US government files antitrust suit to block AT&T purchase of T-Mobile - Page 3

We will see...this will be answered in the next few weeks....
If T-Mobile raises their plan prices to match the rest of the telecoms.....they will lose customer......people choose T-Mobile/Sprint because their plans are cheaper and they have unlimited data plans.

I sell both these and iPhone 4's.

The iPhone 4 still outsells it.

Other companies being AT&T and Verizon.


Ultimately the end would be about the same. Other than T-Mobile customers being forced to search for new service.




The point of the contract is that you get a cheaper phone. Not a cheaper phone bill.

If I understand this correctly. You are saying that Canada has 10 mobile phone providers and there still is no competition.


Ultimately for this happen would require government regulation. This is certainly the wrong political climate for that.

The ETF price raise goes into effect exactly one month and one day before the rumored iPhone 5 launch.

It's answered. It's GOING to happen.


That's the price they'll pay to start playing with the big boys.


TO WHO?!

All four telecoms are going to have identical prices when they all have the iPhone. There will be no "losing customers" over price because there will be no price differences. There's nowhere to go and it will cost $350 to leave ANY of them. It's OVER.


If I were a betting man, I'd bet a brand new iPhone 5 and the cost of two years of service that all hints of "unlimited" plans will be GONE on ALL carriers by 1/1/12. That's how sure I am that they're not going to be around much longer.

so says you......people are leaving Sprint in droves...why because their service sucks. People brag about having T-Mobile...why...because their plans are cheaper not beacuse they like their service. Most will not leave only to pay an ETF but when or if the their contract is up they will leave the low cost carriers (if all pricing and plans are the same) because their call quality is below that of other carriers.
All this will play out very soon and we will see......

Cool! So you're making money no matter the fanboy camp.

Quick question tho, and I know it would only be a personal opinion. Do you think the Galaxy 2 looks like the iPhone4, or more just a passing resemblance?

understatement of the century. lol

* nod * I would not take that bet. Am I ill for being happy that the main carriers in the U.S. will soon have the same iPhone and in 2012/2013 LTE will make them even more the same so there will be apples to apples competition (pardon the pun). They have to compete on price, packages (bundle with TV, phone, cloud services, etc), wireless service quality and customer service. Now if we can just get the consumer to not buy into the $199.00 phone that really costs them $700.00 over time, we can break the backs of these contracts. I'd take a discount on my monthly for buying the phone outright and have the freedom to tell a provider where they can stick it.

Cheers to Apple (and Google for riding along) for turning the wireless carriers into just another pipe and LTE for being a transport they can all agree on. Damn, do I hope Apple can do the same with the Cable TV business.

read his whole comment. he's talking specifically about specs and features. not sales and no idea what that patent stick comment had to do with anything.

Hate it or not the Galaxy S2 is a nice phone.

And I'm talking specifically that those don't matter at all. People couldn't care less.

They want a user experience. Which is what Apple gives them.

You must have missed the point where I said that we'd be better off with wireless networking as a commodity. Your description isn't that of a company's behavior in a commodity market.


You can certainly claim this all you want but that doesn't make it true. Cite some peer reviewed econ journal articles and I'll read them.

In my own experience I can think of a number of industries where privatization has been a good thing.

In the previous city I lived in city waste management services were privatized and costs have dropped drastically while service improved enormously. I can literally put anything out and they'll take it, because I could just pick from one of the 5 other providers in the region.

In Pittsburgh we have strong broadband competition between the cable company, fiber to the home, and 4g. Prices have been dropping and service speeds have been improving dramatically in the past three years.


This isn't really a great analogy as wireless towers aren't really the same as water, electricity, roads, or wires. I'm already covered by towers from four major carriers, plus I'd be happy to lease out my WiFi in a commodity setting.


Dude, government /is/ bad in America because every 4-12 years some idiot is in charge, and we generally don't get to have a vote of no confidence and get new elections.


I'm sure that you can pick out specific instances where this is the case, but I doubt that it's something you can make such a blanket statement about.

You're saying you don't think apple is going to beat the Galaxy 2 with its patent stick?

Galaxy S 2 handsets have yet to be released on any carriers in the U.S.

where do you live?

Is it too much to ask that journalists actually write a complete sentence? I doubt the DOJ released a press statement with the express intent to release a fragmented statement.

The government released plenty of spectrum and T-Mobile's parent let them go nuts when they spent > $13 Billion for a certain portion of spectrum several years back, and yes AT&T wants it.

Early today it was leaked that AT&T is guaranteeing the DoJ that it will create 5,000 new domestic jobs if the deal is approved.

Talk about a bribery.

So they not only will retain jobs in a merger environment where jobs are typically lost, but they will hire another 5k.

OMG is the middle class getting crapped on by corporations!

$60 a month at 1Mbs. Good luck.

I don't understand the bribery angle. splain?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...77U0M620110831

Exactly




While I'll agree that specs can be and often are oversold, it does not appear that you have experience with any other OS besides IOS.

The next year is going to be very interesting across the board.

considering they already are and it doesn't seem to be going in their favor...no I don't.

and there is a UX Android and more specifically Samsung gives you. is it as fluid as iOS? no but to many people it offers more. he obviously has this mystical ability to appreciate both OSes and can thus judge on specs and features.

AT&T does't have to show any of that. All it has to do is show how it 1) benefits consumers, and 2) doesn't decrease competition.

With that said, the buy out would harm consumers, the economy, innovations, and the list goes on.

Creating $5, 000 new jobs does not mean a net gain of jobs if AT&T gets rid of more old jobs, which will be the case. There is no way AT&T is going to keep the thousands of T-Mobile employees in areas such as the T-Mobile stores.

That's assuming they don't actually grow the business and decide to stop making a profit.

This is BS. People are leaving Sprint because Sprint doesn't have competitive phones because Verizon and AT&T have to date have had the lock on such phones. Bring the iPhone to Sprint and the tide will reverse. Same with T-Mobile. I have an unlocked iPhone on T-Mobile not only because of the competive plan prices but because I have had horrible customer service experiences with AT&T and Verizon. I also get better reception with the iPhone then my friends on AT&T (although I understand reception is an area specific issue).

Further, T-Mobile has consistently ranked top in customer satisfaction. Recently T-Moble and Sprint tied for best.

BS. It is about AT&T wasting the spectrum it does have. You don't see Verizon, Sprint, or T-Mobile complaining about Spectrum. Do a Google search, there are plenty of articles out there that says companies like AT&T are hoarding spectrum. AT&T is actually wanting to buy T-Mobile to try to pressure more T-Mobile customers into higher priced data plans whereby the sale can subsidize the price of even more spectrum. There are also articles that suggest AT&T can buy the spectrum if it needed it without buying T-Mobile.

AT&T wants T-Mobile's customers to milk them for higher priced data plans. Currently, AT&T requires users of certain smart phones to have a data plan. T-Mobile has no such requirement. I have no data plan for my iPhone. With wi-fi, and a PDS app like Navigon, I don't need a data plan. I save several hundred dollars a year by avoiding a data plan I don't' want or need.

Not doing well is relative. T-Mobile is profitable, making billions in profit yearly. T-Mobile's problem is it doesn't have access to desirable phones. If the iPhone was on T-Mobile it wouldn't' be losing subscribers. If you are going to be stuck with a phone for two years on contract, you want one you like.

AT&T and Verizon currently have a lock on some of the most desirable phones, including the iPhone.

Boy I would like to be ailing like T-Mobile. Give me that profit. T-Mobile is losing subscribers for the same reason Sprint is losing subscribers. AT&T and Verizon have the most desirable phones. Bring the iPhone to T-Mobile and it will be easier to grow subscribers.

T-Mobile is willing to sell itself to AT&T because AT&T is willing to overpay knowing it will recoup the cost from raising prices for the T-Mobile customers.

T-Mobile played by this same game to their benefit when the had the Danger Sidekick and would not allow any one else to have it. For a brief time the Sidekick was one of the most desirable phones you speak of and T-Mobile had it all to themselves.

AT&T took a chance with the iPhone and Apple's stringent rules for control over the iPhone ecosystem in a way that no other mobile phone provider would have done at the time. That gamble has paid off and AT&T has been rewarded for its faith in Apple.

No one else can be blamed for T-Mobile or Sprint's business decisions.

Go back and read the thread again...people already posted facts that contradict what you said. Sprint has the #3 selling phone:
http://www.cultofmac.com/the-iphone-...-report/109849
the EVO is 3rd behind iPhone 3Gs and IP4......If T-Mobile is so good then why is the parent company shopping them around to everyone that will listen to them? Beacuse they are losing money! You even posted this fact on posts #12 and #22! If they were great then they would not be losing money....plain and simple...... Your call reception/experience with T-Mobile might not be indictitive of the rest of the country. Verizon and AT&T continue to add customers at the expense of Sprint and T-Mobile....
EDIT:
The link you refenced says NOTHING about call quality. It centered around BUYING experiences...not whether they were happy with the call quality or service.

A journalist would have no problem writing a complete sentence. Unfortunately, most of them have been replaced with reporters...

apple???

or Google...I think Google has expressed interest in such a deal...

I do however think Apple would handle it better....but I feel Google would be a better fit as far as prices and the fact that Google would be more inclined to share the spectrum.

Then again I really don't know how these things would work.

"Share the spectrum?" Google's history seems more inclined to share what belongs to others than sharing out what they themselves own.

Let's see how Google handles the intricacies of a hardware company first, before we let the little darlings that can't cook their own meals try to run a wireless company.

You act like the playing field is level. I am not blaming AT&T for its deal with Apple. It hardly took a chance though. It had a five year lock in, which wouldn't hurt AT&T if the phone flopped. Apple bore the cost for bringing the phone to the market. Further, I do not know about Sprint, but T-Mobile also fought for the iPhone. It lost out because AT&T had the larger Network, and Jobs knew AT&T's CEO personally. Trying to land the iPhone doesn't seem like a bad business decision to me.

Moreover, you miss the point. Just because T-Mobile is playing the game, doesn't mean the game is fair or more importantly benefits consumers. The benefitting consumers should be a priority since it is our airwaves the companies are using.

I haven't read anything that suggests T-Mobile was shopping itself around before the AT&T deal. Further, T-Mobile is NOT losing money. It is profitable. It's revenue is declining, which in the future could point to profitability problems. However, T-Mobile even says the bulk of its problem has to do with not having the iPhone. It also says it is profitable.


Further, saying Sprint has the top third best selling phone is meaningless without numbers. HP currently has the second best selling Tablet, yet it is losing millions and its sales are close to a percentage point of Apple's iPad total sales. However, saying you have the second best selling Tablet sounds impressive doesn't it?

The article linked to 1) doesn't give the total number of phone sales, and 2) the break down of who won those sales. If fifty phones were sold, and Apple won 40 of those sales, and the Sprint sold HTC EVO won 5 sales, and everybody else shared five sales, that would make the Sprint HTC EVO the second best selling phone. That also doesn't really seem very impressive either. In my example, 40 of those 50 people likely aren't even considering Sprint or T-Mobile because of the lack of iPhone.

Actually, there's one carrier that has plans exactly like what you want. Once the $15 payments have paid off the price of the phone, your bill goes down by $15. If you bring your own phone, your bill is $15 less off the bat. Can you guess which carrier this might be?

Yup, T-Mobile. Get one of their plans locked in now, before AT&T shuts them off.

That option is bullshit.

When you buy a phone on contract, a portion of your monthly bill goes to pay for the phone... suposedly.

If that's the case, then why is it when you buy a phone out of contract, your monthly rates aren't reduced since you aren't receiving the subsidy?