Slashdot Mirror
SBC Might Buy AT&T
ChipGuy writes "SBC is in talks to buy AT&T according to Wall Street Journal and New York Times, both reporting price tag to be between $15-and-$16 billion. The news comes close on heels of SBC reported weaker earnings and 7000 job cuts. The New York Times says talks are fluid and sensitive. Wall Street Journal says, "a major acquisition would speak to SBC Chief Executive Edward Whitacre Jr.'s aim of turning the company into a national brand and his desire to do at least one final deal before he retires." Om Malik writes that "buying AT&T will make sense for anyone, and not just SBC. Why? Because AT&T still is the only game in the enterprise markets. MCI is hurting and Sprint clearly wants to focus on wireless. That leaves AT&T in a pretty good shape.""
It's been bought and sold so many times.
"Let's break up Ma Bell so that some 20 years later they will all merge back together to become an even more powerful and unstoppable force."
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
I might buy AT&T too. I love speculation. Who else might buy AT&T? Are you thinking about it? Raise your hand if you are thinking about anything else.
How to Download YouTube Videos
I wonder if this is just a sign to come. With things like the internet (skype?) hurting the traditional phone companie's revenue streams, and with the slow but steady emergence of VoIP, the big phone companies days are numbered. They will still have a purpose, of course, but they'll have to learn to be more competitive in a more competitive industry.
I store my recipes online (the way nature intended)
Step 1: Reuinite the Bells Step 2: Use uber resources to roll out fiber (which they apparently don't have to share like their copper) Step 3: Regain monopoly
Sounds like everyone wants to play...
AT&T is not exactly a competitor at the moment. They have never been a competitor. They were designed from the ground up to be a monopoly provider, which they were for many years. Once their monopoly status ended, they coasted by on their reputation for about another 10-15 years, and then once the long distance market became truly competitive (beyond 3 major players) they pretty much fell apart. No division of AT&T has ever actually won over customers based on value, since they've historically been unnecessarily expensive. Without a buyout, AT&T will just wither up and die, as they are already close. No amount of transformation will ever allow AT&T to be a true free market competitor.
ALT="To all AT&T customers: we're here to stay" WIDTH="426" HEIGHT="60" BORDER="0" HSPACE="14" VSPACE="6"
Heck, I might even report this to the Register and get quoted as an "eagle eyed reader" like this guy did.
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
Before we get into it about rebuilding the hated Ma Bell of yesteryear, keep this in perspective. SBC is right now one of the four remaining RBOCs, or Baby Bells, formed from the divestiture of AT&T (the original national phone monopoly) in 1984. The RBOCs already provide national long distance service (opened to them following the Telecommunications Act of 1996). AT&T is mostly a pure long distance and data network (WAN) player these days. The Bells have to have network-sharing agreements to provide national LD service. Qwest has an extensive fiber LD network though. So this potential acquisition would add a national long distance and data network to an incumbent local service provider and give it a huge presence in the enterprise market. It would not create a new national phone monopoly or be the Son of Ma Bell. They would be a formidable competitor though.
Why would you, as SBC, be looking to put out more cash, if you just LOST cash last reporting period?
This must be that business sense i hear so much about.
Not only that, but as an AT&T customer, I'd be scared. SBC is, with the possible exception of CompUSA, the worst company I have to deal with day in and day out. Their tech support is a fucking joke, and their products and services are medocre at best.
Aside from that, do these mega-mergers ever actually, you know, work? Timewarner-AOL, HP Compaq?
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
and his desire to do at least one final deal before he retires
People always tell me that business leaders make their decisions based on hard facts and money. They're just as driven by vanity and shiny new things as the geeks are. They're just less honest with themselves ab't it...
Anyhow, the telecommunications industry has changed dramatically since the breakup of AT&T, and the rationale for the breakup no longer exists. These days, cell phones are prevalent; competitors easily enter the market for cell phones, which can be used for local and long-distance calls. A re-united AT&T (SBC + Pacbell, which was purchases by SBC, + AT&T + Lucent, which includes Bell Labs) would not pose a monopolistic threat. Heck, a re-united AT&T would be no more monopolistic than Micro$oft.
Note that even the Internet poses additional competition in the telecommunication market. Many people use the Internet, via VOIP, to make telephone calls although they may not realize that their call is being routed via IP packets.
This has been happening for a while ... I've always likened it to the scene in T2 where the bad robot is dropped in liquid nitrogen and shatters .... then slowly we see all the drops start to flow together to remake the evil robot again ....
This would be one interesting acquisition if it did happen, if for nothing else reuniting AT&T with one of its spinoff companies. AT&T has a lot of assets (well those that it hasn't sold off) mostly tons of fiber in the ground, not just in the U.S. but internationally as well.
AT&T is sort of caught in the middle of things, they have a failed local business, long distance is dieing (if it's not dead already), and a highly competitive market place for IP services. What else does AT&T have that everyone else doesn't? They don't have their research labs any more (Lucent - another company in a downward spiral, hopefully coming back soon) or their computer division (NCR) and anything manufactured today isn't made by good old Western Electric, it's just rebranded (or someone bought the rights to the name.)
It's sad to see one of the leaders in telecommunications and research in such a poor state of business. I miss the good old days. Many people forget that AT&T (well Bell Labs) invented just a few things like the transistor, laser, TV transmission, etc. not to mention built automatic mechanical exchanges (think crossbar switches!) in days when all there were was vacuum tubes.
I remember getting tours of the 'Labs back a decade or so ago, it was still impressive what they were doing with technology back then. A lot of wireless stuff that's coming out now was created by them. Supposedly during their peak they'd churn out 2-3 patents a day, every day of the year. They had people that would do just hypothetical research, sitting around dreaming about nothing but the big bang theory and getting paid for it. Now that's research.
1) Lose money
2) Spend lots of money for a company losing even more money
3) ?????
4) profit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
So Long and Thanks for all the Fish.
I read that as "SCO might buy AT&T"
...With things like the internet (skype?) hurting the traditional phone companie's revenue streams, and with the slow but steady emergence of VoIP, the big phone companies days are numbered.
Maybe but I doubt it. True, the days of POTS as a cash cow probably are numbered, though we could argue about exactly how much time the have left. But that hardly makes SBC, Verizon and the rest helpless. Someone still needs to deliver a connection to the curb. Despite increasing comptition from cable companies and wireless, the Baby Bells do have a large installed network that isn't easy to replace. Yeah, margins will get squeezed but someone will have to maintain that wire and there is money to be made there.
VOIP is still in its infancy (I say this as somone who uses Vonage daily and likes it) and needs easier installation and greater reliability before it replaces POTS to a large degree. Businesses will probably adopt it earlier but residences are going to take a while. Yes, it VOIP is the future but it's going to take a while and there's nothing preventing SBC and the rest from getting into that business.
As for wireless, SBC and Verizon are the #1 and #2 wireless providers in the US. Both are well positioned there. WiMax/WiFi is a potential threat in that it could make the last mile problem easier, but someone still has to provide the back end for that traffic and it isn't without its problems. (security, frequency crowding, availibility, speed, etc) And again, there is nothing preventing the Bells from competing here either.
So yes, SBC and the rest have their work cut out for them, but I wouldn't bet against them at this point. We're likely to see further consolidation as telecomunications becomes more and more of a commodity business but that doesn't imply that the Baby Bells are going to disappear any time soon. Change? Yes. Disappear. Doubt it.
Actually, one of the biggest problems that AT&T has faced was trying to remain profitable while remaining competitive in a market where one of its biggest competitors (MCI) turned out to be cooking its books to cut (apparent) costs.
Of course, it didn't help that the (now-former) senior management decided to spin off one of its most profitable business units (AT&T Wireless) because they didn't think the cell phone business would get off the ground. Ironically, now that Cingular is buying up that unit, AT&T proper is taking the name back so it can get back into the cell phone business.
cp /dev/zero ~/signature.txt
Why would you, as SBC, be looking to put out more cash, if you just LOST cash last reporting period?
Depends on why they lost money and what sort of a deal they can get. One down quarter isn't necessarily a big deal. AT&T has a real gem of an asset in their enterprise business and another in their network which I'm sure is why SBC is interested. They've talked before about a merger. BellSouth did too a few years back. But AT&T also has a lot of debt and some rapidly sinking businesses. SBC would have to rework or get rid of this debt for the merger to happen. But if SBC can get a sweetheart deal, it might make sense.
Personally, I think the deal is probably a bad idea. As I mentioned before, AT&T's debt load is a problem. There also are competitive issues. The merger could jeapordize SBC's relationship with BellSouth which jointly owns Cingular with SBC. Plus there is the question of whether it can pass regulatory scrutiny; something that is by no means assured. I don't see any obvious way to fix AT&T's problems but I don't have all the facts either.
AT&T is, alas, a sad shadow of its former self, and by that I mean its post-divestiture former self. But it is still a significant competitor, both the largest long distance company (a declining-revenue market, to be sure) and a significant local player (its TCG is a big player in metro fiber). Plus they've got some ISP operations. It would be sad to see Ed's Evil Empire get a hold of them.
;-) If he gets AT&T, he feels his P. is again bigger than that of Ivan Seidenberg of Verizon (or especially Ivan's predecessor Ray Smith, whose ghost hangs over the place).
Ed Whittacre wants them for the same reason he bought SNET and AT&T Wireless (which was not owned by AT&T at the time) -- he's constantly trying to be bigger than Verizon. I call it a "P.D." contest, where "D." stands for Dimensions. Frank Zappa had a song by that name, in case you can't guess what the dick I'm talking about.
AT&T's core problem is that they are operating in highly competitive markets, and their internal culture grew up in a monpopoly and never adapted. SBC, on the other hand, is, uh, well, if the question is acting competitive, they're like asking a tropical fish to be a downhill ski instructor. Without monpopoly power, SBC is dead meat.
Cingular already bought AT&T Wireless. For SBC (40% owner of Cingular) to buy the remainder of AT&T would be a smart move on their part. It's my impression they're doing it for access to the marketshare rather than any infrastructure or technology they have. What SBC wants is more customers, this is a very direct way to do it.
I do wonder if this will mean SBC can sell local service beyond the 13 state region they are currently in?
Lucent Technologies is the spinoff company that was formed from Bell Labs.
I think this would be great. Yes, it may create another monopoly, but also a highly regulated monopoly, also a monopoly that has fierce competition from the wireless market (something that didn't really exist when the breakup occured). It may also bring us back Bell Labs, which was by far the best research group in history (my opinion, of course).
If the merger were to go well, I think it will be a great step forward in the markets they pariticipate in.
If we can get the corporations out of our airwaves and build wireless mesh networks, we won't have to worry about monopolies. That should be the goal.