Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Businesses Cellphones The Almighty Buck Wireless Networking

Why the AT&T and T-Mobile Merger Is Bad For Consumers 367

Posted by Soulskill
from the abuse-of-the-letter-t dept.
adeelarshad82 writes "AT&T recently announced that it will buy T-Mobile for $39 billion. If the transaction gets approved by the government and closes in a year as planned, it will create the nation's largest wireless carrier by far. While this is great news for both companies, analysts believe that it's an awful idea for end consumers for a number of different reasons — from obvious ones, like a rise in rates due to lower competition, to subtler ones, like more selective phone choices for consumers."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Why the AT&T and T-Mobile Merger Is Bad For Consumers

Comments Filter:
  • by Fujisawa Sensei (207127) on Monday March 21, 2011 @03:52PM (#35563610) Journal

    It is certainly bad for customers.

    But its good for Verizon and others, because there are a lot of T-Mobile who are: "Anybody but AT&T".

  • by blair1q (305137) on Monday March 21, 2011 @03:55PM (#35563642) Journal

    AT&T shareholders just watched their management pay way too much for T-mobile. T-mobile and AT&T employees are both now extremely fearful for their jobs, as there is almost 100% overlap in most markets in everything but customer service call centers. This goes all the way up the management chains.

    This is less like "joining forces" than conquering your neighbor by buying his mortgage from the bank for double the house's value, then throwing him and his kids and your wife out on the street.

  • Its a done deal (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Fujisawa Sensei (207127) on Monday March 21, 2011 @03:57PM (#35563694) Journal

    They haven't denied any of the other mergers that became the current AT&T.

    They didn't deny SBC when they wanted to offer long distance service either.

    They're not going to deny this either.

    I'm rather surprised they didn't buy Comcast.

    But of course, they might try it even before this deal completes.

  • Re:$39 BILLION!? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dgatwood (11270) on Monday March 21, 2011 @04:06PM (#35563830) Journal

    Corporations aren't evil. They're amoral. There's a subtle difference.

  • Re:$39 BILLION!? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MickyTheIdiot (1032226) on Monday March 21, 2011 @04:18PM (#35564000) Homepage Journal

    They are amoral, but allow evil deeds to flourish because the people doing the deeds know they will never be held accountable. Lack of personal accountability is the REAL evil of the corporations.

  • Re:$39 BILLION!? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by s73v3r (963317) <`s73v3r' `at' `gmail.com'> on Monday March 21, 2011 @04:59PM (#35564638)

    Even though a lot of people like to pretend they are forced to do business with AT&T, they aren't.

    Except when they buy the provider you went with to avoid going with AT&T.

  • Re:$39 BILLION!? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by spun (1352) <loverevolutionar ... m ['o.c' in gap]> on Monday March 21, 2011 @05:14PM (#35564880) Journal

    If you couldn't go to prison for crimes, wouldn't you do things a wee bit differently? ;-)

    No. I wouldn't. I'm not a sociopath. I don't refrain from doing evil because of a fear of punishment. I refrain from doing evil because I have empathy, and because of that, hurting others hurts me directly. It may also harm me indirectly, as people who have been hurt often lash out irrationally, and people whose choices have been constrained often make choices that harm others, potentially including me. Enlightened self interest looks a lot like selflessness .

  • Re:Reject (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ciscoguy01 (635963) on Monday March 21, 2011 @05:54PM (#35565362)

    The DOJ only has jurisdiction over federal anti-trust laws. And while we may not like it, this does not actually breach any of those laws

    This does violate the Sherman Antitrust Act.
    Why do you say having only one GSM carrier in the entire country wouldn't result in less or no competition?

    GSM is the only network wherein your Iphone can talk and use data at the same time.
    I for one am against any more consolidation among huge companies. We have had it in banks, supermarkets, phone companies, we don't need any more. Do you want there to be only one or two banks, one or two wireless carriers, one or two supermarkets, and that's it? If you don't like it you can just not buy any. I want more competition, not less. More companies duking it out so I have choice.

    These wireless companies have spectrum licenses. They don't own those frequencies, they get to use them in the public interest.
    Remember when AT&T bought Cingular? They sold off the old AT&T network and frequencies to Tmobile. They kept the better performing Cingular Wireless network. Why did they do that? They had to. The Justice Department wouldn't let them buy their competition unless they divested those assets. That's fair. MORE competition, not less.

    AT&T and the baby bells were all separated out years ago in the AT&T Divestiture. Now, Pacbell turned into SBC which bought Bellsouth and others and finally bought their former parent AT&T, and whopee, they are all back together. It was a 25 year plan, they planned it all, the crooks.
    Now they want to take away more customer choice.

    Just say no. No to companies buying their competition. No to consolidations that limit competition. Especially where these companies have government licenses. It's just not right.

  • Re:$39 BILLION!? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Daetrin (576516) on Monday March 21, 2011 @08:51PM (#35567152)

    If you couldn't go to prison for crimes, wouldn't you do things a wee bit differently? ;-)

    No. I wouldn't. I'm not a sociopath. I don't refrain from doing evil because of a fear of punishment. I refrain from doing evil because I have empathy, and because of that, hurting others hurts me directly.

    I don't do evil things to people that i consider good because of empathy.
    I don't do evil things to people that i consider evil but who honestly think they're doing good because of morality.
    I don't do evil things to clearly evil people (people who do evil and don't give a fuck as long as it benefits them in some way) because of the law, ie fear of punishment.

    If that means i'm not as civilized as i ought to be, oh well. Not that it makes a big difference practically speaking, since barring the collapse of civilization i'll behave the same in all circumstances anyways.

Save yourself! Reboot in 5 seconds!

Working...