The following statement is from Wayne Watts, AT&T Senior Executive Vice President and General Counsel, dated August 31, 2011:
We are surprised and disappointed by today’s action, particularly since we have met repeatedly with the Department of Justice and there was no indication from the DOJ that this action was being contemplated.
We plan to ask for an expedited hearing so the enormous benefits of this merger can be fully reviewed. The DOJ has the burden of proving alleged anti-competitive affects and we intend to vigorously contest this matter in court.
At the end of the day, we believe facts will guide any final decision and the facts are clear. This merger 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;
• Result in billions of additional investment and tens of thousands of jobs, at a time when our nation needs them most.
We remain confident that this merger is in the best interest of consumers and our country, and the facts will prevail in court.
Source: AT&T
Related article:
U.S. DOJ sues to block AT&T’s $39 billion acquisition of T-Mobile USA – August 31, 2011
“We remain confident that this merger is in the best interest of consumers and our country, and the facts will prevail in court.”
I wish we could harness the power of bullsh*t. This statement alone could power the nation for months.
I am for the merger:
1. It will allow T-mobile users to finally have an iPhone.
2. It will allow the expansion and evolution of 4G.
3. There is no anti-comptetive reason for DOJ to be involved. This merger would only increase the competitive nature of these telecoms for the benefit of the consumer. Why? Because the competitors will have to try harder to compete with At&t and At&t would have to work harder to keep the larger customer base.
I am against the merger:
1. It would allow AT&T to raise prices because one more alternative carrier would cease to exist and the number of customers they hold hostage would increase.
2. See 1.
3. See 2.
Under what demented bizarro-logic does the removal of a competitor increase competition?
I really hope AT&T paid you to post that, because otherwise… Wow.
If the T-M deal goes through and you want a GSM phone, then there will be no competition in the U.S., at least not until Apple brings the “world phone” to market that work with both CDMA and GSM.
And my screen name is “Sucker”? God, PT Barnum would call you his best customer.
1. T-mobile users are getting the iPhone in a month. That alone will staunch T-mobile’s revenue bleed and get them former AT&T customers who are looking for a better value service.
2. 4G will expand anyway because AT&T doesn’t want to have a slower network than Verizon, T-mobile, or Sprint.
3. Shakes head that anyone could think that a market with three players is more competitive than a market with four, oh wait that’s what AT&T’s PR department said, it must be true. Do you long for 1983 when we paid through the nose for long distance before the original break-up of AT&T?
From redstate
Today it was announced that the Department of Justice will attempt to block AT&T’s acquisition of T-Mobile. The deal is needed for technical and regulatory reasons to allow AT&T to compete in the 4G wireless market with Verizon, Sprint/Clearwire, and with the upcoming competitor LightSquared. So why is the Department of Justice calling it bad for competition?
Enter R. Gerard Salemme. It’s not a well-known name, but it’s been an important one in the Obama administration. It’s also a name that often comes up in the ventures of one Craig McCaw. Craig McCaw is an equal opportunity donor who gives to anyone who looks likely to win, including Gore 2000, Bush 2004, and both sides in 2008.
That $2,300 donation to Obama sure is paying off.
There’s a complicated web here, but I’ll do my best to explain it. R. Gerard Salemme is a man who has moved from one company to another in recent years, co-founding Eagle River, and working at XO, Clearwire, and now ICO Global Communications. What those firms all have in common is that they’re also firms invested in or founded by Craig McCaw, who’s Salemme’s business partner at Eagle River, and has often taken leadership roles in these firms. In particular, McCaw founded Clearwire, which operates a 4G wireless network.
Craig McCaw also took over Nextel, shaped it up, and sold it off to Sprint. Sprint Nextel currently owns a majority of Clearwire.
Where does Obama come in? In 2009, Salemme took time off from his job at Clearwire to join the Barack Obama transition team. One project of his was digital television transition issues, where he promoted the famous delay in the DTV transition. You see, the longer the DTV delay took, the longer it would be before Verizon Wireless could get its hands on the “C Block” of spectrum to aid its own 4G rollout, in order to compete with Clearwire’s network.
So the Obama administration took action, dragging its feet on DTV, in a way that hindered 4G competition. Salemme’s employer stood to benefit. Big surprise!
The time has now come for Clearwire’s 4G competition to be expanded further, as AT&T seeks to get ahold of T-Mobile’s spectrum, to allow it to roll out 4G wireless to over 95% of Americans. So naturally, the Obama DoJ is seeking to stop that from happening.
Ladies and gentlemen, enjoy your Hope and Change in the new Culture of Corruption.
“effects” not “affects” surely?
“Effect” is a noun, as in “special effects.”
“Affect” is a verb, as in how something is “affected.”
It is a poorly written sentence.
not a good sign when your general counsel has a poor grasp on the English language…
‘Affect’ is a perfectly good noun as well, for what you see when someone else feels an emotion.
So what is AT&T feeling, and what does DOJ need to prove?
A good rule of thumb is if can replace it with “result,” then “effect” is the proper choice. Effect does have a verb form – effected.
It’s a pity they didn’t also mention the long and storied history of telecom in this country, and the numerous consumers experienced back in the days when they were a monopoly.
On second thought, that’s probably why they didn’t mention it.
Anyone headed to Vegas soon want to lay a $100 on the DOJ for me? That’s about as safe a bet as you can get.
SCREW the BASTARDS!
Boo hoo hoo.
I think the merger will happen eventually.
Indeed they’ll create many jobs as they lay off thousands of Tmobile employees who overlap their AT&T counterparts and close every Tmobile store within a mile of an AT&T store.
Looking forward to the shitstorm should this merger take place. heh
I don’t buy the DOJ’s anti-competitive BS for a moment. The fact that this was unexpected suggests that political higher-ups at DOJ over-ruled the recommendations of career staff. Most likely, this is intended to squeeze ATT for additional campaign contributions to Obama’s reelection effort. Once the campaign contributions are made, a “compromise” will quickly develop that allows the deal to go through. This whole thing is SOP–standard operating procedure–for DC politicians.
Wow, you bought the whole AT&T line, didn’t you? “The fact that this was unexpected” – unexpected by who? AT&T’s PR flacks? From the moment it was announced there has been debate about this merger, and a formal protest from Sprint. The rest of your post reads like a Tea Party conspiracy tale.
@Ralph M
It must be a difficult existence to have to battle paranoia and dementia. Take courage, their is hope – if you reach out for it.
1+
what other compatible operator is going to take over T-mobile? They need $10 billion to move to LTE or they are a dinosaur, cheap, also, second run… If a hedge fund buys T-mobile do you really think they won’t offshore all the customer service? If sprint were to buy T-mobile, they’d fire everyone in the call center and offshore it. At least we know that AT&T does customer service in the USA and will create more jobs.
T-Mobile doesn’t charge enough to re-invest in future infrastructure and now they are screwed. I don’t see how people think that they should get LTE without paying for it.
The DOJ is correct on this one. After the merger AT&T will be larger than Sprint and Verizon combined. Anyone who believes this increases competition is delusional.
AT&T will control an unprecedented amount of America’s critical communications infrastructure including mobile and land based voice as well as mobile and land based Internet.
A&T& internal documents showed that they could have developed the same amount of additional infrastructure for less than 10 billion dollars. They considered that to be too expensive for the additional clients it would help. Yet they think it is smart to spend 30+ billion to acquire T-Mobile to acquire the additional infrastructure? Riiiiight. They are eliminating competition. If you cannot see this, again, you are delusional.
AT&T is a company that demonstrates that the very last thing on their minds is serving the public almost on a daily basis. The acquisition of T-Mobile will only result in exorbitant prices for the same services including and especially data.
They have demonstrated that rather than expanding existing infrastructure, their solution to growing data needs is bandwidth caps, and other anti-Net Neutrality practices. Expect limitations of all sorts of services. Expect that access to things like video calls, and IP based telephony will be severely restricted.
Remember. Already you pay the company for data access. You pay for a certain amount of bandwidth per month, WHETHER YOU USE IT OR NOT. If you decide you want to consume the bandwidth you’ve already paid for with your computer or some other tethered device, THEY CHARGE YOU MORE. In fact, THEY CHARGE YOU FOR THE RIGHT TO CONNECT YOUR PHONE TO ANOTHER DEVICE. That’s like charging you if you happen to use a bluetooth headset. It is immoral and a slap in the face to anyone who is an AT&T customer.
AT&T spends millions lobbying Washington. They are not asking for permission to improve service to clients. Believe me.
When I get on my capitalism soap box and start preaching the merits of the free market, all you have to do to knock the wind out of my lungs is whisper “AT&T.” It never ceases to amaze me how much people hate oil companies yet seldom mention AT&T.
After the merger, pretty much your only choices will be AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint. Sprint won’t last for long against AT&T and Verizon. When the only two carriers left are Verizon and AT&T expect price collusion up the wazoo.
AT&T is the monster that Apple helped to build.
What utter crap. Spend money on your own network AT&T! I was a loyal customer back to when you guys were Cingular and your service sucked! While Verizon is just as expensive I have great satisfaction with their network.
Stop trying to take over the wireless industry MA BELL!!!!
You naive brainwashed people need to research what a MONOpoly is. Clearly if AT&T merged with T-Mobile there still would be other competitors. Verizon, Sprint, Metro, Boost, Virgin. And if AT&T turned out to be the big nasty company we are afraid of well then nobody is making you stay with them. You see that’s the beauty of this thing called freedom. You can switch to another carrier and make AT&T work for your business. It’s called free market and competition. I see lots of other companies buying others. Were you complaining when Google bought Motorola Mobility??? If AT&T wants to buy another company and they have the money and there are still going to be other wireless carriers in the market then WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH THAT. All you bastards complain about this merger but let me ask you, how many energy providers do you have to choose from for your home’s energy needs??? Government needs to mind it’s own business and so do you people. The power is with the people not the other way around. Don’t undermine the basic principles of this great country and give away our freedoms to big brother government. Or maybe deep down inside your just a little communist and you didn’t even know it. Til now. Thank you.
1