Everything Everywhere bringing 4G to UK in September

Will the mobile phone conglomerate gain a valuable Apple boost?

Everything Everywhere, the mobile phone consortium made up of T-Mobile and Orange, has won approval from Ofcom to roll out an LTE service (more commonly, though perhaps incorrectly), known as "4G") on unused areas of its spectrum a year ahead of the official auction for LTE licenses.

The group is making the most of the fact that it, unlike its major UK competitors, has spare capacity on the 1800mhz portion of the spectrum, and will be launching the high-speed service on 11 September. Vodafone, O2 and Three have all expressed anger at Ofcom's move, with Vodafone giving a strident comment to The Verge's Vlad Savov:

We are frankly shocked that Ofcom has reached this decision. The regulator has shown a careless disregard for the best interests of consumers, businesses and the wider economy through its refusal to properly regard the competitive distortion created by allowing one operator to run services before the ground has been laid for a fully competitive 4G market.

The line is an odd one. Allowing the only regulator with the technical capacity to improve their service to do so seems unlikely to be a net negative for the public at large. Far worse would be Ofcom artificially holding back the state of British technology just for perceived "fairness".

That's not to say Vodafone don't have anything to be angry about; the fact is that it could have moved just as fast as Everything Everywhere if the glacial pace of the digital switchover weren't holding up the spectrum it needs.

But why quite so mad? Well, Savov points out one very interesting point when it comes to the timing of Everything Everywhere's roll-out. They'll turn on the service on 11 September; on 12 September, Apple is expected to announce a new iPhone with LTE technology.

Savov writes:

The market edge that EE gains over its competitors by being first with fast mobile broadband would, in such a scenario, be exponentially magnified. Two of the hurdles to any carrier seeing rapid adoption — educating users about the benefits of the new technology and making them see value in paying a higher price — are central to Apple's strength as a company. In piggybacking on the prospective iPhone announcement, EE would enjoy the halo effect of having Apple conduct the LTE education sessions in advance, plus the comfort of knowing it can charge a premium without consumers scoffing (too much).

I certainly recall switching to O2 to get the original iPhone back when it was exclusive to that network; whether people will switch at the same rate to get a new iPhone on a faster network is something we will find out next month, it appears.

4G iPads sit in an Apple Store in Covent Garden. Photograph: Getty Images

Alex Hern is a technology reporter for the Guardian. He was formerly staff writer at the New Statesman. You should follow Alex on Twitter.

Getty Images.
Show Hide image

Why relations between Theresa May and Philip Hammond became tense so quickly

The political imperative of controlling immigration is clashing with the economic imperative of maintaining growth. 

There is no relationship in government more important than that between the prime minister and the chancellor. When Theresa May entered No.10, she chose Philip Hammond, a dependable technocrat and long-standing ally who she had known since Oxford University. 

But relations between the pair have proved far tenser than anticipated. On Wednesday, Hammond suggested that students could be excluded from the net migration target. "We are having conversations within government about the most appropriate way to record and address net migration," he told the Treasury select committee. The Chancellor, in common with many others, has long regarded the inclusion of students as an obstacle to growth. 

The following day Hammond was publicly rebuked by No.10. "Our position on who is included in the figures has not changed, and we are categorically not reviewing whether or not students are included," a spokesman said (as I reported in advance, May believes that the public would see this move as "a fix"). 

This is not the only clash in May's first 100 days. Hammond was aggrieved by the Prime Minister's criticisms of loose monetary policy (which forced No.10 to state that it "respects the independence of the Bank of England") and is resisting tougher controls on foreign takeovers. The Chancellor has also struck a more sceptical tone on the UK's economic prospects. "It is clear to me that the British people did not vote on June 23 to become poorer," he declared in his conference speech, a signal that national prosperity must come before control of immigration. 

May and Hammond's relationship was never going to match the remarkable bond between David Cameron and George Osborne. But should relations worsen it risks becoming closer to that beween Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling. Like Hammond, Darling entered the Treasury as a calm technocrat and an ally of the PM. But the extraordinary circumstances of the financial crisis transformed him into a far more assertive figure.

In times of turmoil, there is an inevitable clash between political and economic priorities. As prime minister, Brown resisted talk of cuts for fear of the electoral consequences. But as chancellor, Darling was more concerned with the bottom line (backing a rise in VAT). By analogy, May is focused on the political imperative of controlling immigration, while Hammond is focused on the economic imperative of maintaining growth. If their relationship is to endure far tougher times they will soon need to find a middle way. 

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.