FCC Allows AT&T To Withdraw T-Mobile Merger Application, But Releases Damning Co

Status
Not open for further replies.

MasterMace

Distinguished
Oct 12, 2010
51
0
18,590
1
AT&T should take the $38 billion they were putting into T-Mobile and use it to ... oh I don't know... make their network not suck a golf ball out of a garden hose?
 

memadmax

Distinguished
Mar 25, 2011
538
0
18,940
3
ok, AT&Dweeb, we know ur big and bad, but there is a limit...... Now, instead of expanding, how about start consolidating and improving what you have now?
 

ThisIsMe

Distinguished
May 15, 2009
85
0
18,580
0
You guys don't get it. It's not about infrstructure. They don't really need more towers. They want more spectrum to run all of the new stuff on and get it to everyone. Merging at&t's available spectrum with Tmobile's would benefit customers on both sides. They would use Tmobile's to provide true nation wide 4G to both at&t and Tmobile customers that would be much faster than Verizon's or Sprint's. They would also provide faster 3G service to all customers at the same time with very little change to the infrastructure.

This has nothing to do with the number of towers, or the backbone connecting them together. This is about the available bandwidth that a limited sprectrum provides. This is how Verizon was able to do it with 3G. They bought Alltel. Not sure why so many haters now want to stop it when it was cool back then. Seriously. Like a bunch of trolls.
 

jungleboogiemonster

Distinguished
Aug 19, 2007
42
0
18,580
0
Why does AT&T need more spectrum? They have more than any other carrier in the US, including Verizon. I fact, AT&T has offered to sell spectrum to LEAP Wireless if the deal is to go through. AT&T doesn't need spectrum, they want less competition.

[citation][nom]ThisIsMe[/nom]You guys don't get it. It's not about infrstructure. They don't really need more towers. They want more spectrum to run all of the new stuff on and get it to everyone. Merging at&t's available spectrum with Tmobile's would benefit customers on both sides. They would use Tmobile's to provide true nation wide 4G to both at&t and Tmobile customers that would be much faster than Verizon's or Sprint's. They would also provide faster 3G service to all customers at the same time with very little change to the infrastructure.This has nothing to do with the number of towers, or the backbone connecting them together. This is about the available bandwidth that a limited sprectrum provides. This is how Verizon was able to do it with 3G. They bought Alltel. Not sure why so many haters now want to stop it when it was cool back then. Seriously. Like a bunch of trolls.Why does AT&T need more spectrum? They have more than any other carrier in the US, including Verizon. I fact, AT&T has offered to sell spectrum to LEAP Wireless if the deal is to go through. AT&T doesn't need spectrum, they want less competition.[/citation]
 

beardguy

Distinguished
Dec 10, 2010
175
0
18,630
0
[citation][nom]ThisIsMe[/nom]You guys don't get it. It's not about infrstructure. They don't really need more towers. They want more spectrum to run all of the new stuff on and get it to everyone. Merging at&t's available spectrum with Tmobile's would benefit customers on both sides. They would use Tmobile's to provide true nation wide 4G to both at&t and Tmobile customers that would be much faster than Verizon's or Sprint's. They would also provide faster 3G service to all customers at the same time with very little change to the infrastructure.This has nothing to do with the number of towers, or the backbone connecting them together. This is about the available bandwidth that a limited sprectrum provides. This is how Verizon was able to do it with 3G. They bought Alltel. Not sure why so many haters now want to stop it when it was cool back then. Seriously. Like a bunch of trolls.[/citation]

Cool story bro. The fact is that competition is always best for consumers. You take another player out of the already limited amount of carriers, and we end up with a few monopolies that run the show. Why would you think this is a good thing? It seems you are only looking at it from a technological side, which I agree, it would be cool to have full 4G nation wide coverage. But not at the cost of losing another carrier.
 
G

Guest

Guest
I am on t-mobile and the day AT7T takes over I go to Verizon, this merger isn't actually going to get them new customers, as all T-Mobile customers will just leave. If I were Verizon I would have urged for this to pass, lots of more customers.
 

dalethepcman

Distinguished
Jul 1, 2010
542
0
18,940
2
[citation][nom]ThisIsMe[/nom]You guys don't get it. It's not about infrstructure. They don't really need more towers. They want more spectrum ....[/citation]

Actually there was this awesome concept called a roaming agreement that let carriers all share compatible spectrum and towers, then credits between the carriers are exchanged and whomever used more of the others resources pays for the difference. This works great for a long time when 2g/190k was the max data speed a cell could achieve. The thing is all of the big carriers got greedy, and don't want to share their cash cow of 3g and 4g data(you really think it costs even $1 for 5GB of data?) So users are starting to hit intentionally placed frequency limits, because the carriers themselves wont allow cross roaming on their high speed frequency's.

There is no shortage of spectrum. If AT&T's network is over utilized, they could easily have their towers hand off traffic/connections to a competitors tower and pay the for the usage. But AT&T would rather keep the $'s and give the customer a worse experience.

I guess most people are just used to taking it up the backside without lube for $100/month.
 

f-14

Distinguished
Apr 2, 2010
774
0
18,940
4
i seem to recall there being a quite serious sum of money down riding on this anti trust that if it was denied t-mobile gets the premerger payment as well as a chance for it's investors/shareholders to sue AT&T for damages.
something to that effect, am i wrong?
 

Thunderfox

Distinguished
Sep 3, 2006
177
0
18,630
0
At&t wants to be the new Ma Bell. They'd buy Verizon if they could. Thank god the government is doing something right for once.
 

gus1991

Distinguished
Oct 5, 2011
13
0
18,560
0
[citation][nom]MasterMace[/nom]AT&T should take the $38 billion they were putting into T-Mobile and use it to ... oh I don't know... make their network not suck a golf ball out of a garden hose?[/citation]

Yeah dude my AT&T phone blows so hard! I can ONLY get 22 mbps down and 11 up! It's seriously so frustrating...
 

blackened144

Distinguished
Aug 17, 2006
509
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]beardguy[/nom]Cool story bro. The fact is that competition is always best for consumers. You take another player out of the already limited amount of carriers, and we end up with a few monopolies that run the show. Why would you think this is a good thing? It seems you are only looking at it from a technological side, which I agree, it would be cool to have full 4G nation wide coverage. But not at the cost of losing another carrier.[/citation]
Dutch Telecom has hinted that they would rather let T-Mobile go out of business rather than keep paying out major bucks to prop the company up.. So how is letting T-Mobile go under better than letting them merge with ATT? You are going to loose another carrier no matter what happens.. How is that better for consumers or the industry? No one has answered this question yet.
 

nottheking

Distinguished
Jan 5, 2006
311
0
18,930
0
Honestly, I do have to agree with the position taken against AT&T here. Competition is important, especially in the telecom market, which has no become the cell phone market. Those who have any semblance of a memory for history would know that things weren't exactly peachy the first time AT&T had a monopoly in America, and giving them a second round isn't any better an idea.
[citation][nom]blackened144[/nom]No one has answered this question yet.[/citation]
Here's your answer: you're making the fallacious assumption that if T-Mobile dies, all its assets will just vanish into thin air.

Rather, what will happen is that it'll give a chance for smaller start-ups to snap up its assets (especially towers & spectrum, but also potentially subscriber contracts) and hence still giving the USA a fourth major cell provider.

On the flip side, if we allow the merger, we wind up with AT&T going from merely having a plurality, to being just shy of a majority of the market, with only a total of three major carriers. This results in us being closer to having a "too big to fail" situation; with more significant companies, the higher the likelihood that people will be able to allow failing companies to go their natural course. If that's the course in store for T-Mobile USA, then so be it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Linga1985 Streaming Video & TVs 1
R Streaming Video & TVs 0
R Streaming Video & TVs 0
V Streaming Video & TVs 1
K Streaming Video & TVs 1
I Streaming Video & TVs 7
R Streaming Video & TVs 0
W Streaming Video & TVs 2
I Streaming Video & TVs 2
R Streaming Video & TVs 0
R Streaming Video & TVs 0
L Streaming Video & TVs 1
S Streaming Video & TVs 1
R Streaming Video & TVs 0
L Streaming Video & TVs 4
L Streaming Video & TVs 3
Marcus Yam Streaming Video & TVs 28
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 9
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 1
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 2

ASK THE COMMUNITY