A company heralding changes: Vodafone has changed the acquisition narrative in the UK and around the world, says ALEX BRUMMER

The fight has been long. But Vodafone has changed the narrative on acquisitions in the UK and around the world.

It has moved beyond the premise that having more competitors in a market must be better for consumers.

Despite open opposition from its rivals, it convinced the rigorous Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) that three big players in mobile telecommunications could be better than four.

The approval of Vodafone’s £16.5bn deal with CK Hutchison’s Three network in the UK comes with a price. In the technology and telecoms space, where innovation and investment are everything, Vodafone boss Margherita Della Valle convinced the CMA that putting £11bn on the table to improve combined networks would force other mega operators, EE and BT-owned O2, to up their game. Better networks could lead to better deals for businesses and consumers.

No one will see better and faster mobile phone coverage today. The CMA has given Vodafone eight years to implement changes.

In the past, improving mobile coverage meant more antennas and that will continue. In more remote areas of the UK, such as the TV-popular Shetlands, satellites are seen as a game changer.

Vodafone is making its own investments in satellites, but it is Elon Musk, as we know from Ukraine, who holds the Trump card.

Vodafone has been a serial disappointment for shareholders. Having pocketed more than £100bn from the sale of Verizon Wireless in 2013, it is a small force. Investors have been inundated with buybacks and dividends, but decision-making at the top has been poor.

Doubling down on Germany’s sclerotic economy has been disastrous. A legislative change there that freed up the cable sector left Vodafone with a £400m loss.

Della Valle believes the company is now in a better position.

New management and new technological equipment closer to the consumer will turn Germany into a growing market. Vodafone is a pioneer in Africa and in the laying of submarine cables.

The UK is now seen as a great opportunity. But the company is likely to never again be the £200bn heavyweight created by Chris Gent in his pioneering days.

Cryptocrime

Is it time to accept the humility cake and admit that we are totally wrong about cryptocurrencies? In the weeks since Donald Trump was elected, cryptocurrencies have skyrocketed, pushing the price of bitcoin to over $100,000.

The president-elect and his new best friend Musk, a dogecoin fanatic, have vowed to eliminate the roughly 40 regulations imposed by Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) chief Gary Gensler.

Trump has chosen Paul Atkins, a former SEC official, as his replacement. He is on record as believing in deregulation and vowing to end the SEC’s stance against cryptocurrencies. None of this alters the fundamental arguments.

I recognize that many people, including readers, may have made money from cryptocurrencies. But bitcoin and its rivals have limited use as a form of exchange and are too volatile to be a store of value, as well as consuming large amounts of energy.

It is almost impossible for ordinary mortals to understand cryptocurrencies as they are mined using uncrackable encryption.

As with subprime mortgages before the Great Financial Crisis, it is possible to bundle dubious assets and create derivative products, including exchange-traded funds, and make them look respectable.

However, the only practical users of digital currencies appear to be scammers and terrorists. This week, the National Crime Agency uncovered a multimillion-dollar scheme run from London, Moscow and Dubai that allows drug traffickers to evade sanctions. How did he hide? Crypto.

Improbable mission

The Department of Science has revealed Government support for 100 new discovery projects, including neurological pathways for prosthetic arms, which could help strokes.

The University of Southampton is implementing radar to recognize sign language. This could be integrated into virtual systems like Amazon’s Alexa.

The £80 million will make a difference.

But it falls well short of the £22bn spent on the NHS and the need for an AI and R&D ‘Marshall plan’ that could boost Keir Starmer’s promise of a mission-driven economy.