If I remember correctly, the reason why the original merger in 2014 didn't happen is because the regulatory committy under Obama sited that it would create less competition. Article below from 2014 http://www.engadget.com/amp/2014/03/13/sprint-tmobile-merger/
Mergers should almost never be blocked. I can’t think of a real world reason why they should. If competition is actually functioning, no so-called monopoly is possible.
Ah, you may may need to revisit -- or visit -- some basic econ classes.
You may need to revisit some basic American history classes.
This merger should absolutely go forward. It was ridiculous it was opposed in the first place... and I say this as an AT&T stockholder.
Just what we need: fewer companies in a marketplace…
We need less regulation and more competition. As history has shown us time and again, businesses go through cycles of mergers and divestment to remain competitive, but if laws and requirements prevent competition (as was the case when AT&T was a monopoly), then consumers pay the price. There will always be new smaller, more responsive competitors to sluggish and unresponsive behemoths... as long as the behemoths cannot “legally” suppress competition.
This has little to do with regulation. It has to do with ownership rights of the frequencies the at issues companies use. The public owns the airwaves. The companies just have non-transferable rights.
if competition was the goal, killing the proposed ATT merger was one of the best decisions to ever happen to the cellular industry.
Blocked mergers have little to do with regulation? What are you talking about? They have everything to do with regulation.
And if the public actually “owns the airwaves” then there is no need for the FCC.
Um... what?
"What?" yourself. Did you have a real question or are you just so pressed for time there was no actual comment to be made?
This merger should absolutely go forward. It was ridiculous it was opposed in the first place... and I say this as an AT&T stockholder.
The trouble with your argument is the Public owns the frequency they use. Companies like T-Mobile only have a non-transferable license to use the frequency. So the owner of the frequencies need to provide consent to a merger that transfers usage rights.
The reason SoftBank has attempted this merger for the second time is trump is a corporate friendly administration more so than Obama.
If you mean Republicans generally are more willing to do anything a company wants no matter what the cost to the public, I agree.
Although, I will say it would be completely different allowing T-Mobile and Sprint to merge than allowing AT&T to buy T-Mobile. AT&T was wanting to buy T-Mobile to kill competition and increase its market share, T-Mobile and Sprint arguably would be merging to be more competitive with Verizon and T-Mobile. Further, Sprint seems to be slowly dying.
Gee, tell me more about the extraordinary bailouts of the "too big to fail" financial institutions.
Umm..are you referring to the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 ? That was Bush 43.
This merger should absolutely go forward. It was ridiculous it was opposed in the first place... and I say this as an AT&T stockholder.
Just what we need: fewer companies in a marketplace…
One company in a marketplace does not exactly mean monopoly, though. If other companies can occupy that same sector but choose not to because it give no significant income, that is not a monopoly. Monopoly happens when they CAN"T get to that segment, due to other company preventing them from doing that.
Well, that's what the frack they're doing. Man. tiresome.
Considering they get the god damn spectrum from the government and they spend loads of cash lobbying that government, that's a monopoly.
The ability to lobby the gov-t is a monopoly? Since when? What are you smoking?
Comments
You may need to revisit some basic American history classes.
"What?" yourself. Did you have a real question or are you just so pressed for time there was no actual comment to be made?