Slashdot Mirror


AT&T To Acquire T-Mobile From Deutsche Telekom

teh31337one writes "AT&T and Deutsche Telekom have entered into a definitive agreement for the sale of T-Mobile USA for $39 billion in cash and stocks. Press release here." Gripes one anonymous reader: "Americans will have even less choice now when it comes to cell phone carriers. Say good-bye to the one that had the best customer service and was most friendly towards Android and rooting."

13 of 748 comments (clear)

  1. Not gonna lie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is bad.

    1. Re:Not gonna lie by mcavic · · Score: 5, Funny

      Not bad from where I stand. We have too many carriers, and I'd like to see US Cellular get absorbed next. Fewer carriers means more revenue for the remaining ones, and thus more money for upgrades. Also, fewer competing towers = less wasted infrastructure.

  2. Re:Deal still subject to regulatory approval by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 5, Informative

    However, the deal is still a year away and subject to regulatory approval.

    However, the deal is still a year away and subject to regulatory lobbying and bribery.

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  3. Don't worry Citizens! by Haedrian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The free market will save us!

    Any minute now...

  4. Gave up hope long ago by Drakino · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I gave up hope on the mobile industry in the US long ago. When T-Mobile and AT&T couldn't even use compatible frequencies for 3G, the hope of cross carrier compatibility died a long time ago. GSM is only great when you can buy an unlocked phone, choose a provider and pop in a SIM, then change on a whim while paying lower monthly prices due to the lack of a subsidy. This is one of the many benefits Europeans enjoy, along with good roaming agreements to ensure they can make a call even if their own provider doesn't cover the area well. I still look back to 2004 when I had an unlocked Sony Ericsson phone from T-Mobile that I used in Europe for a bit. Bought a SIM in London, traveled into the Netherlands, around Germany and a bit into Switzerland. At one point, my phone saw 9 different providers it was willing to use for emergency calls, and 4 or so of those it was willing to roam on for everything else.

    Since none of those benefits ever came to the US, I hold some hope in that this merger will bring some good. AT&T is pledging a bigger LTE rollout, including to rural parts of the US. This is desperately needed, as many rural areas have dial up and satellite based options only. Dialup is near unusable these days, and satellite adds too much latency, negating benefits from Web 2.0 based sites, and conferencing/communication software. Low caps also prevent rural users from taking advantage of services like Netflix.

  5. Re:Deal still subject to regulatory approval by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 5, Informative

    The only reason I chose T-Mobile was because it wasn't AT&T.

  6. so.... by Carebears · · Score: 5, Funny

    AT&T&T

  7. Ze Germans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Funny how T-Mobile is an underdog in the US and people seem to actually like them there (or hate them less than the competition). At home they're the ex-monopoly. They have the highest prices and the most civil-servant like customer service.

    They must be a different company in the US or the telecommunications sector is abysmal in the US.

    1. Re:Ze Germans by hedwards · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's the abysmal telecommunications sector. Around here I've got 5 choices, 3 of them would require me to buy a new phone, and only T-Mobile and AT&T allow the use of random phones with a SIM. Sprint won't activate a phone that doesn't have it's logo silk screened on it, and none of the major providers competes for anything other than being somewhat less sucky than the others and depending upon inertia to carry them through.

      It's been getting progressively worse over the years. Even with GSM, AT&T uses a different portion of the spectrum for 3G than T-Mobile does, meaning that there's going to be a lot of people without 3G or having to buy new phones prematurely if this goes through.

  8. New round of AT&T / T-Mobile commercials by Jedi+Holocron · · Score: 5, Funny

    So, do we get a new round of AT&T vs. T-Mobile commercials? Does the hot T-Mobile Girl start making out with the AT&T Guy?

    Or do we see him trying to woo her?

    Who get's to be on top? *giggles*

    1. Re:New round of AT&T / T-Mobile commercials by mkiwi · · Score: 5, Informative

      Having been customers of both services, I can tell you that both AT&T and T-Mobile will be on the top, and their customers will be on the bottom.

  9. Re:Deal still subject to regulatory approval by StarChamber · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Surely AT&T could fix up their own network for less than the cost of T-Mobile.

    This acquisition isn't about subscribers or network equipment. AT&T is spending $39B to purchase T-Mobile's frequency spectrum in the US so that they can ensure that they have enough spectrum to roll out LTE and continue to upgrade their 3G HSPA+ network. Any subscribers that opt to stay with AT&T post merger is just an added benefit to them.

  10. AT&T should be broken up (again) by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The above commenter almost certainly works for one of the recent "reputation management" companies that work to subvert online communities from discussing stories that may reflect badly on very big companies. This particular UID was created a few days ago to perform a similar function in a story with the headline "Time Warner Cable Cuts iPad Live TV Access 50%". The tactic is to create a very large section of long, useless trolling comments at the very beginning of the comments section made up of a lot of anonymous idiocy broken up by idiocy from registered users, almost always very recently registered.

    I've seen this tactic used on a lot of stories that always seem to be about some very very large corporation, sometimes on the very same stories reported at other websites with large and active commenter communities. I'm not exactly sure how the technique would work, but it's too widespread and too uniform to be anything but an organized effort. You even see variations on the same user names in different social networking and discussion-based websites.

    I know for a fact that companies like New Media Strategies and all the "Reputation Defender" and reputation.com companies that have recently sprung up are not shy about using some very disruptive and underhanded tactics to try to achieve their goals for their clients, and will sometimes even brag to their clients about their techniques. I know someone who worked for one of these outfits and the stories he would tell are pretty disgusting. And these companies are very richly capitalized. There's a lot of money in obfuscation it seems. Corporations do not want us to know what they are up to.

    Information is already often untrustworthy. We either have to find a way to thwart these efforts or we have to speed development of ad hoc networks on a large scale. If there's not going to be meaningful net neutrality, then we're going to have to do it ourselves.

    By the way, AT&T buying T-Mobile is a terrible development. We can hope that the Justice Department steps in and stops this, but they've been pretty soft on anti-trust. AT&T should not be getting bigger, they should be getting broken up. We will all lose on this deal.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.