Karl although I love your commentary.. -

Author	All Replies
verizon12345 @charter.com	Karl although I love your commentary.. You always write one-sided stories. In your dramas all telcos are evil and everyone else is working for the better good of the people. The FCC report was actually just a draft and full of conjecture. I'm not sure why the FCC even published a "draft," since it was not a full report nor was it even voted upon. There are always 2 sides to each story. Both the FCC and AT&T stories have holes but only one side is pointed out. I have no confidence in the FCC They are politically motivated, just like the phone companies and are more interested in getting re-elected then serving the public good. T-Mobile has been losing customers for over 2 years. Tell me how they are such a competitive disruptive force in our industry? DT has no plans to pour the billions and billions in capital required to build out a nationwide LTE network for T-Mobile much less fill in all their GPRS only areas with HSPA +. How is a company like this in any good shape to operate competitively on its own? The FCC themselves have stated the "dire needs," of spectrum needed by wireless telcos like AT&T yet in the same draft they claim they have "more than enough." Total discrepancy here. Again all the "what if's," and "what not's," are all conjecture on anyone's part. You can hate AT&T and everything associated with them but the statements made by the FCC don't add up either and people will continue to believe only what they want to regardless of merit or facts.
	to forum · permalink · 2011-12-01 14:51:05 ·
HarleyYac Yaco Premium join:2001-10-13 Allendale, NJ kudos:2 Reviews: ·Optimum Online	Here Here!! lets end all regulation and government meddling!!! The corporations will take care of us all!! We can trust them!! ::not:: -- My opinion on religion and science? Science builds airplanes. Religion flies them into buildings.
	to forum · permalink · 2011-12-01 14:58:43 ·
etaadmin join:2002-01-17 Dallas, TX kudos:1	reply to verizon12345 said by verizon12345 : You always write one-sided stories. In your dramas all telcos are evil and everyone else is working for the better good of the people. The FCC report was actually just a draft and full of conjecture. I'm not sure why the FCC even published a "draft," since it was not a full report nor was it even voted upon. There are always 2 sides to each story. Both the FCC and AT&T stories have holes but only one side is pointed out. I have no confidence in the FCC They are politically motivated, just like the phone companies and are more interested in getting re-elected then serving the public good. T-Mobile has been losing customers for over 2 years. Tell me how they are such a competitive disruptive force in our industry? DT has no plans to pour the billions and billions in capital required to build out a nationwide LTE network for T-Mobile much less fill in all their GPRS only areas with HSPA +. How is a company like this in any good shape to operate competitively on its own? The FCC themselves have stated the "dire needs," of spectrum needed by wireless telcos like AT&T yet in the same draft they claim they have "more than enough." Total discrepancy here. Again all the "what if's," and "what not's," are all conjecture on anyone's part. You can hate AT&T and everything associated with them but the statements made by the FCC don't add up either and people will continue to believe only what they want to regardless of merit or facts. The FCC report just reasserts what we (consumers) have experienced for years and decades. 1. That at&t are thieves. 2. That at&t will destroy US jobs after and before the merger. 3. That at&t are parasites seeking special treatment from the government. 4. That at&t lied about the merger and continue to lie. 5. That at&t is too lazy and short sighted to build a competitive wireless network by themselves.
	to forum · permalink · 2011-12-01 14:59:36 ·
rlharris02 join:2009-02-06	reply to verizon12345 Karl does a great job. This is one of the few times that the FCC was 100% right. Tmobile, has been cash positive for over the past 2 years. Having a 4th provider will drive prices down and keep verizon and att in check. Tmobile can easily have a 4G path, they could use the same multi mode antenna's Sprint will and start converting there PCS, and AWS over to LTE over time. Easy. Also spectrum wise ATT in most of the largest markets use less than 50% of there spectrum. ATT is like a warehouse. Also, with providers like LS,Dish,Clearwire there is NO need for ATT or Tmobile to say they need specturm so so bad. But all in all you are clearly an ATT employee .
	to forum · permalink · 2011-12-01 15:05:31 ·
ncbill Premium join:2007-01-23 Winston Salem, NC	reply to verizon12345 3Q2011 results for T-Mobile (connections): 33,711,000 total 126,000 net adds
	to forum · permalink · 2011-12-01 15:13:27 ·
fuziwuzi Not born yesterday Premium join:2005-07-01 Atlanta, GA	reply to verizon12345 The only response worthwhile to your diatribe is: bullsh**. -- Teabaggers: Destroying America is Priority #1
	to forum · permalink · 2011-12-01 15:16:30 ·
pegasusx join:2005-03-29	reply to verizon12345 Any disclosures you'd like to make about who you work for?
	to forum · permalink · 2011-12-01 15:19:44 ·
BiggA join:2005-11-23 EARTH Reviews: ·Comcast	reply to verizon12345 Yup, pretty much. What really annoys me is that they are trying to block this pro-consumer acquisition, and yet they won't take pro-consumer actions against the wireless carriers, like with overages, international roaming, unlocking devices, contracts, etc, etc. The FCC should use this opportunity to say YES, BUT to AT&T, with the BUT being a series of pro-consumer protections around overages, contracts, phone locking, international roaming, tethering, etc, etc.
	to forum · permalink · 2011-12-01 15:45:24 ·
jslik That just happened Premium join:2006-03-17	reply to verizon12345 said by verizon12345 : I have no confidence in the FCC They are politically motivated, just like the phone companies and are more interested in getting re-elected then serving the public good. Uh, the FCC is not elected. They're appointed, and with many FCC folks going on to work in the industry, how is this critical report going to help their future job prospects? -- If they told you wolverines make good house pets, would you believe them?
	to forum · permalink · 2011-12-01 16:15:18 ·
jseymour join:2009-12-11 Waterford, MI	reply to BiggA said by BiggA: Yup, pretty much. What really annoys me is that they are trying to block this pro-consumer acquisition... SBC "pro-consumer?" HAHAHAHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Pull the other one. It's got bells on. That's pretty funny. Jim
	to forum · permalink · 2011-12-01 16:15:52 ·
axus join:2001-06-18 Washington, DC	reply to verizon12345 I always read Karl's long articles as editorials. I can usually count on getting a good opposing view editorial in the comments. Your username is kind of funny, aren't verizon and charter competitors?
	to forum · permalink · 2011-12-01 16:48:45 ·
RJ44 join:2001-10-19 Nashville, TN	reply to rlharris02 said by rlharris02: But all in all you are clearly an ATT employee . The only thing that's clear is he is able to see that there are shades of grey in this world and often there's more than one side to an argument. Unlike many (most?) posters in this forum. And the author of this editorial.
	to forum · permalink · 2011-12-01 16:58:16 ·

chgo_man99 join:2010-01-01 Schaumburg, IL Reviews: ·AT&T U-Verse ·Mediacom ·T-Mobile US	reply to jseymour The old AT&T that was regulated by government was indeed procpnsumer. They had bell labs That invented and earned good reputation. Today AT&T is simply sbc with AT&T name on it and they are not as same as the old AT&T before divesture by doj in 1986.
	to forum · permalink · 2011-12-01 18:22:59 ·
jseymour join:2009-12-11 Waterford, MI	said by chgo_man99: The old AT&T that was regulated by government was indeed procpnsumer. They had bell labs That invented and earned good reputation. No question. Western Electric, too. Used to make telephones that i swear would probably have survived a nuclear holocaust. (I still have one or two--one even with a dial, I think--around.) said by chgo_man99: Today AT&T is simply sbc with AT&T name on it and they are not as same as the old AT&T before divesture by doj in 1986. Funny thing is: I think they figured that, by renaming themselves, they'd escape their past. I guess it never occurred to them that if they kept behaving like SBC, it wouldn't matter what they named themselves, people would still dislike them. I remember when I heard SBC had obtained AT&T. We had AT&T local and long distance, and AT&T T1s. I wrote our TelCom consultant "I got a bad feeling about this." Sure enough: They have met my worst expectations. Things started going south w/in about a year after SBC obtained AT&T, and have gone basically downhill ever since. Jim
	to forum · permalink · 2011-12-01 19:49:47 ·
BiggA join:2005-11-23 EARTH	reply to jseymour Overall, they aren't that great, unless you compare them to Verizon, but this move is pro-consumer, as it will create a efficiency on a much larger scale and disrupt the duopoly that currently rules wireless with an iron fist.
	to forum · permalink · 2011-12-01 20:08:25 ·
tiger72 SexaT duorP Premium join:2001-03-28 Saint Louis, MO kudos:1	reply to verizon12345 said by verizon12345 : You always write one-sided stories. He very much does. In your dramas all telcos are evil and everyone else is working for the better good of the people. agreed. The FCC report was actually just a draft and full of conjecture. I'm not sure why the FCC even published a "draft," since it was not a full report nor was it even voted upon. You're echoeing what ATT said. My question: Why does it matter? There are always 2 sides to each story. Both the FCC and AT&T stories have holes but only one side is pointed out. ATT is extremely effective at marketing their point. They've been repeating their marketing statements for a year now. They have refused to back up their statements with any real data. The onus is on them to prove that they need T-Mobile. I have no confidence in the FCC They are politically motivated, just like the phone companies and are more interested in getting re-elected then serving the public good. They aren't elected... They're appointed. T-Mobile has been losing customers for over 2 years. Tell me how they are such a competitive disruptive force in our industry? Because they continue to make money. By ATT's own admission, they would never have deployed anything about 7.2mbps HSDPA were it not for T-Mobile deploying 21mbps, and then 42mbps HSPA+. By deploying faster HSPA+, ATT benefitted ALL of its customers because it quadrupled their capacity (ie the same towers could provide data 4x faster to the same customers). Again, the only reason you're seeing faster data speeds on ATT now than what you saw 2 years ago is because of T-Mobile's successful HSPA+ deployments that raised expectations for what a '3g' network is capable of. This was Spring of this year: DT has no plans to pour the billions and billions in capital required to build out a nationwide LTE network for T-Mobile much less fill in all their GPRS only areas with HSPA +. How is a company like this in any good shape to operate competitively on its own? I don't even know where to start with this stupid remark. 1. While this whole buy-out business was going on, T-Mobile has continued to see investment. See: 42mbps HSPA+ deployments, 49.95 Unlimited Everything Plan introduced, etc. etc. etc. 2. GPRS areas will eventually be upgraded to HSPA+ - this was already layed out in T-Mobile's business plan. In fact, upgrading those areas to HSPA+ is deemed very important to T-Mobile, as they want to re-farm their 1900mhz network for LTE/further HSPA+ deployment. See: The FCC themselves have stated the "dire needs," of spectrum needed by wireless telcos like AT&T yet in the same draft they claim they have "more than enough." Total discrepancy here. Context. Learn it. For FUTURE growth, a LOT more spectrum is necessary. Eventually the desire is that Cellular internet will compete directly with landline internet (cable/dsl/fiber). But there simply isn't enough spectrum to dedicate right now to making this possible nationwide. So when the FCC speaks to CONGRESS, they inform them that for the FUTURE, there isn't enough spectrum based upon current growth models. But as far as ATT is concerned, they're just sitting on spectrum that they're already supposed to be using. And while small players like T-Mobile, Leap, and Metro are fighting for spectrum ATT is letting it sit unallocated for years. Put differently: If other carriers (say, T-Mobile) had the spectrum that ATT is simply sitting on, they'd be able to have an LTE plan without having to refarm their old networks. ATT is trying to have its cake, and eat it too. They're sitting on spectrum so that their competitors can't use it. Then they're telling the world that they should gobble up their competitors because obviously there isn't enough spectrum to go around. Again all the "what if's," and "what not's," are all conjecture on anyone's part. You can hate AT&T and everything associated with them but the statements made by the FCC don't add up either and people will continue to believe only what they want to regardless of merit or facts. The statements add up. You just need to read up more on the technology at play. -- "What makes us omniscient? Have we a record of omniscience? ...If we can't persuade nations with comparable values of the merit of our cause, we'd better reexamine our reasoning." -United States Secretary of Defense (1961-1968) Robert S. McNamara
	to forum · permalink · 2011-12-01 21:12:25 ·
fuziwuzi Not born yesterday Premium join:2005-07-01 Atlanta, GA	reply to BiggA said by BiggA: ...but this move is pro-consumer, as it will create a efficiency on a much larger scale... No. -- Teabaggers: Destroying America is Priority #1
	to forum · permalink · 2011-12-01 23:26:04 ·
BiggA join:2005-11-23 EARTH	Yes it is.
	to forum · permalink · 2011-12-02 00:05:05 ·
NuShrike join:2010-09-01	reply to verizon12345 Why did AT&T back out of the hearing if they had all the evidence they needed to easily disprove these 'conjectures'? You can't not go to trial, argue you could've easily won, and then subsequently blame the other side for over-reach; you've had your ample chance. You're only loosing credibility now.
	to forum · permalink · 2011-12-02 05:53:57 ·
rlharris02 join:2009-02-06	reply to BiggA What a joke, higher prices, less choices. Pro Consumer, what a JOKE Efficencies for a company merger means job losses as well as the venders will be hurt as well.
	to forum · permalink · 2011-12-02 08:22:31 ·

AT&T Angry FCC Pointed Out Just How Bad T-Mobile Deal Is > Karl although I love your commentary..

Karl although I love your commentary..