How many times in the last sixty years has Europe had to rebuild its telecommunications infrastructure (that didn't exist prior, I might add)?!
I'll admit a bit of exaggeration. I was thinking about Frankfurt at that moment. I swear you could put a t-square on any street corner and it would show true. I loved the ISDN when I lived there, something I couldn't see possible in cities in the NE of the US for decades.
How anyone can say this merger is good for consumers with a straight face is beyond me.
Keep in mind that Sprint tried to get T-Mobile themselves. So that takes the country down to 3 major players. How is that good for consumers. It's the same 'one less player to provide competition' as ATT and T-Mobile joining
Plus DTK is going to kill T-Mobile US if there's not a buyer so that's one less player.
In the end it seems like the issue is the customer contracts but how many does T-Mobile have. And if ATT says they just want the towers is there a way to give them that but not the subscribers. Set the change over for say 6 months ahead and notify all T-Mobile customers that they must switch by that time or they will have no service. Cut all ETFs to smooth the blow.
"We of course will vigorously contest this matter in court as AT&T?s merger with T-Mobile USA will: help solve our nation?s spectrum exhaust situation and improve wireless service for millions; allow AT&T to expand 4G LTE mobile broadband to another 55 million Americans, or 97% of the population; and result in billions of additional investment and tens of thousands of jobs, at a time when our nation needs them most."
I don't believe this part. I think if AT&T acquires T-Mobile, they will lay off thousands of employees, rather than hiring tens of thousands more. Maybe government regulators should hold AT&T to this statement as a condition of approving the merger. If they don't increase their employment by a certain number by a certain date, repossess the T-Mobile spectrum and auction it off to the other telecoms. Some requirements for service levels and lower cost plans would also be welcome.
How anyone can say this merger is good for consumers with a straight face is beyond me.
As I wrote in another post, the ATT-TMobile deal will benefit the consumers by having a much better coverage, and a better service, also, competing with Verizon and Sprint eventually will create better deals for the customer, it is a win win situation for t-mobile, a merger or eventually it may disappear, leaving just a fertile ground for another bidding war for t-mobile patents, equipment and customers.
I'm totally behind AT&T buying T-Mobile and improving and increasing my whole family's and 99% of my friends service.
The government should stay the hell out of my personal life which includes my cell/mobile service.
Just one question: Why on earth would AT&T improve their coverage and capacity once they buy out one of their competition? It actually decreases their incentives to do so.
I don't see any incentive for AT&T to a) improve coverage b) improve speeds c) lower prices once there is LESS competition in the market. If AT&T were an idealist company, that wanted to offer best coverage and speed at lowest possible price it would happen, but (correct me if I'm wrong), AT&T is a business whose main goal is to make money hand over fist.
Remember, that a completely free (i.e. unregulated) market is bad for the consumer in areas where a few big companies can dictate the access to a limited resource (electricity, food, radio spectrum etc.).
The United States also has the problem of being over twice the size of the EU. \
How about service availability and quality in comparably populated areas? East coast, west coast, the lakes?
And there are areas in Europe with low population densities and hostile terrain. Take a look at the Nordics (esp. Norway). Would that be comparable then?
Count me as one who can say it with a straight face. First, explain how having T-Mobile has created competition. Most who are against this deal keep saying that the big players run the market, so how does T-mobile help?
Also, if T-Mobile is not merged there is a strong possibility that they will go away. How does that figure into your plan?
It is called the free market, get used to it.
The thing I (and maybe other people as well) like about T-mobile is their prepaid plans. No other carrier in the US can provide data/voice/text for the prices they offer. Just the other day I tried to activate my factory unlocked iPhone on an AT&T prepaid plan. We got all the way to the last step, when they told me that they don't allow iPhones to be used with a prepaid plan. They went on to offer me a 2 year contract plan that would have cost me over twice as much. Without the competition, dumb rules like this can perpetuate.
AT&T wants T-Mobile for the frequencies. With them, they can ensure less competition.
Wow, from the sounds of it there are quite a few AT&T employees or shareholders here.
I'm all for the free market until the players in that free market start using abusive business practices, like trying to eliminate competition by any means necessary.
As a former AT&T customer and current T-Mobile customer I think the whole thing is hilarious. I get far better service now and prices AT&T just can't meet. I've had so many bad experiences with AT&T in the past it's laughable. If this goes through things will only get worse for consumers.
The problem with your free market theory is it is false. There is government interference in every area of the mix. AT&T relied on government tax rebatements and other freebies to acquire its infrastructure. Moreover, AT&T is relying on a commodity it 1) did not create, and 2) does not own. The public owns the airwaves, hence the government license. The government created the Internet, and released it to the public to use. If your free market theory was correct, anybody with some dough could become a carrier. The fact is, however, that isn't possible because of government regulation that has already delegated most of the spectrum to certain players.
T-Mobile has created competition because it puts pressure on AT&T and Verizon to keep things somewhat honest in terms of pricing. If either got to out of control, people like myself, would switch to T-Mobile. T-Mobile has over 30 million customers. If it had the iPhone, it would be more. That is according to T-Mobile itself.
As far as going away goes. How is a company making billions in profit a year going to go away? Would you give up close to six billion in profit? No way. Neither would T-Mobile. The only reason T-Mobile is up for sale is because AT&T is over paying.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fizzmaster
Count me as one who can say it with a straight face. First, explain how having T-Mobile has created competition. Most who are against this deal keep saying that the big players run the market, so how does T-mobile help?
Also, if T-Mobile is not merged there is a strong possibility that they will go away. How does that figure into your plan?
The thing I (and maybe other people as well) like about T-mobile is their prepaid plans. No other carrier in the US can provide data/voice/text for the prices they offer. Just the other day I tried to activate my factory unlocked iPhone on an AT&T prepaid plan. We got all the way to the last step, when they told me that they don't allow iPhones to be used with a prepaid plan. They went on to offer me a 2 year contract plan that would have cost me over twice as much. Without the competition, dumb rules like this can perpetuate.
AT&T wants T-Mobile for the frequencies. With them, they can ensure less competition.
And for the record, I do own AT&T stock!
Finally someone with some sanity.
AT&T is trying to buy a company for 39+ billion to do what it could do to it's own network with only a 6 billion investment. Experts have already gone on record with the FCC testifying to this. Wake up people!
AT&T is trying to buy a company for 39+ billion to do what it could do to it's own network with only a 6 billion investment. Experts have already gone on record with the FCC testifying to this. Wake up people!
Just to understand, you are referring to infrastructure correct? Because I have not seen anyone present a plan that shows how AT&T would obtain those customers as well.
It cracks me up reading people on this board try to defend not allowing this merger. Some time ago the Pharmacy that my wife works at was acquired by a national chain. The national chain did that to acquire the customers.
This is no different than what AT&T is going to do here. They will purchase T-Mobile and acquire all of T-Mobiles assets, debt, and customers. Some customers will leave, but the vast majority will stay.
The problem with your free market theory is it is false. There is government interference in every area of the mix. AT&T relied on government tax rebatements and other freebies to acquire its infrastructure. Moreover, AT&T is relying on a commodity it 1) did not create, and 2) does not own. The public owns the airwaves, hence the government license. The government created the Internet, and released it to the public to use. If your free market theory was correct, anybody with some dough could become a carrier. The fact is, however, that isn't possible because of government regulation that has already delegated most of the spectrum to certain players.
T-Mobile has created competition because it puts pressure on AT&T and Verizon to keep things somewhat honest in terms of pricing. If either got to out of control, people like myself, would switch to T-Mobile. T-Mobile has over 30 million customers. If it had the iPhone, it would be more. That is according to T-Mobile itself.
As far as going away goes. How is a company making billions in profit a year going to go away? Would you give up close to six billion in profit? No way. Neither would T-Mobile. The only reason T-Mobile is up for sale is because AT&T is over paying.
Would you please explain how T-Mobile has created pressure on Verizon and AT&T? According to many here, neither AT&T nor Verizon have been forced by competition to offer competitive pre-paid plans for example. So exactly how has T-Mobile created competition in this market.
Second, if T-Mobile were doing such a great job, you would be on their network now. Same for many of the people on this board. Of course we all know that they are not truly competitive and will never be given the current direction of their parent company.
Lastly, you might want to dig into the corporate structure more. It has been widely documented that the parent company does not want to invest anymore into T-Mobile since it continues to lose customers and underperform. Here is an article from before the merger talks.http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/04/d...e-usa-spinoff/
Comments
The United States also has the problem of being over twice the size of the EU.
And not getting bombed to oblivion every 40 or so years and having the 'opportunity' to start over their city planning and network infra.
And not getting bombed to oblivion every 40 or so years and having the 'opportunity' to start over their city planning and network infra.
How many times in the last sixty years has Europe had to rebuild its telecommunications infrastructure (that didn't exist prior, I might add)?!
How many times in the last sixty years has Europe had to rebuild its telecommunications infrastructure (that didn't exist prior, I might add)?!
I'll admit a bit of exaggeration.
How anyone can say this merger is good for consumers with a straight face is beyond me.
Keep in mind that Sprint tried to get T-Mobile themselves. So that takes the country down to 3 major players. How is that good for consumers. It's the same 'one less player to provide competition' as ATT and T-Mobile joining
Plus DTK is going to kill T-Mobile US if there's not a buyer so that's one less player.
In the end it seems like the issue is the customer contracts but how many does T-Mobile have. And if ATT says they just want the towers is there a way to give them that but not the subscribers. Set the change over for say 6 months ahead and notify all T-Mobile customers that they must switch by that time or they will have no service. Cut all ETFs to smooth the blow.
then each person can go to wherever they want.
"We of course will vigorously contest this matter in court as AT&T?s merger with T-Mobile USA will: help solve our nation?s spectrum exhaust situation and improve wireless service for millions; allow AT&T to expand 4G LTE mobile broadband to another 55 million Americans, or 97% of the population; and result in billions of additional investment and tens of thousands of jobs, at a time when our nation needs them most."
I don't believe this part. I think if AT&T acquires T-Mobile, they will lay off thousands of employees, rather than hiring tens of thousands more. Maybe government regulators should hold AT&T to this statement as a condition of approving the merger. If they don't increase their employment by a certain number by a certain date, repossess the T-Mobile spectrum and auction it off to the other telecoms. Some requirements for service levels and lower cost plans would also be welcome.
How anyone can say this merger is good for consumers with a straight face is beyond me.
As I wrote in another post, the ATT-TMobile deal will benefit the consumers by having a much better coverage, and a better service, also, competing with Verizon and Sprint eventually will create better deals for the customer, it is a win win situation for t-mobile, a merger or eventually it may disappear, leaving just a fertile ground for another bidding war for t-mobile patents, equipment and customers.
I am all for the merger...
George
I'm totally behind AT&T buying T-Mobile and improving and increasing my whole family's and 99% of my friends service.
The government should stay the hell out of my personal life which includes my cell/mobile service.
Just one question: Why on earth would AT&T improve their coverage and capacity once they buy out one of their competition? It actually decreases their incentives to do so.
I don't see any incentive for AT&T to a) improve coverage b) improve speeds c) lower prices once there is LESS competition in the market. If AT&T were an idealist company, that wanted to offer best coverage and speed at lowest possible price it would happen, but (correct me if I'm wrong), AT&T is a business whose main goal is to make money hand over fist.
Remember, that a completely free (i.e. unregulated) market is bad for the consumer in areas where a few big companies can dictate the access to a limited resource (electricity, food, radio spectrum etc.).
Regs, Jarkko
The United States also has the problem of being over twice the size of the EU.
How about service availability and quality in comparably populated areas? East coast, west coast, the lakes?
And there are areas in Europe with low population densities and hostile terrain. Take a look at the Nordics (esp. Norway). Would that be comparable then?
Regs, Jarkko
Count me as one who can say it with a straight face. First, explain how having T-Mobile has created competition. Most who are against this deal keep saying that the big players run the market, so how does T-mobile help?
Also, if T-Mobile is not merged there is a strong possibility that they will go away. How does that figure into your plan?
It is called the free market, get used to it.
The thing I (and maybe other people as well) like about T-mobile is their prepaid plans. No other carrier in the US can provide data/voice/text for the prices they offer. Just the other day I tried to activate my factory unlocked iPhone on an AT&T prepaid plan. We got all the way to the last step, when they told me that they don't allow iPhones to be used with a prepaid plan. They went on to offer me a 2 year contract plan that would have cost me over twice as much. Without the competition, dumb rules like this can perpetuate.
AT&T wants T-Mobile for the frequencies. With them, they can ensure less competition.
And for the record, I do own AT&T stock!
I'm all for the free market until the players in that free market start using abusive business practices, like trying to eliminate competition by any means necessary.
As a former AT&T customer and current T-Mobile customer I think the whole thing is hilarious. I get far better service now and prices AT&T just can't meet. I've had so many bad experiences with AT&T in the past it's laughable. If this goes through things will only get worse for consumers.
T-Mobile has created competition because it puts pressure on AT&T and Verizon to keep things somewhat honest in terms of pricing. If either got to out of control, people like myself, would switch to T-Mobile. T-Mobile has over 30 million customers. If it had the iPhone, it would be more. That is according to T-Mobile itself.
As far as going away goes. How is a company making billions in profit a year going to go away? Would you give up close to six billion in profit? No way. Neither would T-Mobile. The only reason T-Mobile is up for sale is because AT&T is over paying.
Count me as one who can say it with a straight face. First, explain how having T-Mobile has created competition. Most who are against this deal keep saying that the big players run the market, so how does T-mobile help?
Also, if T-Mobile is not merged there is a strong possibility that they will go away. How does that figure into your plan?
It is called the free market, get used to it.
The thing I (and maybe other people as well) like about T-mobile is their prepaid plans. No other carrier in the US can provide data/voice/text for the prices they offer. Just the other day I tried to activate my factory unlocked iPhone on an AT&T prepaid plan. We got all the way to the last step, when they told me that they don't allow iPhones to be used with a prepaid plan. They went on to offer me a 2 year contract plan that would have cost me over twice as much. Without the competition, dumb rules like this can perpetuate.
AT&T wants T-Mobile for the frequencies. With them, they can ensure less competition.
And for the record, I do own AT&T stock!
Finally someone with some sanity.
AT&T is trying to buy a company for 39+ billion to do what it could do to it's own network with only a 6 billion investment. Experts have already gone on record with the FCC testifying to this. Wake up people!
Finally someone with some sanity.
AT&T is trying to buy a company for 39+ billion to do what it could do to it's own network with only a 6 billion investment. Experts have already gone on record with the FCC testifying to this. Wake up people!
Just to understand, you are referring to infrastructure correct? Because I have not seen anyone present a plan that shows how AT&T would obtain those customers as well.
It cracks me up reading people on this board try to defend not allowing this merger. Some time ago the Pharmacy that my wife works at was acquired by a national chain. The national chain did that to acquire the customers.
This is no different than what AT&T is going to do here. They will purchase T-Mobile and acquire all of T-Mobiles assets, debt, and customers. Some customers will leave, but the vast majority will stay.
The problem with your free market theory is it is false. There is government interference in every area of the mix. AT&T relied on government tax rebatements and other freebies to acquire its infrastructure. Moreover, AT&T is relying on a commodity it 1) did not create, and 2) does not own. The public owns the airwaves, hence the government license. The government created the Internet, and released it to the public to use. If your free market theory was correct, anybody with some dough could become a carrier. The fact is, however, that isn't possible because of government regulation that has already delegated most of the spectrum to certain players.
T-Mobile has created competition because it puts pressure on AT&T and Verizon to keep things somewhat honest in terms of pricing. If either got to out of control, people like myself, would switch to T-Mobile. T-Mobile has over 30 million customers. If it had the iPhone, it would be more. That is according to T-Mobile itself.
As far as going away goes. How is a company making billions in profit a year going to go away? Would you give up close to six billion in profit? No way. Neither would T-Mobile. The only reason T-Mobile is up for sale is because AT&T is over paying.
Would you please explain how T-Mobile has created pressure on Verizon and AT&T? According to many here, neither AT&T nor Verizon have been forced by competition to offer competitive pre-paid plans for example. So exactly how has T-Mobile created competition in this market.
Second, if T-Mobile were doing such a great job, you would be on their network now. Same for many of the people on this board. Of course we all know that they are not truly competitive and will never be given the current direction of their parent company.
Lastly, you might want to dig into the corporate structure more. It has been widely documented that the parent company does not want to invest anymore into T-Mobile since it continues to lose customers and underperform. Here is an article from before the merger talks.http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/04/d...e-usa-spinoff/