Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 40 of 40

Thread: DOJ Attempts to Scuttle AT&T's $39B T-Mobile Buy

  1. #31
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: DOJ Attempts to Scuttle AT&T's $39B T-Mobile Buy

    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh_Akston View Post
    If say GM and Ford merged, I'd see your point. But the problem lies in that there is plenty of competition in the cellular market. There are literally over 180 cellular providers in the US - source, so the angle the DOJ is taking in that it would create a monopoly simply doesn't fly in the face of the facts.

    AT&T is overpriced and they pretty much do suck. I know someone who works in one of their call centers, so I have knowledge of how they run. I'm currently a T-Mobile customer and I could care less either way to be honest.

    As for the 5,000 new jobs promise, I'm a little skeptical as well. There will be layoffs with a merger and how long would these 5,000 jobs remain in place? It is a shot at Obama and his administration and it will be used as campaign fodder for whoever his opponent ends up being. From my perspective, it looks more like the administration is siding with Verizon here more than anything. While both AT&T and Verizon have union employees, the Verizon employees have been on strike. I'm skeptical of the DOJ's angle here in addition to the promise to bring back 5,000 new jobs by AT&T.
    I'm going to defend my employer and say, ATT does not suck.
    Climate, changes. It takes a particularly uneducated population to buy into the idea that it's their fault climate is changing and further political solutions can fix it.



  2. #32
    Sage
    Karl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    12-18-14 @ 09:35 AM
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,561

    Re: DOJ Attempts to Scuttle AT&T's $39B T-Mobile Buy

    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh_Akston, in the OP View Post
    DOJ Attempts To Scuttle AT&T's $39B T-Mobile Buy | FoxBusiness.com

    Hmmm, [1] 5,000 new jobs returning to the US which is struggling to stay out of a double-dip recession and the DOJ blocks it? Good for you Obama! How's that hope and change working out for everyone?

    This is just dumb. The DOJ seems to be picking and choosing who they will side with. [2] Further proof that government needs to stay out of business.
    1. Assuming that the DOJ has legitimate concerns about the merger (and there has been no legitimate reason offered to think otherwise), you're arguing that the DOJ should succumb to bribery (the 5,000 jobs). What if T-Mobile offered to create 6,000 U.S. jobs? Would you then side with them?

    2. You're also arguing against anti-trust actions in general; coupled with point #1, we get government for sale to the highest bidder with no restrictions on how large those bidders may become? No thanks.

  3. #33
    Sage
    Karl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    12-18-14 @ 09:35 AM
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,561

    Re: DOJ Attempts to Scuttle AT&T's $39B T-Mobile Buy

    Quote Originally Posted by soccerboy22 View Post
    Yeah I just read this on CNN. I do not understand the DOJ's logic on this one. I guess they must fear a monopoly on telecommunications?
    I thought the logic rather clear; here are the pertinent excerpts from the OP's link:

    “We feel the combination of AT&T and T-Mobile would result in tens of millions of consumers all across the United States facing higher prices, fewer choices and lower quality products for their mobile wireless services,” James Cole, the deputy U.S. Attorney General, said at a press c onference Wednesday morning. In making its case, the DOJ pointed to the crucial role T-Mobile has played in the mobile market as a low-cost alternative to many Americans. The complaint says AT&T and T-Mobile compete with each other in 97 of the 100 largest U.S. cellular marketing areas.

    “T-Mobile has been an important source of competition among the national carriers, including through innovation and quality enhancements such as the roll-out of the first nationwide high-speed data network,” Sharis Pozen, acting assistant attorney general in charge of the DOJ's antitrust division, said in a statement. “Unless this merger is blocked, competition and innovation will be reduced, and consumers will suffer.” [source: http://www.foxbusiness.com/industries/2011/08/31/report-doj-opposes-atts-t-mobile-usa-buy/]Fox Business]
    Can anyone think of one of these mega-mergers where any consumer or worker came out better for the deal? Or even just stayed the same? Other than the investment bankers that put it together, and the various corporate officer golden parachutes, of course . . . .

  4. #34
    Sage
    Karl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    12-18-14 @ 09:35 AM
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,561

    Re: DOJ Attempts to Scuttle AT&T's $39B T-Mobile Buy

    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh_Akston, in the OP View Post
    DOJ Attempts To Scuttle AT&T's $39B T-Mobile Buy | FoxBusiness.com

    Hmmm, 5,000 new jobs returning to the US which is struggling to stay out of a double-dip recession and the DOJ blocks it? Good for you Obama! How's that hope and change working out for everyone?

    This is just dumb. The DOJ seems to be picking and choosing who they will side with. Further proof that government needs to stay out of business.
    You are effectively suggesting that the DOJ succumb to bribery (the 5,000 jobs), while providing no argument that the DOJ is acting improperly (other than refusing the bribe).

  5. #35
    Sage
    Karl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    12-18-14 @ 09:35 AM
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,561

    Re: DOJ Attempts to Scuttle AT&T's $39B T-Mobile Buy

    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh_Akston View Post
    The government has proven over and over and over (in fact nearly every time they try) again that government can't create competition through regulation and legislation. Most conservatives do believe in competition. If the liberals do, then why do they oppose de-regulating the health care industry to allow insurance companies to sell across state lines, thus bringing down the price of health care, among other things?
    Insurance companies can already sell across state lines, more or less. Blue Cross/Blue Shield, for example, services the health insurance needs (directly or indirectly) of over 100 million people in all 50 states (The 14-state WellPoint is the largest Blue Cross Blue Shield member, and is a publicly traded company) (source).

    Of course, the rub is that individual states have individual (and differing) regulations on what health insurers cover in their state, so outfits like BCBS generally maintain a corporate presence in each state and tailor their policies accordingly.

    Are you suggesting that the federal government step in, override the states, and lay down nationwide uniform health insurance policy guidelines? A national health insurance exchange, of sorts? It would likely streamline things, but I think the 10th Amendment crowd might throw a few rocks at you....
    Last edited by Karl; 09-03-11 at 07:53 PM.

  6. #36
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: DOJ Attempts to Scuttle AT&T's $39B T-Mobile Buy

    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh_Akston View Post
    The government has proven over and over and over (in fact nearly every time they try) again that government can't create competition through regulation and legislation. Most conservatives do believe in competition. If the liberals do, then why do they oppose de-regulating the health care industry to allow insurance companies to sell across state lines, thus bringing down the price of health care, among other things?
    I'm not an expert, but can't they already do that? I think Karl brought up a few decent points.

  7. #37
    Doesn't go below juicy
    tacomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Cleveland
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    31,781

    Re: DOJ Attempts to Scuttle AT&T's $39B T-Mobile Buy

    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post
    I'm not an expert, but can't they already do that? I think Karl brought up a few decent points.
    The main problem is that it will be a race to the bottom

  8. #38
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: DOJ Attempts to Scuttle AT&T's $39B T-Mobile Buy

    Quote Originally Posted by soccerboy22 View Post
    Yeah I just read this on CNN. I do not understand the DOJ's logic on this one. I guess they must fear a monopoly on telecommunications?
    Or a duopoly, more likely. US antitrust law is amorphous/ambiguous and is applied inconsistently (although, admittedly it's probably impossible to apply it consistently in practice). Just reminds me of the whole Baby Bell craziness that went on before I was born.

    If the District Court in DC thinks the DOJ has a case, then the gov't will win. If not, then they'll rule in favor of AT&T. But even afterwards, AT&T will have the FCC to contend with.
    Last edited by StillBallin75; 09-03-11 at 08:09 PM.

  9. #39
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: DOJ Attempts to Scuttle AT&T's $39B T-Mobile Buy

    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh_Akston View Post
    If say GM and Ford merged, I'd see your point. But the problem lies in that there is plenty of competition in the cellular market. There are literally over 180 cellular providers in the US - source, so the angle the DOJ is taking in that it would create a monopoly simply doesn't fly in the face of the facts.

    AT&T is overpriced and they pretty much do suck. I know someone who works in one of their call centers, so I have knowledge of how they run. I'm currently a T-Mobile customer and I could care less either way to be honest.

    As for the 5,000 new jobs promise, I'm a little skeptical as well. There will be layoffs with a merger and how long would these 5,000 jobs remain in place? It is a shot at Obama and his administration and it will be used as campaign fodder for whoever his opponent ends up being. From my perspective, it looks more like the administration is siding with Verizon here more than anything. While both AT&T and Verizon have union employees, the Verizon employees have been on strike. I'm skeptical of the DOJ's angle here in addition to the promise to bring back 5,000 new jobs by AT&T.
    The competition that is being emphasized here is not between ALL cellular providers, but between the few large giants that cater to the NATIONAL market. T-Mobile is AT&T's direct competitor in all but THREE cellular marketing areas nation-wide.

    http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2011...-and-t-mobile/
    Last edited by StillBallin75; 09-03-11 at 08:16 PM.

  10. #40
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: DOJ Attempts to Scuttle AT&T's $39B T-Mobile Buy

    Quote Originally Posted by OpportunityCost View Post
    You need a legal reason to break up a company?
    Unless they engage in collusion, price fixing etc, illegal activity; government cant just stick its nose into a company.

    If they suck, they will get competition. Government shouldnt force market actions, the market will do that by itself.
    Im not against competition, I dont think its the government's place to dictate company and market actions.
    It really depends on the market in question, not all markets are created equal.

    As to your point about whether or not the government should be involved in a firm's actions, there's still a solid basis in US antitrust law for a suit such as this. Anti-competitive behavior, including the formation of oligopolies, monopolies, duopolies, or otherwise, are still grounds for a lawsuit according to antitrust laws in this country.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_antitrust_law

    Anti-trust laws prohibit agreements in restraint of trade, monopolization and attempted monopolization, anticompetitive mergers and tie-in schemes, and, in some circumstances, price discrimination in the sale of commodities.
    Bell System divestiture - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Last edited by StillBallin75; 09-03-11 at 08:28 PM.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •