The Glade 4.0 https://gladerebooted.net/ |
|
U.S. seeks to block AT&T and T-Mobile merger https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=7033 |
Page 1 of 2 |
Author: | Lex Luthor [ Wed Aug 31, 2011 10:45 am ] |
Post subject: | U.S. seeks to block AT&T and T-Mobile merger |
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-3 ... erger.html Quote: The U.S. government sued to block AT&T Inc. (T)’s proposed $39 billion acquisition of T-Mobile USA Inc., saying the deal would “substantially lessen competition” in the wireless market. AT&T shares fell as much as 5 percent. In the complaint filed today in federal court in Washington, the U.S. is seeking a declaration that Dallas-based AT&T’s takeover of T-Mobile, a unit of Deutsche Telekom AG (DTE), would violate U.S. antitrust law. The U.S. also asked for a court order blocking any arrangement implementing the deal. “AT&T’s elimination of T-Mobile as an independent, low- priced rival would remove a significant competitive force from the market,” the U.S. said in its filing. Should regulators reject the deal, which would create the biggest U.S. wireless carrier, AT&T would have to pay Deutsche Telekom $3 billion in cash. It would also provide T-Mobile USA with wireless spectrum in some regions and reduced charges for calls into AT&T’s network, for a total package valued at as much as $7 billion, Deutsche Telekom said this month. Philipp Schindera, a spokesman at Bonn-based Deutsche Telekom, declined to immediately comment on the filing. Jessica Smith, a Justice Department spokeswoman, declined to comment on the suit. Michael Balmoris, an AT&T spokesman, didn’t immediately respond to an e-mail and phone calls seeking comment. Shares Drop AT&T fell $1.02, or 3.4 percent, to $28.60 at 10:55 a.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading after declining as much as $1.49. Deutsche Telekom American depositary receipts dropped as much as 6.4 percent, to $12.93. The purchase of Bellevue, Washington-based T-Mobile would combine the second- and fourth-largest carriers to create a new market leader ahead of No. 1 Verizon Wireless. The new company would have dwarfed current No. 3 carrier Sprint Nextel Corp., which argued against the deal. Overland Park, Kansas-based Sprint’s shares jumped as much as 9.9 percent. Some U.S. lawmakers have said the deal may reduce competition and raise consumer costs. The Federal Communications Commission has given itself more time to study new data presented by AT&T. Economic Models AT&T in a July 25 filing at the FCC submitted new economic models that it said showed the merger would lower prices and increase service in large metropolitan markets. The models offer “further detailed support” for arguments that the merger will lessen strains on the company’s wireless network, lower costs and increase quality, AT&T said in the filing. “Given the size of the cancellation fee that was negotiated into his agreement, AT&T has the incentive to fight,” said Andrew Gavil, a law professor at Howard University in Washington. “The fact that the Justice Department is challenging the deal doesn’t mean they won’t negotiate a resolution at some point.” The case is U.S. v. AT&T Inc., 11-01560, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Washington). To contact the reporter on this story: Tom Schoenberg in Washington at tschoenberg@bloomberg.net Any thoughts on this? I think it is probably a good thing if they are blocked from merging. Without as much competition, they would have less of a reason to improve infrastructure and innovate. |
Author: | Kaffis Mark V [ Wed Aug 31, 2011 10:55 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Lol. "may reduce competition and raise consumer costs." I'm rooting against the merger, as I'm quite satisfied with TMO as my carrier. Now, if only they'd build/upgrade about 2 more towers on the I-75 corridor at the north end of their Dayton HSPDA+ coverage, I'd literally have zero complaints. In contrast, I switched away from ATT because of their data plan policies, lack of no-contract service, and relative cost. |
Author: | Midgen [ Wed Aug 31, 2011 10:57 am ] |
Post subject: | |
I think if I were a betting man, I would probably be betting on the merger going through. This just starts the discussion on 'concessions'. Ultimately, the DOJ (Attorney General's office) answers directly to Barack Obama, who is about to start doing anything and everything he can to get re-elected. The final decision will be more about Obama getting re-elected than it will be about whats best for consumers... |
Author: | Kaffis Mark V [ Wed Aug 31, 2011 10:59 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Also, I find it amusing that AT&T's arguing that it will increase the quality of their service. Well, duh, you're buying T-Mobile to get their bandwith. But what will it do to T-Mobile customers? And, if the AT&T customers are dissatisfied with the quality available to them through your own offerings, they're free to switch TO T-Mobile. That's the "reduce competition" part... |
Author: | Midgen [ Wed Aug 31, 2011 11:11 am ] |
Post subject: | |
I guess I should go on record saying that I'm ultimately very surprised by this filing. I never thought this would happen. And while it is encouraging, it doesn't mean the merger won't go through. The DOJ has just filed suit to stop the merger in it's current state. The merger could very well still go through. It would just mean that AT&T would have to make some as-yet-undetermined concessions (which was pretty much a given anyway). I'm fairly pessimistic, and am camped firmly in the "I'll believe it when I see it" camp. Also, if the merger doesn't go through, there is still a cloud hanging over T-Mobile USA, as Duetch Telecom has shown that they no longer have interest in their US entity. When they acquired VoiceStream in 2001, they milked it of all of their cash profits until the economy turned and the company was no longer profitable. Now they want to divest, rather than re-invest or at least just weather the storm. Ultimately T-Mobile is not in any condition to compete nationally with AT&T on a 'number of customers' basis. It's very difficult to run a nationally competitive network with a fraction of the customer base. The only other merger partner would be Sprint, which is in a similar situation. Unfortunately, from a technology standpoint the two companies (T-Mobile USA and Sprint) are far from compatible. There might be some benefit to merging customer bases into one larger pool to save a little money on billing, etc... the chaos that would ensue would dramatically slow any positive momentum either company has in terms of advancing technologically or geographically. |
Author: | Midgen [ Wed Aug 31, 2011 12:42 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
This statement contains more common sense than I can remember coming from any Federal Government Agency...ever... If they stick to this, I will honestly be impressed. As quoted from this article.. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-3 ... erger.html Department of Justice wrote: AT&T had not demonstrated that the proposed transaction promised any efficiencies that would be sufficient to outweigh the transaction’s substantial adverse impact on competition and consumers,” the department said in the statement. “AT&T could obtain substantially the same network enhancements that it claims will come from the transaction if it simply invested in its own network without eliminating a close competitor.”
|
Author: | Kaffis Mark V [ Wed Aug 31, 2011 12:48 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Lol. Wow. In fact, it would get more network enhancements if it did that, because it wouldn't be burdening the more robust network with more users at the same time. Add capacity to the national infrastructure, overall quality gets better. Reorganize who owns what, and you just average out the quality, making some better and others worse. |
Author: | Midgen [ Wed Aug 31, 2011 1:26 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
I suspect AT&T got wind of this announcement yesterday, and pre-emptively released a statement saying that the merger would "Create 5000 NEW jobs"... this on a day when our beloved President is set to announce his 'jobs' plan.... This was released basically at midnight last night http://www.att.com/gen/press-room?pid=2 ... |financial AT&T News Release wrote: AT&T Inc. (NYSE: T) today committed that after closing its proposed merger with T-Mobile USA, it will bring back 5,000 wireless call center jobs to the United States that today are outsourced to other countries. Today’s commitment results from AT&T developing detailed analysis focused specifically on identifying opportunities with the T-Mobile merger to bring good-paying wireless call center jobs back to the United States. In addition to bringing jobs back, AT&T committed that the merger will not result in any job losses for U.S.-based wireless call center employees of T-Mobile USA or AT&T, who are on the payroll when the merger closes. The 5,000 new wireless call center jobs at AT&T will offer among the nation’s most highly competitive wages and benefits. AT&T, which has not yet determined where in the U.S. the new jobs will be located, is the nation’s largest employer of full-time union employees and the only unionized major U.S. wireless carrier. “At a time when many Americans are struggling and our economy faces significant challenges, we’re pleased that the T-Mobile merger allows us to bring 5,000 jobs back to the United States and significantly increase our investment here,” said Randall Stephenson, AT&T Chairman and CEO. “This merger and today’s commitment are good for our employees, our customers and our country.” Today’s announcement represents the largest commitment by an individual American company to bring jobs back to the U.S. since the economic crisis began in 2008. Also, AT&T has committed as part of the T-Mobile merger to increase its U.S. infrastructure investment by more than $8 billion. According to an analysis by the Economic Policy Institute that was commissioned by the Communications Workers of America, AT&T’s increased investment is estimated to produce up to approximately 96,000 new U.S. jobs. AT&T said today’s jobs commitment does not change its previous guidance on the expected overall merger synergies. Beyond the jobs created, AT&T’s acquisition of T-Mobile USA provides a fast, efficient and certain solution to the impending exhaustion of wireless spectrum in many markets, which limits both companies’ ability to meet the ongoing explosive customer demand for mobile broadband. The uniquely complementary nature of AT&T and T-Mobile’s network assets will allow the combined company to add wireless network capacity – the functional equivalent of new spectrum – sooner than any other alternative. This additional wireless network capacity will enable AT&T to offer better service — fewer dropped and blocked calls, and faster data speeds. Plus, the economic scale, additional spectrum and other benefits resulting from the merger will enable AT&T to deliver high-speed 4G LTE mobile broadband service to 97 percent of the U.S. population, or 55 million more Americans than it would without the merger. Reaching 97 percent of the population with LTE will create a much more extensive and robust mobile broadband platform that will fuel growth and investment throughout the country. The benefits of the AT&T and T-Mobile merger have been recognized by numerous elected officials throughout the country, including 27 governors, more than 100 mayors, 11 state attorneys general, 79 Democratic Members of the U.S. House of Representatives and more than 150 chambers of commerce from 40 states, as well as a dozen labor unions and dozens of high-tech companies, such as Facebook, Microsoft, Yahoo! and Oracle And here is a link to the full text of the DOJ statement announcing the filing, which was released this morning (after the AT&T "Jobs" announcement). http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2011/Augu ... -1118.html Edit: And here is the LOL-Worthy disclaimer at the bottom of that AT&T press release AT&T wrote: Cautionary Language Concerning Forward-Looking Statements
Information set forth in this news release contains financial estimates and other forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties, and actual results may differ materially. In addition to these factors, there are risks and uncertainties associated with the T-Mobile business, the pendency of the T-Mobile acquisition and the ability to realize the benefits of the integration of the T-Mobile business. A discussion of factors that may affect future results is contained in AT&T's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. AT&T disclaims any obligation to update or revise statements contained in this news release based on new information or otherwise. |
Author: | darksiege [ Wed Aug 31, 2011 1:59 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
Kaffis Mark V wrote: I'm rooting against the merger, as I'm quite satisfied with TMO as my carrier. This Oh and Sprint can drink a jar of monkey spunk |
Author: | Lenas [ Wed Aug 31, 2011 3:01 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
Kaffis Mark V wrote: Also, I find it amusing that AT&T's arguing that it will increase the quality of their service. Well, duh, you're buying T-Mobile to get their bandwith. But what will it do to T-Mobile customers? And, if the AT&T customers are dissatisfied with the quality available to them through your own offerings, they're free to switch TO T-Mobile. That's the "reduce competition" part... Well, since T-Mo's handsets will no longer work after the merger (AT&T is dedicating all of TMo's spectrum to data), we'll all need to get new phones. I'm happy with T-mobile as a company, but it's frustrating that my signal sucks any time I've got a roof over my head. They're stuck with a bad spectrum. I want this merger to go through only because it'll probably get me a new phone on the cheap. |
Author: | Midgen [ Wed Aug 31, 2011 3:05 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Well, to be clear, there would be no 'hard cut'.... they would migrate users by attrition (when your contract is up for renewal or you upgrade your handset). Once you are on AT&T's network you may or may not still have your indoor coverage problem, but you will certainly be on the same crappy, iPhone infested network that all of the existing AT&T customers are on. |
Author: | FarSky [ Wed Aug 31, 2011 3:21 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
T-Mobile was great, but they don't have the iPhone. Ergo, I have AT&T. Haven't been terribly displeased with them. The only problem I had with T-Mobile (outside of their lack of iPhones) was Lenas' aforementioned indoor coverage problem. Which was pretty seriously, but...*shrug* |
Author: | Lenas [ Wed Aug 31, 2011 3:25 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
I'll give it to T-mobile, though, their $49.99 unlimited plan is the ****. |
Author: | Kaffis Mark V [ Wed Aug 31, 2011 4:44 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
Lenas wrote: I'll give it to T-mobile, though, their $49.99 unlimited plan is the ****. Yeah. Let's hope that regulators are using the TMO side as the benchmark for improving service quality and value, not the AT&T one. |
Author: | Rorinthas [ Wed Aug 31, 2011 11:34 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
My question is still the same. Does this mean that I can pick up my phone in my parents house and have 3g at home now? If the answer is no, then I might go Verizon next spring. |
Author: | darksiege [ Thu Sep 01, 2011 12:48 am ] |
Post subject: | |
I do not have the indoor coverage issue. :-\ I went to T-Mobile because: 1. AT&T can die in a gorram fire right in their faces and then they can take their neighbors with them. I would rather use a damned pair of tin cans and string than AT&T. 2. Sprint sucks for coverage in my area (as in none for close to 2 miles around my home, despite their coverage map.) And I was paying $196 a month for 1500 minutes, unlimited texting and data. 3. Verizon may be good service... but I would not know. for 3 iphones with unlimited minutes and messages and only 2Gb of data per month... Total Monthly Access Charges $322.94 4. Rates: with T-Mobile; I am paying $195 a month for 3 lines for unlimited minutes, texting, and data, and once I hit 250 Mb of 4G, it slows to 3G... if I want more 4G I can pay 10 bucks per phone for 2 Gb of 4G and unlimited 3G. |
Author: | Midgen [ Thu Sep 01, 2011 4:30 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Telecommunications Family Tree (from the Wall Street Journal) http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... TMAP032811 |
Author: | Corolinth [ Thu Sep 01, 2011 5:03 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
AT&T isn't "surprised and disappointed" by this lawsuit, they're still sore over the one they lost in 1984. |
Author: | shuyung [ Thu Sep 01, 2011 5:12 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Conceded in '82, but yeah. In hindsight, they should have just divested the AT&T Computer Systems part. |
Author: | Midgen [ Fri Sep 02, 2011 10:26 am ] |
Post subject: | |
AT&T's "Plan" to save the merger... http://news.yahoo.com/t-determined-save ... 25701.html (Emphasis mine) Mashable wrote: AT&T has a plan to save the $39 billion T-Mobile acquisition blocked by the U.S. government, reports Reuters quoting sources familiar with the matter.
AT&T's new plan has two parts: First, it will pledge to keep T-Mobile's subscription plans and rates at current levels. Second, it will need to sell off up to 25% of T-Mobile's business, potentially including airwaves and customers. Some analysts doubt AT&T can pull off the merger. Former antitrust enforcer Bob Doyle toldReuters it would be difficult to find a buyer for parts of T-Mobile's business in the U.S., as a sale to either Verizon or Sprint would also cause antitrust lawsuits. Should AT&T fail to reach a settlement, it will need to pay T-Mobile's owner Deutsche Telekom approximately $6 billion. In a recent Mashable poll, 66.49% of readers said the U.S. government was right to block the AT&T/T-Mobile merger, 25.53% thought the government should butt out and 7.97% were unsure. |
Author: | Lex Luthor [ Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:27 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Maybe they should invest in making their products better instead of eliminating competitors... this really show you what their business model is focused on. |
Author: | darksiege [ Fri Sep 02, 2011 4:47 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
Mashable wrote: AT&T's new plan has two parts: First, it will pledge to keep T-Mobile's subscription plans and rates at current levels. Second, it will need to sell off up to 25% of T-Mobile's business, potentially including airwaves and customers. There is no way to hope enough for them to find a fire large enough to die in. |
Author: | Darkroland [ Tue Sep 06, 2011 12:51 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: U.S. seeks to block AT&T and T-Mobile merger |
I love how the telecom market is correcting itself... right into the worst case scenario for consumers. |
Author: | Lex Luthor [ Tue Sep 06, 2011 1:15 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
I think consumerist rage will be so great that this won't ever go through. Also it's a great way for people in government to feel like they're making a good difference. I'd put my money on it being blocked or mostly blocked. |
Author: | Lenas [ Tue Sep 06, 2011 2:14 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
And now Sprint files suit |
Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |