 WHT
join:2010-03-26
kudos:3 | Simple questions Increase competition? T-Mobile currently *is* competition. How would taking them out of the game increase competition?
Lower prices? Just like the companies said blah blah blah would lower prices for grandmothers.
Improve broadband coverage? That would imply T-Mobile has coverage where AT&T is non-existent.
These are simple questions. Translation: Only one coat of AT&T blue paint will be needed to cover up the flaws in their arguments. | |
|
 |  GbcueAlmost P.E.Premium
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA
kudos:8 | Re: Simple questions Creating jobs? How will double the number of reps in duplicate positions not be axed?
--
My Blog 2.2 | |
|
| | | | Re: Simple questions Most of the reps would be axed but for every rep job axed they would hire 4 in Philippines or China . | |
|
| | | | | Re: Simple questions and they must triple the amount of lobbyists they use in washington | |
|
| | competition? How does the takeover and absorption (Borg assimilation-- "resistance is futile") of a separate business entity an increase of competition? It's as if AT&T is saying "by having another player on the field, it gets in the way of us competing with Verizon". That's ultimately what AT&T's "codetalk" means-- they don't want "pesky little" T-Mobile taking customers away from them, that keeps AT&T from beating Verizon with overwhelming numbers. It is the very existence of the "pesky little ones" like T-Mobile that keeps competition alive, and honest. Viva la T-Mobile USA! | |
|
 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD |  Won't Matter
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
|
|  ModusI hate smartassery on forumsPremium
join:2005-05-02
us | Re: Won't Matter You are right it will be approved and all this they are doing is just a act.
--
Think Ahead. Learn More. Solve Now! | |
|
| | | | Re: Won't Matter This is just a show to line up the nay sayers with hush money. | |
|
| GbcueAlmost P.E.Premium
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA
kudos:8 Reviews:
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| said by pnh102:This merger will be approved, as all telecom mergers always are. This blustering by these agencies, as always, will accomplish nothing.
It slows it down, at least.
--
My Blog 2.2 | |
|
| | Reviews:
 ·Comcast
 ·T-Mobile US
| Slows it down.... Exactly, and the name of the game (as far a sprint is concerned) is to buy yourself time as much as you can, and get a lot of customers outraged and try to get as many people/customers on the bandwagon as possible. If sprint gets smart and Lets ATT customers know that this merger will NOT provide them more coverage, that there will still be the same rate plans, no cheaper options for them, and the $39 billion is better spent building on there already in place network vs ATT's proposed $8 billion spending over the next 7 yrs. Getting ATT's own current customers to complain to ATT and the FCC for you is a win.
"You cant stop a Freight Train but put up enough road blocks and throw enough tree branches on the tracks and that trains engineer may decide to stop it on his own.." | |
|
| | | | | Re: Slows it down.... Sprint is only concerned about marketing to T-mobile customers during the transition and try to steal customers. They won't make any attempt to contact AT&T customers about the merger as there is no direct way to make money on it.
IMO, the only reason Sprint is even bitching is to try to get some significant concessions from AT&T so that they can fatten their profit margins. Along the lines of picking up divested assets from AT&T, etc | |
|
| | Sprint in WV It's funny that Sprint is pushing WV. I have Sprint and love Sprint, but in WV, Sprint just piggy-backs on nTelos' back. Sprint has no footprint of their own here. | |
|
 cdruGo ColtsPremium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:5
·Frontier FiOS
| What can they do? What can California, Louisiana, West Virginia, et al do really? So they hold their hearings, watch the dog and pony show about how great the merger is, and then not approve the merger. Then what? Do they have the power to stop the acquisition of a Delaware corporation (AT&T)? Are they going to prohibit AT&T from operating in their state? Or is it just posturing trying to look good for the constituency but no real power behind it? | |
|
| | | Re: What can they do? All they are looking for is some more contribution to the reelection campaign | |
|
| | cdruGo ColtsPremium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:5 Reviews:
·Frontier FiOS
| Re: What can they do? said by nutcr0cker:All they are looking for is some more contribution to the reelection campaign By why would AT&T-Mobile give them any? It would be like you demanding money from me, "or else". But you don't have any power or leverage over me. | |
|
| elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA | I would not expect much from the CPUC.
Two years ago, they "gave up" regulating AT&T, claiming it was "too difficult". | |
|
 PhonePowerPremium
join:2007-07-20
Winnetka, CA
kudos:1 | I've been to these hearings personally For every well meaning average Joe with a sane argument against the merger, there are 10 members of some minority, chamber of commerce, or disability group on the AT&T payroll that testify that they love this.
In the then end, they just tally up the nays and the yays (yays always win because they have been paid to be there).
The final assumption is that's the general public showing up. | |
|
| WhatNowPremium
join:2009-05-06
Charlotte, NC | Re: I've been to these hearings personally AT&T should let T-mobile fail and buy it cheaper. I did not hear Sprint crying when all the rumors were Sprint was the target. T-mobiles parent wants to get out of the market and to get the best price. | |
|
|
| | note to ATT CA wants the same pay off you give to FCC. thank you | |
|
|
|
|
|
·
·