Slashdot Mirror


Verizon Chief Defends AT&T-T-Mobile Merger

The proposed merger of AT&T with T-Mobile doesn't impress everyone as a good idea; in particular, Sprint has filed suit to stop the merger, and while hardly a disinterested party, they're not alone in claiming that the resulting megacompany would harm customers. Verizon is taking a different tack; tekgoblin passes along this excerpt: "Verizon Communications chief executive Lowell McAdam has announced that he is supporting the AT&T T-Mobile merger. He warned that the Government has no choice but to let the deal go though unless they want to fix the current spectrum problems. He went on to say 'We need to be very thoughtful on what the impacts would be to the overall industry if this is a way to regulate the industry without actually passing regulation.' The current telcos need more wireless spectrum to continue expanding and operating efficiently so they have resorted to acquiring other companies."

7 of 128 comments (clear)

  1. Translation by GameboyRMH · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We're ready for less competition! Bring it on!

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    1. Re:Translation by AngryDeuce · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It surprises me that these corporations don't just say stuff like that at this point. They own our government, and the vast majority of people don't even give a shit. Why be coy? There are no repercussions anyway.

  2. Lowell should read the news more often by MetalliQaZ · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Looks like he hasn't been keeping up with the latest reports; indicating that AT&T is secretly trying to SELL spectrum to smaller operators in order to get support for the merger. Sounds like they have plenty already. (this was discussed on /.)

    --
    "Here Lies Philip J. Fry, named for his uncle, to carry on his spirit"
  3. This makes perfect sense by dkleinsc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It would give Verizon the go-ahead to gobble up Sprint in, say, a hostile takeover, leaving only AT&T and Verizon on the playing field. A 2-company oligopoly can price gouge more easily than a 4-company oligopoly.

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  4. it is good for Verizon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It is good for Verizon, because it gets rid of another competitor. They can raise rates more without another decent competitor to keep them in check.
    They also figure, probably rightly so, that a lot of TMobile customers will leave when it happens, giving Verison more.
    Then ATT will continue doing the only thing they know how to do, and that is to keep getting worse than they already are, which will drive even more customers away with fewer competitors for them to go to.
    More and more customers for Verizon all around, with higher and higher rates.
    Win win.

  5. Re:Proof they need more regulations by Xacid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Never trust industries to regulate themselves when it comes to anything.

    FTFY

  6. Spectrum is not what's holding AT&T back by ktappe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    AT&T has plenty of spectrum. What they don't have is connective infrastructure. I constantly have AT&T signal but data just won't go through because the towers' routers are overloaded. AT&T needs to take the billions it is trying to spend buying T-Mobile to add bandwidth.

    --
    "We can categorically state we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - UK military spokesman, July 2007