FCC can and should not reject the buyout for 2 reasons, it would be unfair to AT&T if the buyout was rejected in both cases. Verizon was allowed to purchase alltel making them the largest provider jumping AT&T so when AT&T attempts to buy someone else to compete with verizon it wouldnt be fair to reject that bid and AT&T was already broken up once by the FCC making way to many bells nationwide and giving verizon the opportunity to become the largest provider nationwide. They already got knocked down and forced out of the number one spot so they cant keep kicking AT&T while they are down. This will make 2 huge companies but as was said it would be a mess if sprint buys them out with all thier different technologies and they still wouldnt b...
(continues)
...
FCC and DoJ needs to block this. Alltel is different, since they are/weren't a national carrier. They are more of a regional carrier, than a national carrier.
If AT&T buys T-Mobile, they will be taking out a big national carrier, and causing pricing to increase, between AT&T and Verizon, since they will be allowed to do so.
...
Verizon divested most markets where there was an unfair advantage when merging with alltel. Verizon acquired huge swaths of area they had no service in, thus bolstering the amount of coverage without taking an unfair amount of spectrum in any given area. at@t is looking to merge with a company that has a larger part of their network covering the same areas as they cover.
This needs to be stopped by the DOJ because it will limit the national players in many areas to 2 or 3 carriers. The combined entity of Verizon and at@t-mobile will be 80% of the cellular users in America. This will likely lead to price fixing in the eyes of the DOJ and will likely lead to a denial. Plus with the current administration which is not pro merger we will like...
(continues)
...
Verizon bought Alltel, because they were paying Alltel for roaming. It was cheaper to buy them, than to keep paying them.
...
You need to think bigger than that. Verizon purchased 700MHz spectrum covering the lower 48 but had no towers in vast areas of rural America. It is much easier to grab existing towers and infrastructure than it is to build from the ground up. The purchase of alltel has not about roaming, it was about synergies, quick buildout of LTE and increased native coverage.
...
Exactly!
It is refreshing to see other views on this rather than carrier reps against carrier reps.
There is a twist to this though. If I'm correct, ATT will be forced to divest overlapping markets. This means the subscribers they acquired will be divested with the markets. I don't think they can keep the subs and throw away the leftovers.
John B.
...
That is exactly right. Any market they are forced to divest will include the subscribers in that market. These markets could easily become Sprint customers over night.
...
Not necessarily. Sprint has most of these markets already overlapped as well. It would not placate Sprint to acquire assets only to have to divest in the same areas. I believe Sprint will acquire very little of what is left. a smaller carrier will most likely be a candidate. This is where some subs of TMO will suffer the greatest loss. They will end up in the arms of a smaller carrier than what they were with.
Sprint is pretty much going to be on their own if this goes through. I enjoy my service with them and have no intentions of leaving. They fit the happy medium I seek. I feel for the TMO subs that found the same comfortability in its size.
John B.
...
Yes and no. Yeah Sprint has overlapping networks in the 1900. But there are areas where they may not have much spectrum. These would be prime targets for Sprint.
But for the most part I agree about smaller carriers getting most of the grub. Those assets could even be bought up by Light Squared... another company making a move.
...
If anything, I can see MetroPCS and Cricket picking up some customers and clients. Just remember, it isn't free, they have to pay AT&T for the divested markets and/or spectrum.
...
croodMar 21, 2011, 1:53 PM
AT&T is just a name. This is not the same company that was split by the government. That company no longer exists. They were purchased by SBC, who then just assumed the older name.
...
...by the FCC making way to many bells nationwide and giving verizon the opportunity to become the largest provider nationwide."
🙄
Listen, genius. One of those "Baby Bells" was Bell Atlantic Mobility: One of the entities that went into the merger that created Verizon ca. 2000. I'm not asking you to know what you are talking about when you post. I know that would be asking too much, but you could at lease use Wikipedia or Ask.com or something so you can fake it.
...