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."

Comments

Translation

[GameboyRMH]

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

Re:Translation

[AngryDeuce]

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.

Re:Translation

[Captain Spam]

Alternate translation: "We're planning on buying out Sprint in a few months, so we hope this doesn't cause any problems for us then."

Re:Translation

[GameboyRMH]

I'm pretty sure there is some kind of cartel-like arrangement going on already. Look at how the telcos all do things that screw the customer at the same time: jack up SMS rates, impose data limits, block tethering, all conveniently happened around the same time on all carriers.

And tell OPEC or DeBeers their cartel doesn't work. Remember to yell, it's hard to hear when you're swimming in a pool of cash.

Lowell should read the news more often

[MetalliQaZ]

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 /.)

This makes perfect sense

[dkleinsc]

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.

Re:This makes perfect sense

[compro01]

Freepress.net has a lovely illustration of the history of the baby bells.

http://www.freepress.net/files/att_history.jpg

Re:Proof they need more regulations

[Xacid]

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

FTFY

Spectrum is not what's holding AT&T back

[ktappe]

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.

Re:Doesn't the consumer lose regardless?

[arth1]

The funny thing is that T-Mobile used to be affiliated with Sprint.
Global One Communications was a conglomerate of Sprint, Deutsche Telekom and France Telecom, and T-Mobile and Orange trace their roots there.

T-Mobile USA, on the other hand, is basically the old PN Voicestream network, which was bought up by T-Mobile, a subsidiary of DT, and has little to do with T-Mobile, except the current ownership.
AT&T buying T-Mobile USA is really AT&T buying the remains of Pacific Northwest that it hasn't already sucked up and reincorporated like a Terminator robot.

Confused yet? Not after the next episode of Telesoap!