dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
694
share rss forum feed

axus

join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC
Reviews:
·Comcast

I wonder why AT&T didn't buy it instead

The stated reason for buying T-mobile was because of problems with limited spectrum. I doubt they needed any of T-mobiles other assets, and as T-mobile is losing customers they would probably get those anyways.

Good buy for Verizon. It won't decrease competition, because "SpectrumCo" didn't have customers or affect the price of cell phone service.

How much profit did SpectrumCo make?


lynkx

@comcast.net
Little over a billion profit. Not too shabby. Paid 2.37 B and sold for 3.6 B. There was a buyout of Cox Communications along the way.


JLNHS

@rr.com
reply to axus

It won't decrease competition

The acquisition of this spectrum by Verizon decreases the available supply of spectrum for new entrants and competitors. In effect, it protects Verizon from having to compete with other companies and decreases potential competition because there is a finite supply of spectrum.

Based on this FCC document (unless I've missed something), SpectrumCo paid approx. 1.298 Billion in Sept. 2006:

»wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/defaul ··· 2006&m=9 (PDF - Quick View)


lynkx

@comcast.net
per Multichannel they paid 2.37 B.

»www.multichannel.com/article/477 ··· lion.php

mogamer

join:2011-04-20
Royal Oak, MI
reply to axus
said by axus:

The stated reason for buying T-mobile was because of problems with limited spectrum. I doubt they needed any of T-mobiles other assets, and as T-mobile is losing customers they would probably get those anyways.

ATT didn't want this because it doesn't reduce competition by eliminating a competitor.