ATT Snafu puts wrong document on the FCC site

[Callie Del Noire]

http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/Leaked-ATT-Letter-Demolishes-Case-For-TMobile-Merger-115652

If what the article and my reading of the document is saying is that basically ATT's case for buying T-Mobile is more about eliminating competition than upgrading their own network. I had wondered about it since the first thing I figured they would do is eliminate redundant infrastructure and personnel.

I find it annoying that a LOT of business would rather work on market share that they can't support on their own than upgrade/expand their own infrastructure.

[Bayushi]

I'm pretty vehemently against the merger.

I've always had a dislike for the monopolistic tendencies some large corporations have, and hope that the FCC pulls their head out and says 'No'.

The same applies to Comcast and NBC-Universal's attempt to merge. Content providers should NOT be merging with content creators, not in a society which values freedom of speech. Especially as a Comcast subscriber, I don't need to have more NBC shoveled in my direction, thanks.

The reality of it all is that these massive mergers will allow the new entity to control even more of what you can and can not do with your Phone/Internet/Movies.

[Callie Del Noire]

I'm tired of the FCC being the tool of the whiners who are afraid that Jr. will be exposed to a little nipple at the superbowl and NOT protecting our greater rights of fair media and net neutrality. The leadership of the FCC is these days a gateway to a nice job with someone like Comcast, NBC, ATT or such.

They are there to fairly apportion the broadcast media within the country, regulate and provide standards and PROTECT the public's interests. The last part has been very much forgotten in the last few years. The sudden and steady issue in the mobile internet bandwidth, the curtailing of non-corporate internet and such is starting to piss me off.

[Callie Del Noire]

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/08/31/u-s-moves-to-block-att-merger-with-t-mobile/


I am glad to see the DoJ do this. Nice to see SOMEONE do something since ATT merging would eliminate something like 20+ thousand jobs to redundancies. (ATT claims it would MAKE jobs but I fail to see how)

[Chris Brady]

All I have to say to this is:  Welcome to Corporate Politics.

Seriously, this is like at least 50% of all business mergers, takeovers and buyouts.

[Callie Del Noire]

All I have to say to this is:  Welcome to Corporate Politics.

Seriously, this is like at least 50% of all business mergers, takeovers and buyouts.

This is worse that most.. ATT would be way big and powerful. (as if it wasn't already) and I think they've been lying all the time about why they are doing it. It allows them to narrow the market AND buy up infastructure they should have been using those mind blowing fees on for the last oh.. five years or so.

[Asuras]

I don't know enough about the AT&T deal to comment on it in particular, but:

I don't think anybody should expect any company to ignore a potential monopoly-making deal. Businesses should be businesses. The onus here shouldn't be on AT&T to play nice, it should be on the government to regulate them.

And in this case they have decided to do that.

[Zakharra]

I don't know enough about the AT&T deal to comment on it in particular, but:

I don't think anybody should expect any company to ignore a potential monopoly-making deal. Businesses should be businesses. The onus here shouldn't be on AT&T to play nice, it should be on the government to regulate them.

And in this case they have decided to do that.

No company should have a monopoly, unless it's the one that develops a technology, then it shouldn't hold onto that for very long (competitors will make their own versions). There's a reason the Anti-Trust Act went into affect in the beginning of the last century, and a reason Ma Bell was broken up in the 1980s.

Business should play within the rules, and 'not playing nice' doesn't mean they should bend the laws, lie and deceive people.