Slashdot Mirror
SBC and AT&T Boards Vote to Go Ahead
telstar writes "As a follow-up to earlier coverage regarding the possible acquisition of AT&T by SBC, MSNBC is reporting that boards from both companies met to vote today and that the acquisition will go forward at a price of 16 billion dollars. Both companies are currently keeping the deal quiet."
This is the loudest quiet deal I've ever heard.
Yes, that's quite evident from its being posted on Slashdot, of all places.
Don't worry guys, I'm sure nobody will read it! Probably not even the second or third time they post it!
When things get complex, multiply by the complex conjugate.
Bill Gates responds "16 billion? If they need the dough they know where to find me."
You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
Does it just rub me wrong that all these major companies are merging? If this trend really continues we could easily find ourselves with no choice on communcations period.
Bite me. Seriously, I enjoy it.
It's one thing to say that the boeards give the go-ahead (it was expected), but this deal should REALLY get close Anti-Trust inspection.
THAT's the go-ahead I'm really curious about.
Watch the Teaser Trailer for "The Lightning Thief" Her
I heard ATT wireless sucked untill it was sold to cingular. If this merger goes through, I wouldn't mind it so much if it meant consumers were going to get better service, but whats the chance of that?
My guess is that this will end up with a lot of layoffs and not much benefit to anyone except for a few large shareholders.
sorry 'bout the mess...
...as if thousands of people all dialed 911 at once. . . and got a busy signal.
You are not the customer.
If I remeber correctly didn't we shatter Ma Bell into the baby bells once upon a time? It's like the liquid termenator in T2. It would seem they are all sucking themselves back togeather again.
We are going to have to take a serious look at antitrust law in the United States. It seems like we don't ever enforce in a real way. We make moves to enforce it, we convict people, and then we stop short of solving the problem. There's one big instance of this I'm not going to mention to prevent dragging in a flamewar. But the instance here... we broke up a telephone monopoly, yet appear to have not in any way constricted either its horizontal or vertical monopoly power. SBC retains a monopoly in all the areas it does business in and has done so unbroken since the Ma Bell breakup-- Birch is nothing-- and now it's rejoining after a short break with Ma Bell. We do have successful competing long distance providers now but this may not last too much longer in Texas. Surely this breakup could have been done in a more intelligent way?
I think you confuse the current government with those in the past who actually cared about creating competition.
George Bush's FTC will approve the merger. Guaranteed.
Well, Ma Bell was certainly being as bad, if not worse, than Microsoft. Forcing operating companies to purchase equipment from a subsidiary (Western Electric), routinely undercutting competitors such as MCI, and most importantly in this day and age of companies deciding what users can and can't do, doing everything to prevent users from using non-Bell equipment on their phone lines, despite an FCC ruling that the consumers had a right to do that.
On the other hand, perhaps all these consolidations of the Baby Bells are trying to tell us something - maybe that's just the way the market works. Certainly it would make life easier for consumers to not have to switch phone companies every 5 years. I've gone from New England Telephone to NYNEX to Bell Atlantic, and finally Verizon. And it's been barely 20 years since AT&T broke up. OTOH, service has suffered - I used be able to make a call from a pay phone for a dime in Massachusetts, even 7 years ago. Now it's 50 cents minimum charge, and you're lucky if you can even find a phone booth, let alone one that's run by Verizon and not one of these 10-10-whatever companies. Is that because the big companies don't care? Or is that because of cell phones become more commonplace? Who knows. But I bet in 5-10 years we'll be right back where we started, and someone will have been laughing all the way to the bank.
There is no sig, there is only Zuul.
Would it kill the submitter to explain what SBC, AT&T and MSNBC *mean*?
SBC: Some Bastard Child of
AT&T: A former Totalitarian Telephone company which
MSNBC: May eventually Sire New Bastard Children.
It's all about that circle of life crap. You know, like the way black widow babies eat their mothers. The corporate paradigm in a nutshell!
"What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
/)
the next economic model after capitalism will only take hold when capitalism can no longer support the population... however I do not think it will be communism like Marx says... i think that it will be corpratism.... no competition and one monolithic source of production.
if you look at the trends of economic development over the centuries, a slow and even evolution takes place... right now capitalism is being transformed into something else. people will no longer have property but will purchase all their needs from a central body, no, not the government like Marx said, but the corporation... a large monolithic corporation acts just like a communist government. it is responsible for all the welfare of the people who it serves and it serves the people because they all work for it. the government may get supplanted by the corporation at some point.
it sounds bad, but this form of economic system can either be good or bad. it will depend on the implementation... however, new economic transitions (real ones based on natural societal pressures) tend not to fall apart because they take so long to transition from one state to another, giving the society time to accept and learn how to support the system.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3