Comcast makes case for Time Warner Cable merger to U.S. regulators

“Comcast Corp’s merger with Time Warner Cable Inc would not deprive consumers of TV or broadband choices and would help the two companies compete against newcomers including Google Inc and Apple Inc in the video market, Comcast told U.S. regulators on Tuesday,” Alina Selyukh and Liana B. Baker report for Reuters. “Comcast’s 175-page filing with the Federal Communications Commission formally launches the regulatory review of the proposed $45.2 billion merger between the No. 1 and No. 2 cable operators. The U.S. Department of Justice will conduct the antitrust review and the FCC will examine whether the deal is in the public interest.”

“Comcast has pledged to divest some cable subscribers so the combined company would serve just under 30 percent of the U.S. pay television video market. The company said it would serve between 20 and 40 percent of the U.S. broadband subscribers,” Selyukh and Baker report. “Opponents have raised concerns that the combined company will have too much power over what Americans can watch on television and do online.”

“Comcast’s filing comes a day before the company’s executive vice president, David Cohen, and Time Warner Cable’s finance chief, Arthur Minson, are scheduled to testify in Congress,” Selyukh and Baker report. “They are expected to face questions about the combined company’s reach into broadband markets.”

Read more in the full article here.

4 Comments

  1. “compete against newcomers including Google Inc and Apple Inc in the video market”

    If Comcast wanted to be competitive they would be upgrading their network instead of buying up TW and then making it difficult for Google and others to lay more fiber optic and offer an alternative. It’s all about control.

    Apple? Is Apple laying down fiber somewhere? Is Comcast having a Freudian slip regarding their discussions with Apple?

    1. Their buying of TW won’t affect outlays, as both have budgets that capitalize those projects.

      Do you live in a system that isn’t 750 MHz and therefore has slow internet and pixelated, if any, HD video?

      Just curious.

  2. Two bad companies, both well-hated by vast numbers of their customer, merging to become one bigger company well-hated by vast numbers of their customers.

    What’s required isn’t mergers. What’s required is ACTUAL competition in the market place. These two shite companies exist specifically because of their special privileged place within the industry: Approved MONOPOLIES in most of their market areas. This should never have occurred, should be stopped and reconciled NOW.

    The state of bad biznizz in the USA.

    1. There is competition in most cable markets.

      Satellite for video and rural internet.
      Phone (fiber and twisted pair) for phone, internet and in some places video.
      Cellular for phone and internet, and pretty soon video.

      The problem that irritates you is that cable does most of these better, so for you to have the BEST internet, great video and good phones services, you forget about all the options.

      Again, there are few areas where cable has total domination, and in those areas, the ROI is not there for someone else to take the risk that the local cable company took.

      As an aside, I don’t care for this merger. It has nothing to do with competition, as the subscriber base will stay about the same in each market, but content delivery and control over content delivery via the ISP aspect is too dangerous.

      As the owner of NBC and a purveyor of liberal indoctrination, I don’t want major ISP’s to also be the disseminator of information, left or right.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.