware from Huawei, and we know how that went.

  • Meanwhile Telstra gouge their customers (especially pensioners) on a regular basis, so WTF?

Login or Join to leave a comment