Slashdot Mirror


Comcast To Buy Time Warner Cable In $44.2 Billion All-Stock Deal

symbolset writes "CNBC and many others report Time Warner Cable has agreed to be acquired by Comcast for $44.2 billion. From the article: 'The agreement comes more than eight months after Charter Communictions and Liberty Media made their first foray to try and negotiate a deal to acquire Time Warner Cable (a story broken by CNBC) and follows months of conversations between Time Warner Cable and Comcast about the prospect of a Comcast acquisition of the company. '"

27 of 303 comments (clear)

  1. SEC block? by TrekkieGod · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In terms of competition, verizon buying time-warner is a much bigger deal than the blocked attempt of at&t buying t-mobile. This purchase can't possibly be allowed to proceed.

    --

    Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.

    1. Re:SEC block? by TrekkieGod · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Comcast buying time-warner, I mean. Was thinking about cell phone companies and screwed up.

      --

      Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.

    2. Re:SEC block? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Funny

      In terms of competition, [Comcast] buying time-warner is a much bigger deal than the blocked attempt of at&t buying t-mobile. This purchase can't possibly be allowed to proceed.

      The difference is that cellular is actually competitive, so a change in the market can reduce that competition and give consumers less choice. But in cable, there is usually only one company in any area. So there is no real competition. How much does does their cable coverage overlap?

      I have dealt with both companies (in different cities). On a scale of one to ten, I would give Comcast a one. I would give TWC a zero. So a Comcast takeover could be a win for consumers.

    3. Re:SEC block? by aerivus · · Score: 5, Informative
  2. Antitrust lawsuit? by randomErr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That two biggies merging. Will they be put under the scrutiny of an antitrust investigation? That will definitely eliminate choice in several areas. What the alternative, dial up or over the air broadcast?

    --
    You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
    1. Re:Antitrust lawsuit? by jonnythan · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't think there area any areas where both TW and Comcast operate. So it won't change the number of choices for anyone.

    2. Re:Antitrust lawsuit? by rudy_wayne · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't think there area any areas where both TW and Comcast operate. So it won't change the number of choices for anyone.

      This is true.

      You will just replace one shitty company with an even shittier company.

    3. Re:Antitrust lawsuit? by SJHillman · · Score: 5, Informative

      Washington Post's article confirms that:

      "Comcast and Time Warner Cable don’t have overlapping markets, so antitrust regulators won’t view the merger with the same concerns they did with AT&T’s proposed bid with T-Mobile, experts say. That deal, which regulators rejected, would have eliminated a major national carrier and given consumers across the country fewer options."

      Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

    4. Re:Antitrust lawsuit? by allcoolnameswheretak · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If these two cable providers don't have overlapping markets, it seems to me they were like a cartel to begin with, dividing the territory between them and entering a do-not-compete agreement, which should have already prompted an anti-trust case.

    5. Re:Antitrust lawsuit? by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As horrendous as Comcast is, they've got nothing on Time Warner.

      Ah, but suck is additive ... which means you'll probably end up with an entity which sucks more than either could possibly be on their own.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    6. Re:Antitrust lawsuit? by coastal984 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      No, it won't eliminate consumer choice because most often Cable companies have a government-authorized monopoly on a geographic area.

      What this will do is create a powerhouse negotiator with the content companies as they would represent about 1/3 of all cable households. Who really hates this deal is those content companies, and the satellite companies. If allowed, Comcast will have the power to negotiate substantially lower TV subscription costs than Direct/Dish, and take money out of the content producer/broadcasters coffers.

      The other side is internet... but I'm not sure that this is going to affect their DSL/FIOS competitors that much. Maybe I'm wrong on this, but I think this is likely a secondary concern that lags behind the concerns of the networks/sat providers.

    7. Re:Antitrust lawsuit? by MobyDisk · · Score: 3, Informative

      You are right, but with a caveat. But the reason they don't have overlapping markets is because the local governments give exclusive cable contracts. So it isn't that the companies were forming a cartel, it is that the governments were enforcing a cartel. The companies might have actually wanted to compete, and the government was forbidding it.

    8. Re:Antitrust lawsuit? by Redmancometh · · Score: 4, Funny

      areas);

      Okay there man you're closing out singular parentheses AND reflexively adding semi colons after the end.

      Just close out the IDE man. Its ok sometimes not coding is a good thing.

  3. Remember kids by Dunbal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We need to cap your internet usage and charge you usage fees as well as bandwidth fees because, oh god, it's so hard to make money in the telecommunication business we just can't seem to stop having enough money to buy each other out. By the way, we're going to increase your monthly flat rate bill a good 10% again this year because hey, those "Friends" reruns sure are getting expensive to er, broadcast.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  4. Economies of Scale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Wow! With their improved economies of scale, my rates should drop, and I should get better service than ever!

  5. Bad Service x Fewer Choices by jasper160 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Equals a ISP landscape that will even more consumer unfriendly.

    --
    No good deed goes unpunished.
  6. Meridith Atwell Baker was Re:Antitrust lawsuit? by GoodNewsJimDotCom · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Comcast will just bribe the FCC again

    America was fun while it lasts, but if people can keep being bribed to do favors, corruption can inevitably kill a country. We have laws that you can't buy a vote. That seems noble. But the fact is that politicians can accept campaign contributions which is just a fancy word for a bribe. Who needs to buy votes when you can buy a politician?

    Again, I love America, but corruption unchecked can destroy any nation no matter how strong. And with campaign contributions running rampant, the game is rigged in favor of the corrupt.

  7. Re:Antitrust petition by arekin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This isn't antitrust. Most areas restrict cable franchising so you don't have multiple providers in an area. If Comcast were to buy WOW in areas they both exist (Such as Michigan, maybe available elsewhere) it would restrict competition. Since Comcast and Time Warner don't overlap there is not antitrust issue.

    --
    Disagreeing with you does not make me a troll.
  8. increase of rates by nurb432 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, they have to pay for the purchase somehow, and you cant expect them to take it out of current profits/bank accounts.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  9. Wait ... AOL? by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Funny

    Surely Time Warner understands by now that getting bought in an all stock deal is a stupid friggin' idea.

    Because when AOL bought them with over-inflated .com stocks, it was a terrible idea and ended up with a grossly over-valued company with few actual assets owning a company which had both revenues and assets.

    I predict that in the long run this will be a terrible idea for both consumers and stockholders.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:Wait ... AOL? by jafac · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's still great as a pump-n-dump scheme for the financiers who work the deal, and a couple insider majority shareholders.

      What's not to like?

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  10. Re:ogahdno by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 4, Funny

    Finally, the great customer service of Comcast combines with the competitive pricing of Time Warner to create a single convenient entity to steer public policy with targeted campaign funding. Municipal broadband? Not on Timecast's watch.

  11. Re:ogahdno by Chas · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Agreed!

    I love my Time Warner service. Comcast will find a way to ruin it.

    At what point do we begin to want Government Interference?

    Right about now actually.

    There's the whole "localized monopoly" thing. But this beast is just about the sole provider for a huge swath of the US now, and people's ability to choose providers is in jeopardy.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  12. Re:ogahdno by Shadow99_1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've been all for the government to claim ownership of the physical aspect of these networks for years and then sell the physical service to ISPs for over a decade. The companies have proved time and again, regardless of massive subsidies, that they only care about milking users and not the experience of those users. Hence 1.5m/128k ADSL 'competing' with 10-25m/512k cable internet and 3G/4G capped wireless networks more recently.

    At least with the government doing it we could hold someone accountable, even if the the politicians only care at election time and would likely stick the blame on someone else...

    --
    we are all invisible unless we choose otherwise
  13. Re:ogahdno by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What the fuck justice department? You sue over the US Airways/American Airlines merger, but they're just gonna fucking greenlight this one? Goddamn lobbyists! Fuck you, Comcast, fuck you!

  14. Re:ogahdno by jjeffries · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Hence 1.5m/128k ADSL 'competing' with 10-25m/512k cable internet and 3G/4G capped wireless networks more recently.

    ADSL2+ will do near 30/3 on short loops (~1mi) and can be bonded. VSDL gets up into the hundreds of megabits. Mostly, ILECs just aren't interested/serious in competing, and would generally rather have bunches of unused, zero-revenue copper laying around than resell it to someone who *is* interested, because making no money at all is better than "helping" your competitor (who you aren't interested in competing with) by selling them something.

  15. Re:ogahdno by tbuddy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As good as that sounds, if the government owns the lines they'll start spying on people's communications. *ducks*