The fight for Aussie mobile customers has traditionally focused on price, but now it looks like mobile network coverage will be the biggest battle of all.
TPG Telecom — which includes brands TPG, Vodafone, iiNet, Felix and Lebara — has taken a swipe at Telstra’s mobile network coverage claims on the back of the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) proposal to make mobile coverage mapping standard.
The ACMA’s proposed standard would set coverage categories (good, moderate, usable and none) for telcos to use when explaining the levels of coverage and set defined signal strength thresholds. The aim is to ensure mobile network coverage maps are published in a clear and consistent manner for consumers to be able to understand what coverage is available to them across Australia.
As operator of the third largest mobile network in the country, behind Optus and Telstra, TPG has argued that the ACMA’s proposed standard would see Telstra’s claims on mobile network coverage drop significantly. According to TPG, Telstra would ‘lose’ one million square kilometres of coverage.
TPG, Optus and consumer group the Australian Communications Consumer Action Network (ACCAN) have backed the ACMA’s new standard. Telstra has agreed that it’s important to create a consistent standard for mobile network coverage maps, but argued that these rules don’t quite consider the real-world outdoor mobility experience across the country.
TPG vs Telstra — the back-and-forth over mobile coverage claims
This isn’t the first time that TPG has taken aim at Telstra’s claims about network coverage. In early 2025, TPG and Optus entered a network sharing agreement which saw the Vodafone-operated mobile network more than double from 400,000 to 1,000,000 square kilometres of coverage.
After this network expansion, Vodafone called for a regulatory investigation into Telstra’s claims about its mobile network. At the time, Vodafone alleged that Telstra had been misleading consumers into by overstating the size of its mobile network, and that much of its network coverage claims were based on coverage accessed by specialist equipment including an external antenna.
Telstra fired back by denying that its coverage claims were not based on signal strength while only using an external antenna. The telco said that it instead takes a conservative approach to testing, based on using a standard mobile phone without an external antenna during drive testing.
In a March 2026 submission to the ACMA, TPG again called out Telstra’s coverage claims. TPG alleged Telstra had confused customers over its coverage map, which uses two different ‘views’ of its network. One view shows coverage that would support a wide range of mobile phone usage; the second view shows coverage where calls, texting and web browsing are predicted to be available, but higher intensity data usage activities may be slow or inconsistent.
It’s this lack of clarity that TPG Telecom believes is part of the wider confusion, and why it claims Telstra’s advertised network coverage will decrease if the ACMA’s standard goes ahead in its current form.
In a statement provided to Canstar, a TPG Telecom spokesperson said, “ACMA is stepping in with this new standard because current telco maps aren’t comparable and over‑promise what consumers can rely on. The draft standard draws a simple line: coverage should mean a normal phone can actually connect a call, not just show a bar of signal.”
“This is exactly the issue TPG raised last year when Telstra was telling Australians their phone would work across three million square kilometres. We exposed that Telstra overinflated its coverage maps by displaying maps that relied on use of an external antenna in weak signal areas (needing costly specialised equipment), and not normal outdoor phone use.”
How can Telstra ‘lose’ its network coverage?
TPG Telecom’s claim about Telstra ‘losing’ its network coverage is up for debate. The ACMA’s proposed standard is suggesting a cut off for signal strength, by labelling ‘no coverage’ for signals measured below -115 decibel-milliwatts (dBm).
However, Telstra claims that more than 1.5 million customers use coverage below that -115 dBm measurement each month — this includes 57,000 emergency calls each year, plus 700,000 voice calls, 750,000 texts and 300TB of data is transferred each day.
Telstra doesn’t oppose a standard for coverage maps, but wants to ensure that these maps will show the real-world experience — and that customers would not ‘lose’ network coverage.
A Telstra spokesman told Canstar, "Telstra has not lost coverage. Our network works today exactly as it did yesterday. The debate is about how coverage is displayed, not whether it exists.”
“As already stated, we support one clear standard for comparable coverage maps, but it must reflect the reality of available coverage, misrepresenting working coverage doesn’t help customers make better decisions.”
But what does all of this mean for TPG, Telstra and even Optus customers?
Network coverage and reliability is vital for Australians, especially with so many regional and remote communities relying on a good mobile network performance to keep them connected. Research from Canstar conducted in 2025 found that across prepaid, SIM-only postpaid and phone-on-a-plan customers, network availability was the number one most important feature provided by their telco.
Ultimately, a standard for how the telcos show their network coverage should make it even easier for Aussies to decide on which mobile provider will suit their needs best. This would apply to not just the big three in Telstra, Optus and Vodafone (TPG Telecom), but the smaller providers that use these networks too.
Tara Donnelly, Canstar’s Managing Editor - Utilities, said, “Any changes proposed by the ACMA will help customers figure out which telco’s network will keep them connected in the places they’re likely to go. While existing coverage maps can give a general guide, they’re not a guarantee, so categorising coverage by signal strength can offer more transparency about a network’s real-world footprint.”
“Unfortunately, current maps can’t account for factors like devices used, distance from a mobile tower, how congested the network is and even weather impacts or physical obstructions, like tall buildings. All of these can play a part in signal strength and data speeds, making it hard for customers to accurately gauge coverage even in metro areas.
“If strong coverage is non-negotiable to you, network maps are a good place to start — but you can also check benchmarking and data reports from outlets including OpenSignal and Umlaut, or even crowd-sourced data submitted to websites such as Ookla’s Speedtest.”
.webp?w=640)
.webp?w=640)