AT&T and T-Mobile Ask FCC for Permission to Transfer Spectrum
Exciting
The service is great when it works, but it fails really bad when I travel up and down California. I frequently travel from San Francisco to LA on the weekends and the coverage is extremely poor when I get closer north.
get to the point said:
Hope they say no! One company should not have to give something up and get nothing in return.
Sure they can! This was part of the agreement AT&T committed to when they chose to purchase T-Moble and failed. AT&T only made such a large promise becaus they were sure they would get their way. Now it's come back to bite them.
wdfichtel said:
Sure they can! This was part of the agreement AT&T committed to when they chose to purchase T-Moble and failed. AT&T only made such a large promise becaus they were sure they would get their way. Now it's come back to bite them.
Yep. A deal is a deal.
wdfichtel said:
Sure they can! This was part of the agreement AT&T committed to when they chose to purchase T-Moble and failed. AT&T only made such a large promise becaus they were sure they would get their way. Now it's come back to bite them.
I agree then let the ORIGINAL agreement stand, one can't cherry pick agreements. The FCC should say no. After all fairs fair.
(continues)
get to the point said:
For it to be a contract it must have consideration, I see what t-mobile gets. But what does AT&T get?
That would be 'jack crap'--as stipulated in this truly awesome deal.
get to the point said:
For it to be a contract it must have consideration, I see what t-mobile gets. But what does AT&T get?
T-Mobile and ATT entered into a binding agreement. T-Mobile recieved consideration from ATT and enetered into a binding agreement for ATT to purchase the company for 39 billion because DT wanted out of the US market all together. In return ATT recieved consideration from DT/ 😎 T-Mobile and offered the roaming deal and spectrum along with the cash payment in exchange for that consideration from DT to accept their buyout offer.
AT&T is simply fulfilling the agreement they signed with T-Mobile. I can't see why you think that is wrong.
no merger and they still raise the price?
now there' nomore 2gb for 25$, it 3gb for 30$.
(or if you exceeded, was $35 for up to 3GB).
$30/3GB = $10.00/GB
That is not raising the price.
Studies are showing with more people using more data, the 2GB may not be enough.
get to the point said:
Hope they say no! One company should not have to give something up and get nothing in return.
The FCC doesn't (and shouldn't) care about individual companies and their profit margins. The FCC mandate is to ensure the competitive viability of the marketplace at large which is a completely different perspective.
If the spectrum transfer were in any way inappropriate, AT&T would have the first lawyer in the courtroom trying to weasel out of the break-up details, so why aren't they?
I expect this transaction to sail through the FCC without a ripple.
Besides- AT&T refused to deploy service in their AWS spectrum holdings anyway! At least in T-mobile's hands, someon...
(continues)
Their job is to protect the consumer, and it is in the consumers interest for the companies to remain profitable. When companies don't remain profitable, they cannot stay in business and we lose competition...example, T-Mobile. The government may have blocked the aquisitions at this time, but don't think for 1 second that DT isn't still going to try and dump the company. They are ok for now and have growth opportunity, but they said themselves, they are worried what happens after their 7 yr roaming agreement is up.
The best ...
(continues)
get to the point said:
Hope they say no! One company should not have to give something up and get nothing in return.
Of course they should...you know, 'CONTRACT' and everything.
also the Monterey area is a challenge for most carriers because of the mountainous terrain for that region.
This forum is closed.