FCC reviewing AT&T, T-Mobile deal

FCC reviewing AT&T, T-Mobile deal
FCC reviewing AT&T, T-Mobile deal

The Federal Communications Commission is already reviewing the AT&T, T-Mobile merger and we’ll soon see if the deal will face the steep challenges we all think it will.

The FCC is doing a thorough review of the AT&T, T-Mobile deal right now and it will be looking at a few key issues. The first issue is that the federal agency will be trying to determine if AT&T will control too much spectrum if the deal is approved without significant divestitures.

One of the main reasons AT&T wants to shell out $36 billion to buy T-Mobile is because the carrier wanted to get at more spectrum. Spectrum is the lifeblood of the industry but prime spectrum doesn’t become available that often so getting T-Mobile’s access, as well as its existing customers and towers, would be worth it for AT&T.

If the FCC approves the AT&T, T-Mobile deal, there will likely be the need for AT&T to give up spectrum in multiple markets. We saw this happen when Verizon gobbled up Alltel, so that is pretty much a given.

Sprint has already gone on record against the deal because it believes that this will give too much power in the mobile industry to two players. Additionally, it said that this move won’t be beneficial to consumers because the lack of competition means that the two major players won’t have ot compete as hard on pricing.

This is going to take a long time to figure out and I have a sneaking suspicion that the FCC will allow this to happen with some strings attached. Along with the divestitures, I kind of hope that FCC includes some sort of net neutrality rules with the deal. That could be a nice end-around to getting these rules on the mobile networks.

What do you think, friends?

[Via Gadgettell]

  • Kinkypork

    most people i know (since i am an iphone user a couple of years now and so are my friends) are with AT&T. no one i know likes AT&T. i know a lot of people. they all feel this way for many reasons. they feel captive by at & t because the iphone gave us no choice-and over the years, before verizon was a choice-which there is no real data on yet, we experienced dropped calls, slow speeds, adjustments to their agreement terms, and i honestly do not know one person that likes AT & T and have never seen such hatred towards a major corporation in my 4 decades on this earth. they have acquired many other companies in the last few years, as a florida resident in miami, they also have me as a bellsouth customer. i have a landline and dsl from them-no choice unless i get cable for internet, i cannot get verizon-i don’t know how they did that, because as a new yorker, i recall having choices up there for my landline options. maybe it is governed by state laws, but i have tried to find other carriers for my landline and there are none-it is as if AT&T is the ONLY CHOICE. that does not make me feel good, nor is it competitive as free markets should be. i have been to other parts of florida that offer verizon as landline as well, but not here in miami to my knowledge. but i digress, back to the deal where they want to buy T-Mobile. i say this will surely make them liked even less, and there will be no choice. why would that deal get approved? it seems to me that could even force verizon to buy sprint -not that any such words have been spoken, but if they did, lets say, then there would be only two giants. because while there are a few small crumb players like metro pcs-who stand to get eaten up like all small payers, this is just unamerican-publically traded free market companies are supposed to be in groups of many to offer us choices. it’s capitalism. competition keeps prices fair and competitive. i know there is corruption in all industries where big money is involved. i cannot, for the life of me, understand why this deal to buy T-mobile would be approved-not for ATT or Verizon. they are too big as it is. leave sprint and tmobile remain as they are as 3rd and 4th player options. in fact, if anything, sprint and tmobile should merge to really compete with the other two giants. that would be far more fair-but we know life is not fair-this should be-because didn’t we break up mother BELL into the many baby Bells to prevent giants from dominating the consumer? why would we limit choices in the private sector-it isn’t good for the consumer, and prevents companies from competeing. as it is, att is constantly, whenever it wants, changing it’s terms of service and limiting what they said was unlimited-i know a corporation can change terms and if you don’t leave in 30 days, that is your concent to agree to the new-often choking and restrictive new terms. that’s fine i guess, as long as we have many other choices to go to. but that is the point- att can send me the new terms with little fear because down here anyway in south florida, they already bought all the competition-certainly for local landline dsl, and now they are trying to do it nationally on a wireless level. if this deal goes through, i can only say in my opinion, although i have no proof at all, that it is because agencies that govern them may be corrupt? because, who, in their right mind, would think this is a good idea? only att. it’s easy to see what they gain-but we can all see what we lose. and we the people lose.

Back to top ▴