New AT&T Acquires BellSouth

spune writes "Only months after SBC's acquisition of AT&T last November, the newly rechristened telecom has announced that it plans to buy fellow Baby Bell BellSouth Inc, of Atlanta, Georgia for $67 billion. This action by AT&T will consolidate more than half of the original Bell System into a single entity, leaving only Verizon and Qwest as remaining Bell family competitors. Analysts predict this deal will be approved by the FCC with only minor restrictions on the new company, which will serve residences and businesses from California to Florida."

Comments

Headline should read...

[Spazntwich]

"AT&T puts into motion plans to acquire Bellsouth."

Hurray for fucking retard editors who can't be bothered to check headlines for accuracy.

Let them consolidate

[MikeRT]

Then they'll be regulated as a monopoly because no one will be able to argue with a straight face that there is a free market for telecoms. With monopoly status, they won't be able to argue that they are being forced to cut their prices down to unsustainable levels. Cheap broadband is nice and all, but if it's too cheap they aren't making enough money to support their infrastructure which is why access sucks in most of the country. As I've been saying, I'd rather they charge me $100/month for real 3mpbs up AND down than charge me $15-$40 a month for 3mpbs with an invisible cap on its monthly use. It makes more sense for them too. If they provide the bandwidth each month, Apple and others can provide the content which makes their service worth paying a premium for.

Whining about it won't accomplish anything...

[DaedalusLogic]

Where is the line to start the fight?

Fax or Call your Congressional Representatives.

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cdirectory/index.html

Drop these guys a line.

http://ftc.gov/

If you are intelligent and well spoken... call your local news and make a case for this being a bad idea.

Or, if you want to be an ineffective lump, go ahead and sit back and shut up... If you're going to complain, for god's sake aim your mouth in the right direction.

I challenge every voting Slashdot reader to actually do something about this one and send a fax in tomorrow. E-mail can be filtered and ignored, but choking the phone lines that serve them will serve as an ironic way of showing how unhappy we are with the prospect of this merger.

I am a customer of these organizations and I want this stopped in it's tracks.

will I get three bills for service I don't have

[anagama]

Four years ago I made the mistake of signing up w/ AT&T. I cancled and paid off my bill (something like $14). Now, every four months I start getting bills, then the calls. I ignore them till they catch me. Then I ask for immediate acceleration. If I don't get it I curse a little (I've been doing this 3x/yr for 4 years now -- I'm not normally an asshole). Eventually someone says they see the problem and correct it. Every time I'm told this. And inevitably, the bills come back. Last time, when the person was through "fixing" it (I've since started getting bills again), she asked if I was interested in signing up for service. I laughed.

Re:Wait a minute

[lordkuri]

Today, if you walked into a RBOC and asked to buy/lease local loops or rackspace, they'd have to let you.

Not since 2002, that was overturned. source

Re:Cincinnati Bell

[Anonymous Coward]

This action by AT&T will consolidate more than half of the original Bell System into a single entity, leaving only Verizon and Qwest as remaining Bell family competitors.

Cincinnati Bell will be quite surprised to learn that it no longer exists.

Possibly the summary was referring only to companies that were part of the original AT&T and were spun off
as RBOCs way back when. Cincinnati Bell, despite it's name, was not actually part of AT&T; it was an independent company who licensed the right to provide service for the Cincinnati area.

Great Wikipedia chart of Bell System companies

[massysett]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Rbocs.gif

If Verizon buys Qwest, we're down to two phone companies!

Re:They're trying to get it done quick.

[Baricom]

Fortunately, I'm a cable subscriber, so I'm not too worried about any direct effects...yet. However, BellSouth's position on net neutrality isn't much better than AT&T's. They start by proclaiming themselves strong supporters of net neutrality, then go on to define exceptions to that support:

However, BellSouth opposes those proponents of net neutrality who seek to render DSL service as nothing more than a "dumb pipe." Under BellSouth's view of net neutrality, the essential consumer protection is clear disclosure in the service plan agreement...Broadband networks providers should be able to manage bandwidth...[and] should be able to curb network usage (such as peer-to-peer file sharing) that consumes a disproportionate amount of bandwidth and may adversely impact other network users....Broadband network providers should be able to offer different plans that feature enhanced levels of service or that promote their own brand names and products or the services of selected vendors. For example, BellSouth should be able to enter into arrangements with content providers by which the content provider pays for special treatment, such as preferential listing or faster downloads from that provider's website or receiving a higher quality of service. (emphasis and length-editing mine)

I used to work at ATT in AntiTrust Litigation

[Ralph Spoilsport]

I worked as a paralegal "research analyst" working directly for the lawyers involved, and I can assure all that the break up of ATT was not the defeat of some evil megacorp at the hands of some valiant heroic upstarts. It was an ugly battle by giant corporations, all of whom were evil Evil EVIL, when they weren't being incompetent and utterly stupid.

Did ATT deny MCI, Sprint, ITT, sonitrol, and everyone else involved access to their lines?

Yep.

Was MCI a giant grasping hellhole bent not on defeating ATT, but becoming ATT?

Yep.

Was Sprint an incompetent bunch of losers who couldn't find their own butts with a flashlight, a map, and both hands at the ready?

Yep.

Was Sonitrol along for the ride?

Yep.

Was ITT a vast corrupt corporation run by thugs?

Yep.

It's all there in the evidence - which fills a freakin' warehouse somewhere. Representatives of ITT threating people, Sprint incapable of figuring out how to bill their customers, MCI pulling all kinds of nasty shenanigans on ATT and other providers - and ream after ream of circuit listings noting that the denial of service was for "Reasons Unknown" - it was ugly. Truly nasty. There were no good guys in that case.

And now ATT wants to rebuild its empire. Well, it's a different world now with VOIP, Cellphones, cable modems, etc. Even if they do corner the DSL market, there's another market out there...

I don't if I should laugh or cry for all my wasted effort in that messy trial.

RS