DOJ Launches Inquiry Into Baby Bell Antitrust Behavior Uncle Sam sniffing at handset deals, net neutrality... According to the Wall Street Journal, the Department of Justice has launched an inquiry into whether companies like AT&T and Verizon have violated the Sherman Antitrust Act. According to the Journal, the inquiry isn't a full investigation yet -- and looks to explore exclusive handset deals and whether certain carriers "are unduly restricting the types of services other companies can offer on their networks." AT&T had this to say when Reuters asked for their thoughts on the DOJ's sniffing about: "We are not aware of any formal investigation by the Department of Justice, nor have they asked us to provide any information. The U.S. wireless industry is highly competitive and, as a result, delivers terrific innovation, many choices and attractive pricing for all customer segments." Scott Cleland, a "consultant" paid by AT&T and Verizon to regurgitate their policy positions, not too surprisingly, well, regurgitated AT&T's policy position. In a blog post, Cleland earns his cash, insisting that any in depth DOJ investigation would find "vibrant" competition in both the wireline and wireless sectors. The No Choke Points coalition, stocked with carriers like Sprint and Covad, were unsurprisingly less friendly, taking the opportunity to again attack AT&T and Verizon for their special access pricing: The NoChokepoints coalition echoes DoJ's concern about abuse of market power by dominant telecommunications companies, and believes that the focus of the Department's investigation should be on the clearly anti-competitive rates, terms and conditions imposed by AT&T and Verizon on the high-capacity broadband market, also known as special access. While there's a lot of talk about the new Obama administration being tougher on corporate interests, so far that hasn't been particularly clear in the telecom sector. Obama disappointed many by protecting AT&T and Verizon from the NSA warrantless wiretap boondoggle, and stocking the DOJ with oodles of RIAA and MPAA lawyers. New FCC boss Julius Genachowski only just joined the FCC, and while he's saying all the right things, whether he's going to be tough on AT&T or Verizon is certainly not clear. A real litmus test will be the administration's national broadband plan -- which could be a truly objective attempt to rectify the sector's competitive shortcomings, or a dog and pony show that pays lip service to consumer interest but does little to change the incumbent carrier stranglehold on the regulatory process.
|
 | | Well... Even if there is nothing going on, it's good to look in from time to time.
- A -- LETS GO METS! | |
|  |  | | baby bells DOJ should focus on AT&T not the baby bells. | |
|  |  n2jtx join:2001-01-13 Glen Head, NY Reviews:
·Optimum Online
| Re: baby bells said by brianiscool:DOJ should focus on AT&T not the baby bells. What baby bells? Except for US West which is now Qwest, they are all gone; NYNEX, Bell Atlantic, SNET, BellSouth, SBC, Southwestern Bell, Ameritech and Pacific Telesis.
AT&T = SBC, Southwestern Bell, Pacific Telesis, Ameritech, SNET, BellSouth and the old parent AT&T. Verizon = Bell Atlantic and NYNEX plus the independent telephone companies GTE and MCI. -- I support the right to keep and arm bears. | |
|  |  | | AT&T is the BabyBells, just all glued back together. AT&T is one of the targets of this investigation. | |
|  |  |  | | Re: baby bells I guess they will have to break up the company again. | |
|  |  |  |  nitzanPremium,VIP join:2008-02-27 kudos:2 | Re: baby bells They should. | |
|
 DaveDudeNo Fear join:1999-09-01 New Jersey kudos:1 | innovation , what innovation ? Phones havent changed in 30 years, Prices have never gone down. It wasnt until voip that the phone companies started caring. | |
|  |  me1212 join:2008-11-20 Pleasant Hill, MO | Re: innovation , what innovation ? Thats cause VoIP is actual competition. | |
|  |  RayWPremium join:2001-09-01 Layton, UT kudos:1 | said by DaveDude:Phones havent changed in 30 years, Prices have never gone down. It wasnt until voip that the phone companies started caring. Hmmm...I have a touch tone phone with 'memory' from around 1980, and it is *very* different than the phone I bought a year or two ago.
Of course, I also have a phone from 1965 (at least that is the tag on the back). Can not do touch tone, but it is the best phone for just talking on. And unlike the newer phones, it is a bullet proof phone from before the break-up days and fancy junk from China, now that IS different.
Or are you talking about the fact that most POTS phones are still connected to an analog cable made of twisted copper pairs going to the central office and thus having a lot more controllability? -- I am not lost, I find myself every time. | |
|  |  |  DaveDudeNo Fear join:1999-09-01 New Jersey kudos:1 Reviews:
·ViaTalk
·Vonage
·Comcast
| Re: innovation , what innovation ? said by RayW:said by DaveDude:Phones havent changed in 30 years, Prices have never gone down. It wasnt until voip that the phone companies started caring. Hmmm... Or are you talking about the fact that most POTS phones are still connected to an analog cable made of twisted copper pairs going to the central office and thus having a lot more controllability? yup... Cant compare to digital phone in office buildings. Why arent there home digital phones , as opposed to pots. Why do i have to hear touchtones, that work sometimes? There needs to be a home switch option. -- They Live... We Sleep...
Spreading the wealth around never results in a better outcome for people. It always results in destruction.
| |
|  |  |  |  | | Re: innovation , what innovation ? said by DaveDude:yup... Cant compare to digital phone in office buildings. Why arent there home digital phones , as opposed to pots. Why do i have to hear touchtones, that work sometimes? There needs to be a home switch option. ISDN has been available for many years now. If you can get an ISDN phone, there you go.
Before AT&T was broken up, they were gearing up for a big rollout of ISDN, and I'm sure a nice hefty lease of ISDN phones to end users. | |
|  |  |  |  |  DaveDudeNo Fear join:1999-09-01 New Jersey kudos:1 Reviews:
·ViaTalk
·Vonage
·Comcast
| Re: innovation , what innovation ? said by smcallah:said by DaveDude:yup... Cant compare to digital phone in office buildings. Why arent there home digital phones , as opposed to pots. Why do i have to hear touchtones, that work sometimes? There needs to be a home switch option. ISDN has been available for many years now. If you can get an ISDN phone, there you go. Before AT&T was broken up, they were gearing up for a big rollout of ISDN, and I'm sure a nice hefty lease of ISDN phones to end users. But that was in 90's right, what has happened since, i really wish there was a home switch option. Where you got a dsl-to switch at your house. -- They Live... We Sleep...
Spreading the wealth around never results in a better outcome for people. It always results in destruction.
| |
|
 | | NoChokePoints and Sprint Phooey on that. Sprint is a choke point. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. | |
|  |  iansltx join:2007-02-19 Golden, CO kudos:2 | Re: NoChokePoints and Sprint Please explain. | |
|
 |  1 edit | Mean whiles gasoline prices at the pumps are climbing and climbing once again.
Where are the DOJ inquiries? Drill baby drill! | |
|  |  DavidI have a son- d3Premium,VIP join:2002-05-30 Granite City, IL kudos:68 | Re: Mean whiles I keep hoping they will drill into that. I think the oil industries are in bigger cohorts than cell companies. | |
|  |  |  DaveDudeNo Fear join:1999-09-01 New Jersey kudos:1 Reviews:
·ViaTalk
·Vonage
·Comcast
| Re: Mean whiles said by David:I keep hoping they will drill into that. I think the oil industries are in bigger cohorts than cell companies. Well with the anti-drill lobbies , helping keep the price up. I something think the enviros have more money in exxon, then any investor. | |
|  |  |  |  MTUPremium join:2005-02-15 San Luis Obispo, CA Reviews:
·AT&T Yahoo
| Re: Mean whiles Do a bit of history search and you'll discover that a few years ago Chevron told it's stockholders that they were purposely NOT increasing refinery capacity so as to keep prices where they wanted them. Further, the OC's have over 10,000 'unexplored' existing leases (onshore and on) that are purposely being held 'offline'. When you have a captive audience and can still profit from 'imported' (from their own international fields) oil, why spend the extra to pay 'local' fees?
Sounds kinda like they (our own petroleum moguls) have us over a barrel. Oil that is. | |
|  |  |  |  |  DavidI have a son- d3Premium,VIP join:2002-05-30 Granite City, IL kudos:68 | Re: Mean whiles Wasn't there a PIC once that showed the FBI in a boat holding up a fish labled "stewart" on it and all the bigger fish below the boat labled "enron" and "tyco" were swimming below.
it was quite the funny pic. | |
|
 |  | | But look at that GREEN, well maintained grass! | |
|  |  Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| said by ninjatutle:gasoline prices at the pumps are climbing and climbing once again. Where are the DOJ inquiries? Drill baby drill! Screw that.. I want hydrogen fuel cell vehicles for under $30k and fuel stations selling a full tank for under $5! GM & Chrysler should be run out of business.. Ford can stay & soak up all the assets of the other two... and invite another foreign country (non asian) into the mix... to compete for hydrogen cars & suv's..
BTW, they just took a small break, they're not done gouging you at the pump this year! They just realized with the 1-year mark from the worst gasoline prices in USA history.. how much more they could be screwing you for, but give it time and poor attention span of the american people and it will happen again. By that time, the rest of the big 3- auto makers will be out of business (unless they can offer you a 15 year, 200,000 mile warranty bumper to bumper, extended warranty for a measly $2k more). | |
|  |  |  |
 |  fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium join:2005-05-20 kudos:3 | Nice photo from 2008.. Gas has dropped about 45 cents the last couple weeks.. around these parts , regular unleaded is just $2.25. As for CA, that's not a FED issue since CA wants to mandate all that E.C. suff keeping you up about 30 cents higher than the rest. | |
|
 | | This is actually the ONLY govt involvement that's needed... ...in telecom. Micro-regulation of ISPs, via competition-killing, innovation-stifling regulation masquerading under the banner of "network neutrality," is a bad idea, and the Obama administration should not pursue it. The government should limit itself to protecting consumers in the one way that is necessary: by protecting competition. If it does that, no other intervention is necessary.
See my blog posting at
»bennett.com/blog/2009/06/whats-t···al-axes/
for more on one area where anticompetitive behavior does need to be looked at -- and it's far more important than whether you can get your favorite model of cell phone on a particular network. | |
|  |  | | Re: This is actually the ONLY govt involvement that's needed... That's 30 seconds of my life I'll never get back. | |
|  |  |  |
 | | Don't waste time and resources ... Just tell them they broke the law and make them drop their rate or they are going to state a government will get in the cell phone biz. An do it cheaper .... 
This isn't going to happen ... Look at the price of oil ... ExxonMobil is stealing again ... | |
|  | | no crime here
there is no crime happening here as far as handset exclusivity goes. There would be a crime if said handset was exclusive and was the only handset that could make a call...or if there was only one handset provider. otherwise it is apple/google/htc/whoever 's business and right to partner with another company. | |
|  |  cfm117 join:2004-02-13 Woodland Hills, CA | Re: no crime here It's a moral crime for the "everyone must be equal" crowd. The government has to step in and make things right as it is unjust. | |
|  |  | | It's a crime because it limits competition, which is in essence anti-competitive. Phone manufacturers don't have to compete with each other directly, and wireless carriers can lock in customers for multiple years without having to worry about the service and quality of their network just because they have a good phone (*cough* AT&T *cough*). | |
|  |  |  fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium join:2005-05-20 kudos:3 | Re: no crime here said by sonicmerlin:It's a crime because it limits competition, which is in essence anti-competitive. You CLEARLY do not know what "competition" is, based on that comment alone. The competition is that one carrier has asked for a phone for THEIR network which means THEY have something desirable over someone else.. THAT is called "competition".. there are OTHER handsets that you can make calls on.. there is NOTHING in the law that requires a handset maker to make their sets available to all networks.
When it comes to right/wrong and the law, there is "the law" and there is what everyone else "feels" things should be.. As imperfect as some laws are, I'll still live by the law over what people WANT things to be... any day!
Phone manufacturers don't have to compete with each other directly, and wireless carriers can lock in customers for multiple years without having to worry about the service and quality of their network just because they have a good phone (*cough* AT&T *cough*). Again.. you're wrong. You don't HAVE to be locked into a carrier for any term.. YOU lock yourself into the carrier by taking the cheap phone offers.. pay full price and you're out anytime you want.
There is plenty of competition in cellular business.. While you may all it "crappy service" others may call it superior. Just becuase YOUR tower or set of towers gives you poor service doesn't mean towers down the street or in another city do.. the same goes from carrier to carrier.
.. and yea.. if you want the "good phone" then that is the part of the competition that you bought into.. personally, I like Sprints calling plans.. their phones aren't the greatest in my opinion.. while others MAY like their phone, such as the Palm Pre but say the rate plan they are required to have sucks..
.. it ALWAYS is more than a 2-way street.. competition is just fine. Just because someone doesn't like the phone, the plan, or a combination of both, available to them doesn't mean there is no competition.. it just means that they aren't pleasing everyone - and never will. This is OFTEN mistaken for "lack of choice".. and there is NOTHING that guarantees that everyone will have an option that fits their needs best.. | |
|  |  |  |  | | Re: no crime here You know, I could write a 1000 word essay disputing your claims and demonstrating your obvious logical fallacies, but I'd rather just point out that you have a history of bias and blatant misrepresentation.
Really, comments like "There is plenty of competition in cellular business" completely strip you of any credibility. | |
|  |  |  |  |  | | Re: no crime here said by sonicmerlin:You know, I could write a 1000 word essay disputing your claims and demonstrating your obvious logical fallacies, but I'd rather just point out that you have a history of bias and blatant misrepresentation. Really, comments like "There is plenty of competition in cellular business" completely strip you of any credibility. Can't be said any truer than that. | |
|  |  |  |  |  fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium join:2005-05-20 kudos:3 | When you're done living in your own opinions, and want to rejoin the real world, we'll talk. Your "cute" and allegedly witty responses don't win arguments - facts do.
The fact that you have nothing to say, rather, chose to attempt to discredit me by posting ANY response at all shows your incredible lack of knowledge. (And your cheer leader that followed your post as well)
For your information...
Competition:
Competition is a combat between individuals, groups, nations, animals, etc. for territory, a niche, or allocation of resources. It arises whenever two or more parties strive for a goal which cannot be shared. Competition occurs naturally between living organisms which co-exist in the same environment. For example, animals compete over water supplies, food, and mates, etc. Humans compete for water, food, and mates, though when these needs are met deep rivalries often arise over the pursuit of wealth, prestige, and fame. Business is often associated with competition as most companies are in competition with at least one other firm over the same group of customers.
Competition may give incentives for self-improvement. For example, if two watchmakers are competing for business, they will hopefully improve their products and service to increase sales. If one watchmaker is more responsive to the needs of consumers, this watchmaker will flourish. If birds compete for a limited water supply during a drought, the more suited birds will survive to reproduce and improve the population.
Rivals will often refer to their competitors as "the competition". The term can also be used to refer to the contest or tournament itself. | |
|  |  |  |  |  jester121Premium join:2003-08-09 Lake Zurich, IL | If there's supposedly no competition, why do I see commercials all over the place for ATT, Verizon, Sprint, TMobile, US Cellular?
What are they doing if not competing, oh gifted oracle of wisdom? | |
|
 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD | Silly Phone Companies Perhaps AT&T and Verizon should hire members of the New Black Panther Party to be their lobbyists. Then they will escape any criminal prosecution whatsoever. -- Blagojevich / Madoff 2012! | |
|  | | History repeats itself.... | |
|  | | Hilarious The whole idea behind the breakup in 1984 was to increase competition, from the local, equipment and long distance perspective.
So where did eight years of George W put US? Back exactly where we were 25 years ago, I appreciate our Anti-Trust division of the government looking out for us.
God bless the Magic Jack.. | |
|  |  jester121Premium join:2003-08-09 Lake Zurich, IL | Re: Hilarious hehe yeah, sure. Quick question for ya -- how many of the mergers took place since 2001? | |
|
 1 edit | Nothing will change The .Gov and ATT are in bed together. Do any of you actually think something will come out of this.
Here's a pipe keep on smoking.
They dont have to, pnh102. They will just allow DHS to do whatever they please, and the .Gov will roll over. | |
|
 | |
|
|