AT&T Responds to Justice Department Suit
Replying to: i agree with ATT ! by netboy
Re: i agree with ATT !
http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/discuss.php?fm=m& ... »
Please, stop using this car manufacturer argument, you just sound foolish.
mycool said:netboy said:
do you know how many car manufactures out there?
then why isnt Mercedes selling under cars under 20,000$ ?
of course you pay more if you want better coverage (att + tmobile towers).
but if you dont want to pay more, get virgin mobile! 35$ for unlimited calls, texts, and web !
You're asking the wrong question. What you should be asking is this:
If there were only 2-3 car manufacturers to choose from, would the Mercedes still be selling for what it is now, or would it be even more expensive or have less luxuries?
Oh, and here are some preemptive strikes against arguments against my point:
1) I choose to use the example of 2-3 car manufacturers because realistically in some areas that is how many choices the consumer will be left with. Sure, there are other areas with more options, but that doesn't mean we should neglect those who will be left with 2-3 choices.
2) I point you to a great Wikipedia article describing what barriers to entry is. The car manufacturer industry has very little in terms of barriers of entry when compared to the cellular industry. Sure, there are government regulations for emissions and safety standards, but if someone really had a great idea and wanted to, they could build vehicles and sell them. Hell, Ferrari started off by selling vehicles that were built by hand (not through an assembly line). So it is very much possible for new competition to enter the car manufacturer industry, whereas entering the mobile phone industry is far closer to impossible more than anything else. I'm not saying it is impossible, just very close to it.
3) Pricing might stay the same or might even drop, even with less competition. It seems like something pretty straight forward to debunk the entire argument. But, what isn't taken into account are other factors a consumer would use in making their decision such as customer service. There is a reason that Sprint at one point was loathed even with great pricing and that was due to their poor customer service. Thankfully, they have turned that around to keep competition going. Also, even if we did concentrate on pricing alone less competition does mean more of a cost. If the prices stayed the same one could argue that it is due to a lack of competition (stagnation). If the prices drop one could easily make the argument that the rate of competition is severely slowed down. Of course, you could argue speculation doesn't mean anything, and to that I say that this isn't some doomsday theory concocted out of thin air. It is backed by empirical historical evidence. Competition drives the market. Other factors do play a role as well in slowing the market down or speeding it up, but competition is a forward-moving force in a large factor.
4) If Sprint had made and won the bid to purchase T-Mobile it still would have been bad. People aren't arguing that it would have been a good thing. It would have been less bad, but still bad. There is a sharp difference between having 3 competitors on equal footing as apposed to having 2 competitors controlling 80% of the market and the other major competitor not even controlling the entire remaining 20%.
5) AT&T is sitting on stockpiles of spectrum, so the argument that they need additional spectrum to be able to provide good service is very much debunked. Of course, you could easily argue that you don't believe in numbers to ignore this point.
I'd love to educate (debunk) you on anything else you can think of
No replies to this message