dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2014-03-25 09:14:07: One of the reasons AT&T had such a hard time getting antitrust regulators to approve their proposed takeover of T-Mobile was the sheer hubris with which the company repeatedly lied about the benefits of the deal, insisting that eliminating a competit.. ..

page: 1 · 2 · next

rradina

join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO

Unlikely

A product's retail price includes all costs and the buyer funds all costs.

AT&T's regulatory-free ideals are just fancy cost shifting. In the case of OTT products, consumers either pay more the connection or more for the content. They still fund the whole.

tpkatl

join:2009-11-16
Dacula, GA

Why would anyone believe AT&T, especially when it comes to money?

I don't know if pathological is the right word - but AT&T isn't exactly the most believable company in the world when it comes to service, service levels, pricing, performance, and a host of other things.

So why would anyone believe that they would voluntarily reduce prices? Only a fool.

I guaranteed that if they were so lucky as to get the regulators to sign off on this scheme, AT&T would find some clever way to squeeze out of any promises they made. It's the nature of a corporation to do that, and AT&T has been in the bait & switch business for longer than most.


ropeguru
Premium
join:2001-01-25
Mechanicsville, VA

Look for...

PAckage prices to go down and all the BS fees to go up.

tkdslr

join:2004-04-24
Pompano Beach, FL
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US

The only time prices will go down..

Is when a new aggressive competitor comes to town, and challenges the status quo.
(Google fiber please come to Florida..)

Until then, its switch to the best value and/or lowest cost, or do without..

Me, I got so use to slow/crappy/deteriorating aDSL broadband. It kept my usage down to the point that I was able to piggyback onto other already paid for internet access.

Screw the duopoly. Pox on both your houses, At&t and Comcast.


Mr Anon

@k12.il.us

1 recommendation

They absolutely would!

They would lower Internet prices to new levels you've never heard of like possibly $20 a month for as fast as they can provide it to you!

Then after that there would be an access fee.
A fee for youtube, Netflix, System updates and security, a general Internet access fee and various others. However you won't be paying these fees alone, the companies you access would be paying them too! All Money to the ISPs, it's only fair right?

political_i

join:2013-11-12

1 recommendation

Broken Promises

I think precedence speaks louder than their press releases.


MDA
Auto negotiating
Premium
join:2013-09-10
Minneapolis, MN

1 edit
reply to tpkatl

Re: Why would anyone believe AT&T, especially when it comes to money?

AT&T still butthurt from bell labs monopoly breakup. They want to con at every point they can to take back what they think should still be their's.


Zenit

join:2012-05-07
Purcellville, VA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Comcast
·T-Mobile US
·Verizon Online DSL

Wait what?

How would this in the end "lower prices for consumers" when they can charge -whatever they want- for access to different parts of the web?

I.E You don't have the Streaming Package, thats an extra $59.99 plus Streaming Technology Fee of $9.99, without this no Youtube, no Netflix, No Hulu, no iTunes Movies.

The above is the worst case scenario, but I can see how offering a shitty throttled service vs a service that tries to perform decently with the rest of the net is cheaper, for them.

They need to re-breakup AT&T, its too big. Just like they need to break up VZ. The RBOCs should have never been allowed to become wireless carriers. I am absolutely convinced that their wireless cash-cow is the problem with regards to wire-line quality. Why deploy FTTP when you can sell overpriced LTE?


rradina

join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
What they mean to say is the consumer's cost for their broadband connection could be lower because the cost of providing that connection would be shifted to content providers like Netflix, Hulu, Youtube, etc. However, competition for OTT services is much more vibrant than for connection services. History proves that competition leads to innovation and innovation makes things cheaper. It's unlikely the cost for the service that lacks competition will be reduced. More likely, it will not increase (as much) whereas the OTT service will increase to the point that it matches other OTT services offered by the company providing the connection service.

IMO -- this is all a lot of chess moves designed to prepare us for the day when traditional video disappears and it's all OTT. Those who earn revenue from traditional video will be well positioned because Netflix will have to charge $59.99/month to cover their delivery fees thereby allowing much more price flexibility to carrier-provided video options.


PaulHikeS2

join:2003-03-06
Fitchburg, MA
Reviews:
·Comcast

How about this logic?

Taking AT&T's logic one step furthur, I think the transit providers and the content providers should pay me to help upgrade and maintain my routers, internal ethernet network, and computers. Both parties will benefit from these upgrades: the transit providers as I will have better equipment to suck up their bandwidth that they will certainly bill me for, and of course I will be able to buy mode content at a higher quality (and price) with my newly upgraded equipment. Sound like a win-win!
--
Jay: What the @#$% is the internet???

mitsu06mr

join:2010-06-07
Ozone Park, NY

Prices did go down.

I used to pay $162 for 2 phones and 10GB shared data now I pay $116 a month for the same plan.

Got my mother in law the same discount, she used to pay around $250 for 5 phones and only 4GB data and now she pays around $172 a month for 10GB data and unlimited text+talk.

toejam

join:2013-06-14
San Jose, CA
reply to tpkatl

Re: Why would anyone believe AT&T, especially when it comes to money?

...no doubt a contender for the worst company award.

toejam

join:2013-06-14
San Jose, CA
reply to Mr Anon

Re: They absolutely would!

How dare you lay out their business model so clearly.

InvalidError

join:2008-02-03
kudos:5
reply to rradina

Re: Unlikely

That only works in cases where the costs are predetermined and fixed. The cost of bandwidth is elastic and highly variable, which makes it impossible to have a flat rate that is truly proportional to costs attached to individual accounts. That's where the notion of light subscribers subsidizing heavy users and per-byte billing comes in.

In theory, allowing ISPs to charge transit and content providers for peering imbalance would enable them to take out a large chunk of capacity-based costs out of end-user bills, allowing much cheaper service for people who use relatively little bandwidth during peak hours. Heavier peak users would end up paying the balance indirectly through their over-the-top services.

In practice, carriers have a long history of charging more for less so the amount of skepticism about AT&T passing a fair chunk of their savings back to customers is understandable.


ieolus
Support The Clecs

join:2001-06-19
Danbury, CT

Monopoly last-mile

None of this nonsense would even be possible w/o the last-mile monopolies/duopolies that we have let fester. That is the root of the problem and is what needs to be fixed.
--
"Speak for yourself "Chadmaster" - lesopp


ieolus
Support The Clecs

join:2001-06-19
Danbury, CT
reply to mitsu06mr

Re: Prices did go down.

Prices went down when T-Mobile decided to compete on price against AT&T? Who woulda thunk it?
--
"Speak for yourself "Chadmaster" - lesopp


PapaMidnight

join:2009-01-13
Baltimore, MD
reply to toejam

Re: Why would anyone believe AT&T, especially when it comes to money?

Oh please. Clearly, the actions of a video game company are much more egregious than that of a telecom that which has historically engaged in some of the most egregious business practices since the 1800s-era Robber Barons.

Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
reply to InvalidError

Re: Unlikely

Not the cost are not elastic or highly variable consider that it cost fractions of a penny to serve a consumer 1mb over 1gb once the equipment is installed.

Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
reply to PapaMidnight

Re: Why would anyone believe AT&T, especially when it comes to money?

Not sure where you pulled that rabbit out of, but AT&T is surely one of the worst companies on the planet.


jseymour

join:2009-12-11
Waterford, MI

1 recommendation

The Scorpion and the Frog: A Parable for Modern Times

The Scorpion and the Frog

A scorpion and a frog meet on the bank of a stream and the
scorpion asks the frog to carry him across on its back. The
frog asks, "How do I know you won't sting me?" The scorpion
says, "Because if I do, I will die too."

The frog is satisfied, and they set out, but in midstream,
the scorpion stings the frog. The frog feels the onset of
paralysis and starts to sink, knowing they both will drown,
but has just enough time to gasp "Why?"

Replies the scorpion: "Its my nature..."


Mr Fel
Premium
join:2008-03-17
Louisville, KY
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
reply to Skippy25

Re: Why would anyone believe AT&T, especially when it comes to money?

said by Skippy25:

Not sure where you pulled that rabbit out of, but AT&T is surely one of the worst companies on the planet.

EA makes Worst Company in America History, wins title for second year in a row
--
There's a point, far out there when the structures fail you, and the rules aren't weapons anymore, they're shackles.


Mr Fel
Premium
join:2008-03-17
Louisville, KY
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse

1 recommendation

reply to toejam

Re: They absolutely would!

He wasn't first to think of this crap.




IowaCowboy
Iowa native
Premium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Verizon Broadban..
·Comcast

A courageous judge

It took a lawsuit and a courageous judge to break up the Bell System in 1984.

Unfortunately the only entity that can be a plaintiff in an anti-trust lawsuit is the government, which is held hostage by lobbyists bought and paid for by big cable and telecoms.


PapaMidnight

join:2009-01-13
Baltimore, MD
reply to Mr Fel

Re: Why would anyone believe AT&T, especially when it comes to money?

Thanks, Mr Fel. I suppose I should have dropped in an "/s" as the end of that.


Mr Fel
Premium
join:2008-03-17
Louisville, KY
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse

1 edit
reply to tpkatl
I could tell it was sarcasm, I thought it was obvious

Edit: Made a direct reply to PapaMidnight See Profile but it sent the reply to wrong person, odd.


IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman

join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
kudos:1

Right...

This coming from the company that initially throttled "Unlimited" data for the top 5% of users, assuring that as time went on that the amount of data used by the top 5% would actually continue to drop beneath what AT&T sold as metered plans. »www.att.com/gen/press-room?pid=2···mapcode=
Then, AT&T arbitrarily picked 3GB (3G) and 5GB (LTE) data caps after which you are throttled to a crawl, but the plan is still called "Unlimited".

This coming from the company that asserted it needed T-Mobile to build its LTE network, when in actuality it didn't need it at all.
»Leaked AT&T Letter Demolishes Case For T-Mobile Merger

No AT&T, I don't trust you.
--
"We're going to start at one end of (Fallujah), and we're not going to stop until we get to the other. If there's anybody left when that happens, we're going to turn around and we're going to go back and finish it."
Lt. Col. Pete Newell: 1st Inf. US Army


fg8578

join:2009-04-26
Salem, OR
reply to Skippy25

Re: Unlikely

said by Skippy25:

Not the cost are not elastic or highly variable consider that it cost fractions of a penny to serve a consumer 1mb over 1gb once the equipment is installed.

Did you mean "once the fiber is installed"? Because burying the fiber is what costs the most. Even though it is a one-time cost, it is not negligible.

houghe9

join:2008-02-27
Lexington Park, MD
reply to tkdslr

Re: The only time prices will go down..

oh god thank you!

all of the posts can go away none of them matter. this is the bottom line. every market that google came into the customer has benefited whether it is from getting 70.00 a month unlimited or the forced incumbant offering better service at lower prices. this hurts my head so much that people do not understand this when it is so clear. google initially said they were only going to do 2 markets. by doing that it should have shown EVERYONE how much lack of competition means. people please please please understand any bill act law that reduces competition does not serve the consumer! business have one objective MAKE MONEY. reducing competition allows them to MAKE MONEY. it is clear in all of these markets. how are all of you guys enjoying that unlimited to 5gb cell cap as your feel that tingling sensation in your backside. you have 2 companies offering the same plans and prices. yeah they plan on lowering thier prices just as long as we give them more freedom....

this hurts me people would choose to pay more argue how they should pay more then tell everyone how stupid they are becasue big business will look out for us...

InvalidError

join:2008-02-03
kudos:5
reply to Skippy25

Re: Unlikely

Investment costs are not recovered overnight. When a large ISP or transit provider invests 200M$ adding 100Gbps of capacity across their network, they do not charge their individual residential end-users a one-time $500 extra fee to recover the parts, labor, maintenance, operating, etc. costs plus profit forecast for the equipment's projected lifespan; they amortize it over 5-6 years. In the meantime, there are also financial charges since most of those equipments are purchased on credit for additional tax deductions.

The rates transit providers charge their clients is the amortized cost of that investment based on bandwidth distribution between clients, recurring costs such as rack space, fiber/wavelength rental, maintenance, management, power, cooling, etc. plus profit margin.

There is no immediate link between investments and rates. It all goes through statistics and financing.

rradina

join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
reply to fg8578
So now that it's buried for FIOS areas, why do they need a new source of revenue from content providers to help recover those costs? Are they deliberately pricing a product that loses money?