Mirror Finish Polishing ~ 1-816-529-6089 ~ sales@mirrorfinishpolishing.com ~ mirrorfinishpolishing.com For the best rate on home, auto, life or business/commercial insurance call me at 888-959-0955, cell 636-734-1310 or bricehazelwood@weiss-ins.com. Never Done Garage - donewhenimdead.com Peerless Automotive Reconditioning - 1155 W. Dennis Ave, Olathe Ks, 66061 - 913-893-1201 Mark H. Epstein ~ The Epstein Law Firm, LLC ~ 913-396-5123 Wilkes Automotive ~ wilkesautomotive.com ~ 246 Marion St, Olathe, KS 66061 ~ 913-254-7171 Skandalous Inc ~ www.skandalousinc.com DIY Auto Repair Inc ~ www.diyautorepairkc.com ~ 11509 Strangline Rd, Olathe KS 66062 ~ 913-226-3806 Your advertisement here! The Law Offices of Jeremiah Johnson, LLC ~ 104 E. Poplar, Olathe, KS 66061 ~ (913)764-5010 ~ www.kcatty.com - www.johnsoncountydui.com ~ jeremiah@kcatty.com Santa Fe Body, Inc ~ 8717 Lenexa Drive, Overland Park, KS 66214 ~ (913) 894-6090 House of Boost LLC Nude? HouseofHID.com - The #1 source for HID The Print Shop KC 816.200.6694 or Ryan@RMD-Photography.com the art of tyleR ~ http://tyleR.bigcartel.com ~ TYLERcoey.com ~ MUTTtoy.com ~ MUTTtoy@gmail.com W-K Chevrolet Buick Pontiac Cadillac GMC ~ 3310 W. Broadway, Sedalia, MO 65301 ~ 800-382-5088 ~ Cell 660-553-8928 ~ dustin@wkchevy.com ~ www.wkchevy.com

Go Back   KCSR - THE Kansas City Forum > General Forums > Computers, Teh Interweb, Gaming, Electronics

Reply
Thread Tools
Unread 2011-06-21, 05:01 PM   #176
JDLM
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 168,941
Post Thanks / Like
Default

Sprint offers AT&T spectrum solution without merger








By Jasmin Melvin
WASHINGTON | Mon Jun 20, 2011 6:36pm EDT

(Reuters) - AT&T Inc (T.N) could greatly expand its network capacity for a fraction of the cost it plans to shell out to buy T-Mobile USA, Sprint Nextel (S.N) said on Monday.
Sprint, a vocal opponent of the deal, said it would present the Federal Communications Commission later on Monday with a technical analysis detailing the actions AT&T could take to improve its network without acquiring T-Mobile USA.
The proposed merger, which requires FCC and Department of Justice approval, would concentrate 80 percent of U.S. wireless contract customers in just two companies -- AT&T/T-Mobile and Verizon Wireless (VZ.N) (VOD.L).
Sprint said its filing to the FCC will assert that AT&T could forgo the T-Mobile takeover and increase its network capacity by more than 600 percent by 2015 by simply putting its current resources to better, more efficient use.
AT&T argues that it needs the spectrum of Deutsche Telekom AG's (DTEGn.DE) T-Mobile USA to expand high-speed services faster and improve its network performance, criticized by consumers for dropped calls and slow data speeds.
Sprint, considered the carrier with the most to lose from the AT&T deal, as it would put it in a distant third place in the U.S. market, called this rationale unfounded.
"AT&T could increase its capacity by developing its warehoused spectrum, accelerating its 4G network buildout, and implementing a more efficient network architecture," Sprint said in a statement.
A 600 percent boost in capacity could handle AT&T's projected data demands and would cost far less than the $39 billion AT&T would spend to take over T-Mobile, Sprint said.
An AT&T spokesman responded by criticizing Sprint's transfer of its network management to Ericsson (ERICb.ST). "A company that has outsourced the management of its own network shouldn't be giving advice to others."
The public interest group Public Knowledge also said on Monday it would file a preliminary economic and technical report questioning both AT&T's spectrum constraint claims and T-Mobile USA's financial hardships.
"The report argues both companies have many options to increasing their high-speed data networks," a spokesman for the group said in a statement.
__________________


B68 | F82 |///M | S55B | NAV | LED | Avant Garde | Toyo Proxes 4
JDLM is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2011-06-21, 05:37 PM   #177
KUweatherman
Super Moderator
 
KUweatherman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 41,509
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 403
Thanks (Received): 364
Likes (Given): 4993
Likes (Received): 2126
Dislikes (Given): 123
Dislikes (Received): 174
Default

I <3 Sprint.
__________________
KUweatherman is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2011-06-21, 05:40 PM   #178
JDLM
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 168,941
Post Thanks / Like
Default

I wouldn't ever trust a co. that doesn't even manage their own network anymore
__________________


B68 | F82 |///M | S55B | NAV | LED | Avant Garde | Toyo Proxes 4
JDLM is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2011-06-22, 05:29 PM   #179
JDLM
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 168,941
Post Thanks / Like
Default

AT&T says merger on track for March 2012 approval



AT&T says it’s still on track to get its merger with T-Mobile approved by March 2012, even as state utilities, business partners and consumer interest groups express concern about the deal.
In a meeting with reporters in Washington, AT&T General Counsel Wayne Watts said the company has provided a second round of information requested by the Justice Department. He said meetings with the Federal Communications Commission are also going as scheduled.
“The number one question I get from investors is can we get (the deal) done,” Watt said. “I think we can.”
He rejected arguments that merger approval should include a stipulation that AT&T stop exclusive contracts with handset makers. It’s two-year exclusive contract with Apple was the main reason behind its smartphone success, the company has said.
Sprint Nextel and regional carriers have argued that the practice has prevented them from attracting customers as quickly as AT&T and Verizon, which also has a deal to carry the iPhone.
But Watts, who has worked on more than a dozen mergers involving AT&T in about three decades, said there is plenty of handset competition.
In recent weeks, resistance to the merger has grown.
The California Public Utilities Commission hasn’t opposed the deal outright, but has decided to conduct a rare investigation of the transaction’s affect on consumers.
New York’s attorney general is investigating the deal and last week the the state’s Public Service Commission said in comments to the FCC that the merger failed to pass two tests to ensure it would result in adequate wireless industry competition.
“Both the market concentration and spectrum aggregation screening tools indicate the proposed merger may have anticompetitive impacts, and that these anticompetitive impacts will be felt, in particular, in New York State,” the commission wrote. “Therefore, the FCC should carefully scrutinize the potential impacts of the proposed merger on New York State’s wireless voice and broadband markets.”
AT&T and T-Mobile have also received support for their deal.
Facebook Microsoft and Silverlake Partners say the deal helps their businesses because it would bring more robust networks to more consumers. More than 20 governors have written the FCC in support.
Arizona’s public utitilities commission scrutinized the deal and voted in approval.
__________________


B68 | F82 |///M | S55B | NAV | LED | Avant Garde | Toyo Proxes 4
JDLM is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2011-07-20, 04:46 PM   #180
JDLM
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 168,941
Post Thanks / Like
Default

US Senator Herb Kohl: The AT&T/T-Mobile Deal Needs to be Rejected

by Quentyn Kennemer on July 20th, 2011 at 5:10 pm

The senator of the best state in the country – Wisconsin – has called out against AT&T and T-Mobile’s (say that 5 times fast) proposed merger. Herb Kohl, being the chairman of the US Senate Antitrust Subcommittee, made his case to the FCC in the form of a formal request to block it.
Given his position, his stance against the deal is likely seen as a victory for Sprint and all of the other smaller carriers who can ill afford to let these big time acquisitions happen.
As everyone has, Senator Kohl has cited stifled competition and economic implications for customers as reasons why the merger should not go through.
While we try to stay as objective as we can here at Phandroid, we can’t say we’d like to see good ol’ Magenta scrubbed off the face of this country. Needless to say, we’re glad Kohl has taken this stance and we’re hoping the rest of his committee is just as supportive and aggressive in blocking the deal
__________________


B68 | F82 |///M | S55B | NAV | LED | Avant Garde | Toyo Proxes 4
JDLM is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2011-07-20, 04:57 PM   #181
kellyrx8
Super Moderator
 
kellyrx8's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Kansas
Posts: 14,381
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 30
Thanks (Received): 101
Likes (Given): 704
Likes (Received): 455
Dislikes (Given): 7
Dislikes (Received): 3
Default

im with herb
kellyrx8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2011-07-20, 05:45 PM   #182
JustinCredible
 
JustinCredible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 19,352
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 178
Thanks (Received): 96
Likes (Given): 920
Likes (Received): 340
Dislikes (Given): 18
Dislikes (Received): 4
Default

Quote:
AT&T disagrees with Senator Kohl's letter, finds ally in Sen. Lee

Not to be left out of the discussion, AT&T has also issued a statement in response to Senator Kohl's letter to the FCC regarding AT&T's proposed purchase of T-Mobile, and as expected, disagrees with his position. The carrier also has garnered some support from other members of Congress, most notably Senator Mike Lee from Utah.

AT&T's statement is as follows:
Quote:
We respect Senator Kohl. However, we feel his view is inconsistent with antitrust law, is shared by few others, and ignores the many positive benefits and numerous supporters of the transaction. This is a decision that will be made by the Department of Justice and the FCC under applicable law and after a full and fair examination of the facts. We continue to believe those reviews will result in approval of this transaction.
Senator Lee added his own thoughts on the matter:
Quote:
The mobile phone market is a critical component of our nation's economy and the proposed merger between AT&T and T-Mobile deserves careful review. In my view, the merger has the potential to provide significant network efficiencies that may help alleviate capacity constraints, enable enhanced service quality, and facilitate expansion of a 4G LTE nationwide network, which would in turn create opportunities for handset innovation and continued development of data-rich applications.

I have confidence that the Department of Justice and Federal Communications Commission will take steps to ensure that the market remains competitive and that regional carriers continue to enjoy access to popular handsets and roaming arrangements on the nationwide networks.
http://www.mobileburn.com/news.jsp?Id=15889
JustinCredible is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2011-07-27, 04:59 PM   #183
JDLM
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 168,941
Post Thanks / Like
Default

T-Mobile responds to Sen. Al Franken’s recommendation against AT&T merger



Minnesota Senator Al Franken sent a letter to the heads of the Federal Communications Commission and the Department of Justice earlier this week, stating that AT&T’s proposed $39 billion acquisition of T-Mobile USA was not in the best interest of the American public. “The competitive effects of a merger of this size and scope will reverberate throughout the telecommunications sector for decades to come and will affect consumer prices, customer service, innovation, competition in handsets and the quality and quantity of network coverage. These threats are too large and too irrevocable to be prevented or alleviated by conditions,” Franken wrote. The Minnesota democrat also said that the deal could cost thousands of Americans their jobs. T-Mobile issued a statement in response to Franken’s note late on Tuesday, stating plainly that Franken’s assessment of the deal is wrong. “While we respect Senator Franken, his analysis of our pending transaction is just wrong,” T-Mobile said in a note to the press. “The combination of T-Mobile and AT&T should be approved because it will deliver what consumers are looking for in the age of smart phones, tablets and mobile internet – speed, service quality and reduced costs. As is documented in our government filings, the combination of our two networks creates significant efficiencies that will trigger strong benefits for consumers. We are confident that a thorough review of the record will demonstrate the transaction advances the public interest.”
__________________


B68 | F82 |///M | S55B | NAV | LED | Avant Garde | Toyo Proxes 4
JDLM is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2011-08-09, 06:41 PM   #184
JDLM
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 168,941
Post Thanks / Like
Default

The going gets tough for AT&T’s T-Mo plans


Updated: The Federal Communications Commission said it would combine the review of AT&T’s purchase of spectrum from Qualcomm with the agency’s review of Ma Bell’s purchase of T-Mobile.
Update: The FCC can however, conclude its reviews independently. The FCC’s decision on Monday night could be seen as the agency’s taking a careful view of consolidating so much spectrum in the hands of one company, which could be a blow for AT&T’s plans to buy the No. 4 player in the U.S. market.
We’ve long said this deal is bad for consumers and bad for innovation, but in the last few weeks a few other reports have come out that indicate our initial reaction might be correct. And perhaps with its decision on Monday, the FCC is really listening.
For example, last week the Yankee Group issued a note that said it believed wireless prices would rise by $35 in six major cities if AT&T were to buy T-Mobile. AT&T disputes this. Last month consumers (with the help of an enterprising law firm) filed a suit seeking arbitration to stop the merger. Also in July, Senator Herb Kohl, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on antitrust matters, came out strongly against the deal, as did several other Democratic senators. However, two powerful Republican senators, including John Cornyn from the state of Texas, where AT&T’s headquarters are based, praised the deal.
However, not everyone seems upset. AT&T hired consulting firm M+R to do its own analysis on T-Mobile. The paper, by M+R economist Allen Rosenfeld, argued that regulators are focusing somewhat on the wrong issue — not what happens if AT&T buys T-Mo but what happens if AT&T doesn’t buy T-Mobile. The paper posits that without AT&T’s big bucks, T-Mobile will fail, leaving consumers with less choice in the market anyhow.
It says that many analysts are making a mistake by comparing apples to oranges, with the oranges being the current 2010 pricing environment and the apples being the 2012 post-merger pricing environment if the T-Mobile buy occurs. So instead of comparing today’s real prices, the paper suggests that the economically rational thing to do is compare the imaginary apples of the 2012 time frame if the deal happened versus if the deal did not happen.
At the core of the flawed apples-and-oranges comparison is an implicit assumption that, in the absence of the proposed merger, T-Mobile USA’s current pricing structure would continue to be available to consumers. In the most-general sense, that assumption implies a continuation of the status quo for T-Mobile USA for the foreseeable future. More specifically, it assumes that T-Mobile USA’s overall customer strategy, driven by plans priced lower than AT&T’s and Verizon’s, could be sustained for years to come. A close look at the industry and the competitive outlook for T-Mobile USA, however, casts serious doubt upon the validity of the assumption that T-Mobile USA, going it alone in the absence of the merger, would be able to sustain its pricing strategy and that consumers would be better off if the merger were not approved.
This perspective may explain why AT&T’s executives on the company’s second quarter results call shared last month that they were confident in the merger going through. But with the latest review by the FCC, it certainly doesn’t look like it can take its $39 billion purchase for granted.
Update No. 2: Qualcomm isn’t pleased with the FCC delay in approving its sale of spectrum to AT&T. The chimaker emailed the following statement:
The FCC should approve the pending AT&T-Qualcomm spectrum sale now because of the clear benefits to the public from the sale that stand on their own and are totally unrelated to the proposed AT&T-T-Mobile merger. Approval now will foster the public policies that the FCC correctly deems so vital for the American public. Approval now will re-purpose unused 700 MHz unpaired spectrum for mobile broadband, thereby easing America’s spectrum crunch and helping to meet the FCC’s goal of reallocating 300 MHz for mobile broadband over the next five years. Approval now will also allow Qualcomm to invest in a new, spectrally efficient technology (supplemental downlink) and enable the first worldwide deployment to occur in the U.S., thereby fostering U.S. economic growth and job creation and enhancing U.S. global leadership in wireless technology.
__________________


B68 | F82 |///M | S55B | NAV | LED | Avant Garde | Toyo Proxes 4
JDLM is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2011-08-10, 06:32 PM   #185
JDLM
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 168,941
Post Thanks / Like
Default

Consumer Watchdog Warns Regulators Not to Be Fooled Twice by AT&T, Calls For Rejection of Merger with T-Mobile









Research Shows AT&T Made and Broke Same 'Improved Service' Promises in 2004 by Cutting Service, Forcing Customers into Costly New Plans After Cingular Merger
"Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me"
SANTA MONICA, Calif., Aug. 10, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Consumer Watchdog urged U.S. and California officials yesterday to reject the proposed AT&T/T-Mobile wireless merger, calling to their attention that AT&T made the same promises of lower prices and better services before the Cingular/AT&T merger seven years ago, only to betray those promises after that merger was approved.
In a then-and-now comparison of promises made by AT&T, the group quotes language assuring T-Mobile customers that they may keep their present (and cheaper) rate plans and their current T-Mobile phones, while gaining better service.
The company made virtually identical promises in 2004. But once the 2004 merger was approved, it degraded the old AT&T network and forced AT&T customers to buy new phones and costlier plans--or be slapped with large termination fees. Consumer Watchdog's lawyers brought a nationwide class action lawsuit against AT&T in 2006 seeking refunds for AT&T's customers. AT&T continues to fight that lawsuit in the courts.
"Federal and state officials should not even contemplate approving AT&T's purchase of T-Mobile when AT&T still hasn't paid back its customers for the huge fees and other illegal overcharges it forced people to pay when it broke its promises after the merger with Cingular back in 2004," said Harvey Rosenfield, founder of Consumer Watchdog and one of the lawyers prosecuting the lawsuit stemming from the AT&T-Cingular merger.
In a letter sent yesterday to the Federal Communications Commission, the U.S. Department of Justice and the California Public Utilities Commission, Consumer Watchdog provided a side-by-side comparison of the company's promises in 2004 and its promises today. The language is nearly identical in its assurances to consumers and regulators that the merger would cure the ills of the wireless market, from high prices to spotty service.
Read Consumer Watchdog's letter here: http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/reso...tter_final.pdf (Citations and sources are in the letter)
For instance:
2004 AT&T–Cingular pre-merger promises:
"In addition to improvements in network coverage and service quality, and greater availability of enhanced service offerings, the transaction will result in a number of synergies which will benefit consumers..."
"The combination of AWS and Cingular will allow the availability of these services on a seamless, nationwide basis far more promptly than can otherwise be achieved, if they could be achieved at all, by the companies individually."
AT&T is "working to make this transition as seamless as possible for customers of AT&T Wireless."
"[C]ustomers of both companies will continue to enjoy the benefits of their current phones, rate plans, and features, without any service interruptions."
AT&T Wireless customers were assured that they would be able to "continue using their existing phones and rate plans but now have access to the largest digital voice and data network in the country."
2011 AT&T–T-Mobile pre-merger promises:
"This transaction will increase spectrum efficiency to increase capacity and output, which not only improves service, but is also the best way to ensure competitive prices and services..."
"The synergies of this transaction will create immense new capacity that will provide enormous benefits to consumers."
"We are confident in our ability to execute a seamless integration, and with additional spectrum and network capabilities we can better meet our customers' current demands…"
"Will T-Mobile customers have to get a new phone? No. Their current T-Mobile phone will continue to work fine once the transaction is complete."
"Will T-Mobile customers have to move to a new plan? Will they lose their plans? No. They will be able to keep their existing price plan."
"Once the transaction closes, T-Mobile customers will gain access to the benefits of AT&T's network."
As the group wrote:
"After the Federal Communications Commission approved the deal with negligible scrutiny, the newly merged company – which later renamed itself AT&T Mobility LLC– betrayed its promises. It abandoned the old AT&T network, deliberately degrading the network so that AT&T customers would be forced to migrate to Cingular's own network, pay an upgrade fee of $18, buy new phones and agree to new and more expensive rate plans. These anti-consumer moves were enforced by an anti-competitive 'early termination fee' of anywhere between $175 and $400, which prevented customers of AT&T from moving to another carrier.
"In short, AT&T policyholders were railroaded into spending hundreds of dollars more in order to maintain their cellular service - a colossal rip-off by the same corporate executives who are now asking for permission to do it all over again."
The 2004 merger did nothing to cure the many ills that continue to plague wireless service today, including:
Blocked and dropped calls;
Spotty service for rural residents;
Shrinking spectrum that limits wireless improvements;
Noting that AT&T is once again mounting a multi-million dollar lobbying and public relations campaign to win approval of the merger, Rosenfield said, "Public officials should not approve the AT&T/T-Mobile merger, at least not without conditions that will protect current customers against higher prices, less competition and reduced services – and require the company to repay the customers it ripped off after the last merger."
__________________


B68 | F82 |///M | S55B | NAV | LED | Avant Garde | Toyo Proxes 4
JDLM is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2011-08-12, 05:12 PM   #186
JDLM
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 168,941
Post Thanks / Like
Default

AT&T Says They Would Only Need $3.8 Billion For Network Buildout, Not T-Mobile, According to FCC Filing Redaction




This doesn’t help AT&T at all. Not one bit. A recent filing submitted to the FCC has had a portion redacted by AT&T. No big deal, I thought. Somewhere in that redacted statement, though, they revealed that they’d only need $3.8 billion to bring 4G LTE to 97% of their subscribers at the current state of things.
Consider that – $3.8 billion. Yet, at the same time, they say they absolutely need T-Mobile at a cost of $39 billion due to their limited spectrum and other problems with trying to build their network. Sprint tried to refute that AT&T needed T-Mobile to build a 4G network and even gave them a quick idea of how it could be achieved. AT&T declined to listen, and instead insisted that they needed T-Mobile. The same T-Mobile that would cost them $39 billion to buy. Doesn’t add up, does it?
Let’s go over this one more time. AT&T says the $3.8 billion is too high a price to bring LTE to 55 million additional Americans who would otherwise have to stick with 3G. Yes, according to Ma Bell, $3.8 billion to bring LTE to the rest of their coverage area is financially unjustifiable. But $39 billion to buy out T-Mobile isn’t.
They claim T-Mobile’s spectrum is needed for the task of bringing LTE to more Americans, yet the redacted portions of the accidentally-publicized documents contradict that in every way. My apologies for repeating all of that. I just had to make sure that it all made sense. After further review, it doesn’t.
I’m sorry, AT&T, but we aren’t fools. And you have to think that the Department of Justice aren’t, either. This isn’t helping your case in the anti-trust investigation at all. You probably would have been better off not redacting your FCC filing because now you just look plain guilty on top of the blatant incrimination. Unfortunately, we won’t know how much this will hurt AT&T for a bit further down the road. Read ahead for AT&T’s response.
"There is no real news here. The confidential information in the latest letter is fully consistent with AT&T’s prior filings. It demonstrates the significance of our commitment to build out 4G LTE mobile broadband to 97% of the population following our merger with T-Mobile. Without this merger, AT&T could not make this expanded commitment. This merger will unleash billions of dollars in badly needed investment, creating many thousands of well-paying jobs that are vitally needed given our weakened economy."
Am I the only one not seeing an answer to the real question at hand somewhere in there?
__________________


B68 | F82 |///M | S55B | NAV | LED | Avant Garde | Toyo Proxes 4
JDLM is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2011-08-12, 06:04 PM   #187
Billy Mild
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Pevely, MO
Posts: 6,170
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 120
Thanks (Received): 74
Likes (Given): 2618
Likes (Received): 593
Dislikes (Given): 85
Dislikes (Received): 33
Default

Bad news for ATT. Should have stayed SBC and they wouldn't have this issue.
__________________
1991 Corvette ZR-1 #1599 of 2,044 airlid mod
2016 RAM 1500-Roll coal
1986 Yamaha RZ350-blown up
1971 Yamaha AT1c-In the middle of restoration
Billy Mild is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2011-08-31, 02:46 PM   #188
KUweatherman
Super Moderator
 
KUweatherman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 41,509
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 403
Thanks (Received): 364
Likes (Given): 4993
Likes (Received): 2126
Dislikes (Given): 123
Dislikes (Received): 174
Default

Quote:
US government files to block proposed AT&T / T-Mobile merger (update: companies respond)

You heard right. Bloomberg is reporting that the United States government (!) just filed court papers in Washington, D.C. to block the much ballyhooed tie-up between AT&T and T-Mobile USA. Oddly enough, T-Mobile and AT&T promised this morning that a total of 5,000 jobs would be hand delivered to the US if the two telcos were allowed to become one, but it'll take a heck of a lot more convincing now. For what it's worth, this doesn't mean that the deal is or isn't happening -- it's just another step in the process -- but it most certainly doesn't bode well for proponents. Nor for AT&T's share price.

According to the report, the Justice Department feels that the deal would "substantially lessen competition" in the wireless space. In fact, it boldly stated the following: "AT&T's elimination of T-Mobile as an independent, low-priced rival would remove a significant competitive force from the market." If things end up falling apart, it's important to remember that AT&T would be forced to pay Deutsche Telekom $3 billion as a break-up fee, which ought to make Tiger Woods' misfortunes look like an outright bargain.

Update: Full press release is now embedded after the break, and meanwhile, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski has issued the following public statement: "Although our process is not complete, the record before this agency also raises serious concerns about the impact of the proposed transaction on competition."

Update 2: Wayne Watts, AT&T Senior Executive Vice President and General Counsel, issued the following statement (seen after the break)...

[Thanks to everyone who sent this in] "We are surprised and disappointed by today's action, particularly since we have met repeatedly with the Department of Justice and there was no indication from the DOJ that this action was being contemplated. We plan to ask for an expedited hearing so the enormous benefits of this merger can be fully reviewed. The DOJ has the burden of proving alleged anti-competitive affects and we intend to vigorously contest this matter in court. At the end of the day, we believe facts will guide any final decision and the facts are clear. This merger will:

∑ Help solve our nation's spectrum exhaust situation and improve wireless service for millions.
∑ Allow AT&T to expand 4G LTE mobile broadband to another 55 million Americans, or 97% of the population;
∑ Result in billions of additional investment and tens of thousands of jobs, at a time when our nation needs them most.

We remain confident that this merger is in the best interest of consumers and our country, and the facts will prevail in court."

Update 3: Not like anyone asked 'em, but Sprint's just entered the conversation with a statement of its own: Vonya B. McCann, senior vice president of Government Affairs for the carrier, had this to say:
"The DOJ today delivered a decisive victory for consumers, competition and our country. By filing suit to block AT&T's proposed takeover of T-Mobile, the DOJ has put consumers' interests first. Sprint applauds the DOJ for conducting a careful and thorough review and for reaching a just decision Ė one which will ensure that consumers continue to reap the benefits of a competitive U.S. wireless industry. Contrary to AT&T's assertions, today's action will preserve American jobs, strengthen the American economy, and encourage innovation."

Pretty amazing how two companies in the exact same business can see this so differently.

Update 4: The Wall Street Journal now also has T-Mobile parent company Deutsche Telekom's response to the news. It's as follows:
On August 31, 2011, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) informed Deutsche Telekom that it will file a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia seeking a permanent injunction blocking the proposed stock purchase agreement between AT&T and Deutsche Telekom under which AT&T will acquire T-Mobile USA from Deutsche Telekom.

The Company is very disappointed by the DOJ's action, and will join AT& T in defending the contemplated merger against the complaint in court. DOJ failed to acknowledge the robust competition in the U.S. wireless telecommunications industry and the tremendous efficiencies associated with the proposed transaction, which would lead to significant customer, shareholder, and public benefits. We appreciate the DoJ's willingness to discuss possible remedies to address the competitive concerns.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/08/31/u...mobile-merger/
__________________
KUweatherman is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2011-08-31, 02:51 PM   #189
Ricerking13
 
Ricerking13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 50,936
Post Thanks / Like
Default

I really don't agree with the DOJ blocking the merger.
__________________
2015 Genesis Coupe Ultimate
Ricerking13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2011-08-31, 02:53 PM   #190
KUweatherman
Super Moderator
 
KUweatherman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 41,509
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 403
Thanks (Received): 364
Likes (Given): 4993
Likes (Received): 2126
Dislikes (Given): 123
Dislikes (Received): 174
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricerking13 View Post
I really don't agree with the DOJ blocking the merger.
Sooo, you're pro-merger?
__________________
KUweatherman is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2011-08-31, 02:57 PM   #191
Ricerking13
 
Ricerking13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 50,936
Post Thanks / Like
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KUweatherman View Post
Sooo, you're pro-merger?
I wish they wouldn't, because I hate ATT, but legally I support their option to do it. There is still tons of competition, so I don't think it's right for the DOJ to block it.
__________________
2015 Genesis Coupe Ultimate
Ricerking13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2011-08-31, 03:03 PM   #192
JDLM
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 168,941
Post Thanks / Like
Default

At&t used the same tactics with Cingular ...its all BS
__________________


B68 | F82 |///M | S55B | NAV | LED | Avant Garde | Toyo Proxes 4
JDLM is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2011-08-31, 03:04 PM   #193
KUweatherman
Super Moderator
 
KUweatherman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 41,509
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 403
Thanks (Received): 364
Likes (Given): 4993
Likes (Received): 2126
Dislikes (Given): 123
Dislikes (Received): 174
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricerking13 View Post
I wish they wouldn't, because I hate ATT, but legally I support their option to do it. There is still tons of competition, so I don't think it's right for the DOJ to block it.
Quote:
For what it's worth, this doesn't mean that the deal is or isn't happening -- it's just another step in the process -- but it most certainly doesn't bode well for proponents.
.
__________________
KUweatherman is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2011-08-31, 04:23 PM   #194
ItalionStallion888
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 35,376
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 184
Thanks (Received): 261
Likes (Given): 2195
Likes (Received): 1605
Dislikes (Given): 68
Dislikes (Received): 73
Default

I don't know how you can be pro merger unless you love ATT, Celeste and I will be fucked if att pulls the same shit they did in 04. We'll either have to spend a fortune upgrading to ATT shit and new plans for pay a fortune to get out of our contract to go somewhere else. I for one hope it doesn't go through at all.
ItalionStallion888 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2011-08-31, 04:37 PM   #195
88STANGGT
 
88STANGGT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Satans Anus
Posts: 3,888
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 24
Thanks (Received): 74
Likes (Given): 191
Likes (Received): 547
Dislikes (Given): 6
Dislikes (Received): 22
Default

1996 again?
__________________
88STANGGT is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2011-08-31, 04:55 PM   #196
Molon Labe
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: JOCO
Posts: 6,609
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 19
Thanks (Received): 39
Likes (Given): 185
Likes (Received): 169
Dislikes (Given): 13
Dislikes (Received): 12
Default

I hope it does not go thru. If it does.....when they turn off our 3g towers........to get 3g we will all have to get an ATT phone and then they will require us to get an ATT priced plan. I bet they won't even let us get just an ATT sin if we are on a tmobile sim and just get our own phone outright. I'm sure they will screw us all that way.

I'm debating on cancelling all my lines.....for now I'm just cancelling 1 line as my job is giving me an EVO free and paying the bill....


However what upsets me at tmobile is that my other 2 lines are 1 smartphone and 1 dumbphone. I have to pay the price for 2 smartphones even though 1 is a dumbphone. So I'm going to be automatically over billed on 1 phone.
Molon Labe is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2011-08-31, 05:02 PM   #197
JDLM
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 168,941
Post Thanks / Like
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Louie d'Pirate View Post
I hope it does not go thru. If it does.....when they turn off our 3g towers........to get 3g we will all have to get an ATT phone and then they will require us to get an ATT priced plan. I bet they won't even let us get just an ATT sin if we are on a tmobile sim and just get our own phone outright. I'm sure they will screw us all that way.

I'm debating on cancelling all my lines.....for now I'm just cancelling 1 line as my job is giving me an EVO free and paying the bill....


However what upsets me at tmobile is that my other 2 lines are 1 smartphone and 1 dumbphone. I have to pay the price for 2 smartphones even though 1 is a dumbphone. So I'm going to be automatically over billed on 1 phone.

It will be sort of like that, they just won't kill it over night it will take time/money but that is what will happen "phone and plan wise"
__________________


B68 | F82 |///M | S55B | NAV | LED | Avant Garde | Toyo Proxes 4
JDLM is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2011-08-31, 05:17 PM   #198
JDLM
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 168,941
Post Thanks / Like
Default

Sprint ‘applauds’ DOJ attempt to block AT&T/T-Mobile merger



Sprint’s senior vice president of government affairs Vonya B. McCann issued the following statement in response to the Department of Justice’s attempt to block AT&T’s planned $39 billion acquisition of T-Mobile USA:
The DOJ today delivered a decisive victory for consumers, competition and our country. By filing suit to block AT&T’s proposed takeover of T-Mobile, the DOJ has put consumers’ interests first. Sprint applauds the DOJ for conducting a careful and thorough review and for reaching a just decision – one which will ensure that consumers continue to reap the benefits of a competitive U.S. wireless industry. Contrary to AT&T’s assertions, today’s action will preserve American jobs, strengthen the American economy, and encourage innovation.
AT&T responded to the DOJ earlier on Wednesday noting it will ask for an expedited hearing, and said “the facts will prevail in court.” FCC Chairman Julius also said the FCC has ‘serious concerns‘ about the impact of the merger.
__________________


B68 | F82 |///M | S55B | NAV | LED | Avant Garde | Toyo Proxes 4
JDLM is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2011-09-20, 04:48 PM   #199
JDLM
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 168,941
Post Thanks / Like
Default

AT&T Says Keep Your Rate Plan, Even When Your Contract Expires







While AT&T awaits FCC approval, DOJ lawsuits and a host of contentious members of the political machine they are still trying to win over the T-Mobile customer. As of September 16th T-Mobile updated their internal FAQ for employees regarding possible customers question surrounding rate plans changing post-AT&T takeover. A small addendum might help allay the fears of some T-Mobile customers who are fearful that their rate plans will disappear.
We’ve known for a while that AT&T has said T-Mobile customers will be able to keep their rate plans but for the same length of time we’ve wondered what would happen at the end of a contract. AT&T has finally answered that question by stating that T-Mobile customers will be able to hang onto their current rate plan “even when their term ends and the service continues on a month-to-month basis.”
That’s good news but the real question is: what happens when I want to upgrade? When I decide the time is right for a new smartphone will I be forced to leave my beloved T-Mobile rate plan behind and pick one of AT&T’s current offerings? That’s the question I want someone to answer.
__________________


B68 | F82 |///M | S55B | NAV | LED | Avant Garde | Toyo Proxes 4
JDLM is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2011-11-21, 07:48 PM   #200
JDLM
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 168,941
Post Thanks / Like
Default

AT&T and T-Mobile merger not looking good; leaves T-Mobile customers in a tight spot





A new report out of the Financial Times today sheds some light on what analysts think of the T-Mobile AT&T merger, and it isnít good.
According to the report, a large number of analysts put the probability of the deal passing at under 50%, with some going as low as 20%. No one thought the merging of two wireless giants was going to be a simple task, but the deal has been met with more opposition than originally expected.
The merger was supposed to be completed by March of 2012, one year after it was announced. Earlier this month, AT&T came forward stating that it would take more time than that, changing their projected timeline to the middle of 2012. The latest reports say that at the very least, AT&T will have to sell off some of the spectrum theyíll acquire from the merger if they want the deal to go through.
The lawsuits, delays, T-Mobileís third quarter customer gains and analysts predictions (which are a little more helpful here than when trying to pinpoint release dates) mean one thing for AT&T: if they want this merger to go through, they are really going to have to work for it. But what does it mean for T-Mobile customers?
When talking about the merger, and what will happen between AT&T and T-Mobile, it can be easy to forget the kind of predicament T-Mobile customers are in. Speaking from personal experience, itís hard to decide what to do when your future is so uncertain.
Even if I can just transfer my family plan of five lines to AT&T when the time comes, should I? Will there be some hidden fees later down the road that will come back to haunt me? Will I not be allowed upgrades anymore, or will doing so move me onto an AT&T plan thatís twice as much as what I pay now? I have been heavily considering buying a Galaxy Nexus from overseas, but if I canít even use it in six months becuase I end up switching to Sprint, whatís the point? And whatís going to happen to all the people still signing up for T-Mobile? Do they know that soon enough, the carrier they just joined up with will be gone? Perhaps the biggest question of all, what will T-Mobile do if the merger doesnít succeed?
Clearly, thereís far more questions than answers. And it puts T-Mobile customers in a tight spot. Even those that were ready to accept their fate as a customer of AT&T are facing more and more uncertainty on the possibility everyday. Customers of T-Mobile, what are your plans? Are you going to wait it out and see what happens next year, or are you getting tired of waiting?
__________________


B68 | F82 |///M | S55B | NAV | LED | Avant Garde | Toyo Proxes 4
JDLM is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
kansas, merger, seattle, sprint, tmobile

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

 

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:14 AM.


Design By: Miner Skinz.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.13.37
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright (c) 1993-2012, KCSR.org