Slashdot Mirror


AT&T: Meet the New US GSM Monopoly

itwbennett writes "Why should consumers care about the AT&T/T-mobile merger? Already, Verizon has dropped unlimited data plans and the US trails Japan, South Korea, and others in variety and performance of mobiles. Don't think for a second that those aren't the direct result this new monopoly, says blogger Tom Henderson. '...Those pesky State agencies that used to have regulatory authority has been usurped by the US Federal Government,' writes Henderson. 'This wasn't an accident. Who would you rather deal with, 43 different state regulatory authorities, or those convenient people on Capitol Hill?'"

10 of 189 comments (clear)

  1. Where's the "corruption" tag? by zooblethorpe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It certainly seems appropriate for this article.

    --
    "What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
    "A four-foot prune."
    1. Re:Where's the "corruption" tag? by ArhcAngel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Politics

      --
      "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
  2. incoming calls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Are you, Americans are still paying for incoming calls and SMSes?

  3. Re:free market by CyprusBlue113 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Umm, no, it is the regulation of the single tech spectrum that is exactly why other countries have better mobile infrastructure, not stupidly creating more islands of spectrum.

    --
    a handful of selfish greedy people are no match for millions of selfish, greedy people -u4ya
  4. Re:keep voting for them! by ISoldat53 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We have a two party system. The Sold and the For Sale.

  5. Re:free market by __Reason__ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    AT&T is a bit like the liquid metal terminator from Terminator 2. You can break it into little pieces, but somehow, eventually, it'll find a way to reassemble itself and become a monopoly again.

  6. Re:No competition? by crow · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes, but how many of those are just resellers? Essentially, they a virtual carriers with roaming agreements with the ones that you've heard of. Some may have a small area of real service, but I doubt that many do.

  7. Re:Sprint by neurocutie · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sprint will not survive this buyout... even Hesse admits this...
    Either Sprint will be bought by Verizon, or Sprint will die a slow death, then be bought for pennies on the dollar.
    Sprint will be strangled by 1) high roaming costs, or NO roaming, which means poor coverage for its customers, who will then leave,
    2) handset freeze out, prime example being the iPhone which Sprint *still* cannot get,
    3) price war: AT&T and Verizon can just decide to wage a price war for a couple of years and decimate Sprint,
    4) landline/call termination obstruction and rate hikes, since between AT&T and Verizon, most of the landline are controlled by them, they can and will simply charge Sprint huge sums to allow Sprint consumers to call landlines. This is already a big cost for Sprint and it will get bigger.

  8. Yes, thanks to the Magic of the Free Market! by Benfea · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Having a market dominated by a smaller number of larger companies is the ideal capitalist system according to rightist ideology. This is why they like mergers and hate it when antitrust laws are enforced. In this way, the few remaining companies don't have to deal with as much of that pesky "competition" thing, and through economies of scale they can deliver better goods for less money. At least, that's the excuses libertarians and conservatives usually give me.

    This is also part of the reason why I argue that they are not in fact capitalists, but rather neo-feudalists.

  9. Re:US telecom trailing others isn't a fair assessm by cdrguru · · Score: 3, Insightful

    One of the biggest problems in the US is simply finding a spot to put a tower.

    Can't put it anywhere within a city limits without permission from the city. Can't put it on any land the city owns, period. Can't put it on any private land without a permit from the city. Can't put it anywhere near people that complain about the radiation hazards, how the sight of the tower offends them or any other complaint unless you like spending millions in court.

    This means in non-rural areas finding a spot for a tower is a huge challenge whereas I suspect most other countries the siting for a tower is easy - you get the government permission at a high level and nobody is allowed to argue with you. This is especially true when the telephone provider also happens to be state-owned.

    Sure there are "regulators" involved but they aren't listening to the lunatic fringe. Here in the US between the environmentalists, the radical environmentalists (you know, all progress since 800 AD is cruel, inhumane and against nature) and the basic nutjobs (cell tower radiation hazards, power transmission line hazards, magnetic cure-all bracelets that are negatively affected by any other EMF fields in the area, etc.) have the ear of the government and the courts.