Charter Challenges Comcast/Time Warner Merger

An anonymous reader writes "Regional ISP Charter Communications is fighting back against the potential merger between Time Warner Cable and Comcast. Charter had been bidding for TWC before Comcast got involved, and now they're urging shareholders to reject the deal. 'From the regulatory perspective, it is difficult to imagine a transaction that could concentrate the industry more than the proposed Comcast merger,' they said in an SEC filing. James Stewart with the NY Times explains what Comcast would look like if the merger continues — when you add the TWC deal to the NBCUniversal pickup a few years ago, Comcast is starting to resemble a global tech company. He also explains why the deal isn't setting off antitrust alarm bells: 'Time Warner Cable operates in 29 states, but thanks to the old system of regional and municipal cable monopolies, Comcast and Time Warner Cable don't compete anywhere. Justice Department merger guidelines define geographical markets, which is why regulators weighing airline mergers examine competition on individual routes, not national market share. ... Under conventional antitrust standards, it's pretty much an open-and-shut case.'"

Comments

These companies need to be split up

[Karmashock]

Not merged... and they need to compete with each other.

Currently they don't because the cities and counties don't let them. They set up absurd pole leasing rates and policies that effectively mean only one company can operate in the area. Its a violation of the spirit of the law if not the letter of the law. They need to be split and they need to compete.

Re:These companies need to be split up

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't blame just the cities and counties for that.

The Cable companies went to them and said "Oh woe is us, we can't possibly put up lines and run the risk of somebody else coming in to steal our thunder, please give us an exclusive franchise, and we'll give you a truckload of money" which you can hardly blame the government officials for, it's a perfectly honest bribe.

They've also gone to your state legislatures and REQUIRED such franchise contracts to be exclusive, and even banned competitors with their own rights to the line (like your power company) from competing.

Re:These companies need to be split up

[Jane Q. Public]

"You don't get the Sarcasm Channel there either, do you?"

Actually I did get your sarcasm. But it wasn't very obvious where the sarcasm actually began and ended. The last part was obviously serious, and I thought perhaps you meant the first part seriously too, with just the middle being sarcastic.

"If you're going to chop-quote, at least make it so you aren't showing how you missed the point of what I said."

I didn't miss anything. But you sure seem to have.

Cable customers shafted by state government.

[packrat0x]

"Time Warner Cable operates in 29 states, but thanks to the old system of regional and municipal cable monopolies, Comcast and Time Warner Cable don't compete anywhere."

This is your state government(s) shafting you. The states created laws which allow cable monopolies. Local governments collect a franchise fee on the gross revenue of the cable companies operating within their boundaries. In the eyes of local government, less competition means higher prices which means more tax revenue (without voter feedback). Local government passively discourages competition through regulations, filings, public meetings, disclosures, insurance requirements, etc. Some local (and state) governments *actively* discourage competition.

"they don't compete" is the reason for rejecting

[Jon_S]

When are people and regulators going to wake up and realize that the "well, they don't compete against each other an any areas" is *not* a reason to say this merger is OK, but is a reason why it should be rejected!

The problem with broadband access in the US is that we don't have competition in most places. Some places have DSL (slow) or Fios/U-verse, but most don't. And no, satellite or 2 GB-capped cell service doesn't count as competition.

The very statement that they don't compete anywhere is the problem. Things need to be changed so that they compete against each other. That will not happen if they merge.

Re:Hmm

[geminidomino]

. I suppose it's closer to socialism/fascism.

The fact that you connect "socialism" and "fascism" in that fashion suggests that you either don't know what either word means, or you don't know what "/" means.

Re:Programming is hard because computers are slow

[jeffb (2.718)]

Then there's the whole "posting in the correct discussion thread" optimization...