Discussion about
Still thinking about today's big news, but here are some of my initial thoughts:
1. It makes sense for T-Mobile. Deutsche Telekom has been trying to unload T-Mobile USA for a while now, and it was probably just a matter of time until they found a buyer. I don't think they're interested in being the the fourth biggest player in any market. Despite rebadging HSPA+ as 4G and calling itself "America's Largest 4G Network", T-Mobile doesn't actually have any plans to deploy LTE -- they simply don't own the spectrum for it -- and so was going to hit a wall sooner or later. With subscriber growth
down and average revenue per user way below that of AT&T and Verizon, DT had to decide whether it wanted to cut its losses or find billions and billions of dollars to invest in building a true 4G network to stay competitive. Seems like an easy call, all things considered.
2. It makes sense for AT&T, too. Once again AT&T gets to call itself the largest carrier in America, and presumably they'll try and leverage that combined customer base to get better deals (i.e. lower prices and more exclusives) out of handset makers. Plus, even though AT&T and T-Mobile's HSPA networks operate on different bands, it'll still be easier to combine the two networks than it would have been to pair up Sprint's CDMA/WiMAX network with T-Mobile (though Sprint has made it clear that it could transition to LTE if need be), and AT&T will be able to combine T-Mobile's spectrum with its own as it builds outs its LTE network. In the meantime, AT&T gets an immediate boost where they need it most right now -- coverage -- and adding all of T-Mobile's towers lets them expand their network much more quickly than they would have been able to otherwise.
3. It won't be good for consumers, at least for the most part. I've been a T-Mobile subscriber for a few years now, and have generally liked both the pricing (which is just about the best of the Big Four, I pay about $63 per month for voice + text + unlimited data), the coverage (which is good where I live), and how it easy it was to get a service plan without a contract (I haven't been under contract with anyone for almost eight years now). Once this deal closes I don't expect to continue to pay as little as I have been, or to keep my unlimited data plan, and I suspect AT&T (and Verizon!) will be happy to see a low-priced competitor out of the market and will find it easier to raise or maintain prices.
4. The merger will also result in fewer handsets hitting the US market. Since almost all phones in the US are sold subsidized through a carrier that effectively means less consumer choice in terms of phones (though of course if people were willing to suck it up and buy unsubsidized that wouldn't be the case). The carriers like exclusives, so for the most part they've done a good job of getting handset makers to do phones just for them, and that's meant that each carrier has a nearly-exclusive line-up of phones. It's possible that the combined company will offer a wider selection, at least initially, but I'd guess that they'll end up offering just about the same number of handsets as AT&T does now.
5. The one bright side is that after the merger AT&T and T-Mobile subscribers should see improved service. Combining T-Mobile's network with AT&T's network will enhance coverage and reliability, and presumably we'll see fewer dropped calls.
6. Most handset makers won't like this. Remember that in the US the handset makers' real customers are the carriers, not us, and seeing the market go from four big players to three won't help them. As I mentioned above, a combined AT&T/T-Mobile will have be able to command a huge amount of purchasing power, and I have no doubt that they'll wield that power to extract the absolute best deals from the likes of HTC, Samsung, Motorola, LG, HP, etc. The one manufacturer that might actually gain is Apple, which gets to sell the iPhone to 33 million or so T-Mobile subscribers without having to negotiate with another carrier or risk alienating one of its existing carrier partners.
6. This is definitely not good for Sprint. After a few rough years it looks like things have stabilized and Sprint has finally stemmed the bleeding, but they didn't have the scale of Verizon or AT&T before this deal and facing a combined AT&T and T-Mobile won't make things any easier. Getting exclusives on hot phones will be harder, since most handset makers can get larger volume guarantees from Verizon and AT&T, and devices are what tend to drive new sign-ups. On the other hand, having T-Mobile out of the picture would make it easier to for Sprint to position itself as a low-cost alternative to the big guys. My bet is that Sprint gets bought soon, probably by Comcast, though Time Warner is another possibility.
7. Nothing is going to change for awhile. The deal is expected to take about a year to close, and is subject to regulatory approval, so we'll be well into 2012 before we see any material developments, good or bad. Getting regulatory approval is not a slam-dunk, but my guess is that the FCC and FTC will sign off, though they might extract some concessions first.
8. T-Mobile will have to kill all those ads attacking AT&T's service.
down and average revenue per user way below that of AT&T and Verizon, DT had to decide whether it wanted to cut its losses or find billions and billions of dollars to invest in building a true 4G network to stay competitive. Seems like an easy call, all things considered.
2. It makes sense for AT&T, too. Once again AT&T gets to call itself the largest carrier in America, and presumably they'll try and leverage that combined customer base to get better deals (i.e. lower prices and more exclusives) out of handset makers. Plus, even though AT&T and T-Mobile's HSPA networks operate on different bands, it'll still be easier to combine the two networks than it would have been to pair up Sprint's CDMA/WiMAX network with T-Mobile (though Sprint has made it clear that it could transition to LTE if need be), and AT&T will be able to combine T-Mobile's spectrum with its own as it builds outs its LTE network. In the meantime, AT&T gets an immediate boost where they need it most right now -- coverage -- and adding all of T-Mobile's towers lets them expand their network much more quickly than they would have been able to otherwise.
3. It won't be good for consumers, at least for the most part. I've been a T-Mobile subscriber for a few years now, and have generally liked both the pricing (which is just about the best of the Big Four, I pay about $63 per month for voice + text + unlimited data), the coverage (which is good where I live), and how it easy it was to get a service plan without a contract (I haven't been under contract with anyone for almost eight years now). Once this deal closes I don't expect to continue to pay as little as I have been, or to keep my unlimited data plan, and I suspect AT&T (and Verizon!) will be happy to see a low-priced competitor out of the market and will find it easier to raise or maintain prices.
4. The merger will also result in fewer handsets hitting the US market. Since almost all phones in the US are sold subsidized through a carrier that effectively means less consumer choice in terms of phones (though of course if people were willing to suck it up and buy unsubsidized that wouldn't be the case). The carriers like exclusives, so for the most part they've done a good job of getting handset makers to do phones just for them, and that's meant that each carrier has a nearly-exclusive line-up of phones. It's possible that the combined company will offer a wider selection, at least initially, but I'd guess that they'll end up offering just about the same number of handsets as AT&T does now.
5. The one bright side is that after the merger AT&T and T-Mobile subscribers should see improved service. Combining T-Mobile's network with AT&T's network will enhance coverage and reliability, and presumably we'll see fewer dropped calls.
6. Most handset makers won't like this. Remember that in the US the handset makers' real customers are the carriers, not us, and seeing the market go from four big players to three won't help them. As I mentioned above, a combined AT&T/T-Mobile will have be able to command a huge amount of purchasing power, and I have no doubt that they'll wield that power to extract the absolute best deals from the likes of HTC, Samsung, Motorola, LG, HP, etc. The one manufacturer that might actually gain is Apple, which gets to sell the iPhone to 33 million or so T-Mobile subscribers without having to negotiate with another carrier or risk alienating one of its existing carrier partners.
6. This is definitely not good for Sprint. After a few rough years it looks like things have stabilized and Sprint has finally stemmed the bleeding, but they didn't have the scale of Verizon or AT&T before this deal and facing a combined AT&T and T-Mobile won't make things any easier. Getting exclusives on hot phones will be harder, since most handset makers can get larger volume guarantees from Verizon and AT&T, and devices are what tend to drive new sign-ups. On the other hand, having T-Mobile out of the picture would make it easier to for Sprint to position itself as a low-cost alternative to the big guys. My bet is that Sprint gets bought soon, probably by Comcast, though Time Warner is another possibility.
7. Nothing is going to change for awhile. The deal is expected to take about a year to close, and is subject to regulatory approval, so we'll be well into 2012 before we see any material developments, good or bad. Getting regulatory approval is not a slam-dunk, but my guess is that the FCC and FTC will sign off, though they might extract some concessions first.
8. T-Mobile will have to kill all those ads attacking AT&T's service.
Im not a fan of the deal because of the repercussions to the consumers. Peoples choice for carriers has been kind of reduced to three major carriers. This is another nail in the coffin for unlimited plans as well which stinks, IMO.
This is when I really dont get the FCC and how they deal with ISPs and mobile carriers. I dont understand how a country this large and advanced has only three major mobile carriers and four major ISPs for wired internet (comcast, cablevision, verizon and time warner). Its kind of comparing apples to oranges but look at the choice of car manufactuers you have in the USA, over 10 major companies from all over the globe.
Im on a rant but this is really dishearting news to me.
This is when I really dont get the FCC and how they deal with ISPs and mobile carriers. I dont understand how a country this large and advanced has only three major mobile carriers and four major ISPs for wired internet (comcast, cablevision, verizon and time warner). Its kind of comparing apples to oranges but look at the choice of car manufactuers you have in the USA, over 10 major companies from all over the globe.
Im on a rant but this is really dishearting news to me.
I consider AT&T U-verse to be a pretty large ISP/Cable/Phone company also.
In the short run Apple wins by having the iPhone available to T-Mobile customers, but in the long run, Apple loses as AT&T and Verizon become a duopoly. Apple loses tremendous negotiating leverage with the carriers as essentially there are only two: AT&T and Verizon. Without speaking to each other (which would be illegal), AT&T and Verizon could shadow each others stances toward Apple and screw Apple in negotiations. There is a good chance Antitrust regulators in the U.S. will seek to block this. Apple should really consider spending its cash horde to enter the wireless business.
I disagree with #6. This could out to be huge for Sprint. People went to T-mobile because of the cheap prices and to get away from AT&T. I know a lot of tmobile faithfuls I follow on twitter will mass exodus to Sprint if this merger goes through. I think this is probably not going to turn out like AT&T hopes. Sure they will get the network and wireless bands but if only half the subscribers come with it, what is the gain. Especially if Verizon does something like drop all their plan prices to meet Sprints. In all reality AT&T is the most publicly despised network around and the only reason they are number 1 and not 3 or 4 now is because of the iphone and that exclusivity is gone. I just don't see this going well for anyone except Sprint and Verizon in terms of money.
If anyone buys Sprint, I hope it's Google and not Comcast or Time Warner.
I see Google has a couple of new Blog post about Nexus S 4G for Sprint and Google Voice integrating with Sprint.
googlemobile.blogspot.com/2011/03/introducing-nexu...
googlevoiceblog.blogspot.com/2011/03/sprint-integr...
I see Google has a couple of new Blog post about Nexus S 4G for Sprint and Google Voice integrating with Sprint.
googlemobile.blogspot.com/2011/03/introducing-nexu...
googlevoiceblog.blogspot.com/2011/03/sprint-integr...
I did mention that this does give Sprint an opportunity to position itself as a low-cost alternative, but that isn't an easy road to take because your margins are thinner.
I also wouldn't overestimate how many people might leave T-Mobile over this. They might lose a few, but I doubt it will be enough to make a material difference to AT&T.
I also wouldn't overestimate how many people might leave T-Mobile over this. They might lose a few, but I doubt it will be enough to make a material difference to AT&T.
Fair point, i skimmed a lot of it, but in all honesty it could go either way. My views are skewed due to my like of Android. AT&T has never truly accepted Android in its true form, and that is a big downside. I just see that AT&T will lose most of its android customers from Tmobile as well as the ones that want cheap relialble service. If the plans stay grandfathered thats fine, but if after an upgrade you have to pay a little more for less then people will leave.
In my opinion the best thing AT&T could do is if it gets approved leave Tmobile alone as a separate entity and take the profits.
In my opinion the best thing AT&T could do is if it gets approved leave Tmobile alone as a separate entity and take the profits.
I was about to say that there was no mention of the potential impact on Android. T-Mobile was the first carrier to release an Android device and arguably challenge AT&T with its then exclusive iPhone. Sure Verizon, Sprint and even AT&T adopted Android later on, but the Android experience isn't the same on the other carriers, probably with the exception of Sprint.
Verizon released Android phones with Bing, and AT&T disabled side-loading apps (installing via APK files). Now AT&T are chasing after people who are tethering without paying for the service too... It's ugly.
As you said, AT&T never accepted Android in its "true form"... They added Android to their list of devices just so they can say that they have it too.
Any way you slice it, Sprint is screwed in this whole fiasco.
Since both AT&T and Verizon have iPhones now, maybe this will be an opportunity for Google to team-up with Sprint and focus on them rather than the two main players.
This will also mean that HTC needs to find an outlet for their Android devices... Sure they had a model or two with each carrier, but when it came to Android phones, T-Mobile was their main partner.
Verizon released Android phones with Bing, and AT&T disabled side-loading apps (installing via APK files). Now AT&T are chasing after people who are tethering without paying for the service too... It's ugly.
As you said, AT&T never accepted Android in its "true form"... They added Android to their list of devices just so they can say that they have it too.
Any way you slice it, Sprint is screwed in this whole fiasco.
Since both AT&T and Verizon have iPhones now, maybe this will be an opportunity for Google to team-up with Sprint and focus on them rather than the two main players.
This will also mean that HTC needs to find an outlet for their Android devices... Sure they had a model or two with each carrier, but when it came to Android phones, T-Mobile was their main partner.
I will give serious consideration to whichever network ends up carrying HTC's Android phones, and with lesser weight, where Google goes with the next Nexus phone.
But once Tmo's bands are put to LTE, it would only be voice and maybe EDGE for the remaining Tmo customers, and that would not go very well and people would still leave. I would because I WANT MY 4G! Some people might not care but probably not enough to make a profit on the remaining Tmo.
I will miss T-Mobile. I have also been a long time non-contract subscriber to T-Mobile. I went to them when I had terrible service with Verizon and AT&T and never looked back because I live in California and Switzerland so it was paramount that I can go back and forth with no disruption and T-Mobile fit the bill. T-Mobile may not have have the best phones or the best prices but I have never contacted them because of bad connection, service, et. al. Since I travel a great deal, I have a few T-Mobile phones which they always un-locked for me whenever I had extended stays in Europe. Also, I have purchased unlocked GSM phones in Europe (including an iPhone) and T-mobile had always been helpful over the phone helping me in setting up emails, web, and VPN issues for phones which is NOT in their roster. I will hold on until the very last moment before I hang up my T-Mobile holster and try to search for another servicer. Maybe it's time to re-visit AT&T with much chagrin.
This news made me want to vomit. I spent over $200 last year in early termination fees specifically to leave AT&T due to insufficient network in my area and because I hate the company, for their phone / DSL service as well as their pathetic cellular network. I moved my wife to a T-Mobile contract-free plan and that went well enough for a while that I ended up taking the free android phone offer in Feb., which put her on a contract. Now, only a little over 1 month later, I find out that she will be an AT&T customer again, this time against my will. Needless to say, I am pretty irate. I considered Sprint for her since that is where I have my cell service through work, but the plans were more expensive... enough so that I stuck with T-Mobile.
So, I doubt Sprint is going to become known as the "low cost" alternative. I think we will all be stuck with three "high cost" choices, none of which have any choice for us since unlocked phones will now be pointless. I despise the cell phone industry. I long for the day when someone offers some kind of cheap whitespace data plan that can handle Google Voice as VOIP. :(
So, I doubt Sprint is going to become known as the "low cost" alternative. I think we will all be stuck with three "high cost" choices, none of which have any choice for us since unlocked phones will now be pointless. I despise the cell phone industry. I long for the day when someone offers some kind of cheap whitespace data plan that can handle Google Voice as VOIP. :(
I'm cautiously optimistic about how AT&T will handle existing T-Mobile customers. It would be ideal if they kept T-Mobile exactly the same and grandfathered in exactly what T-Mobile would have and has done. Of course, AT&T has to honor existing contracts, but for people just paying monthly (myself included) are probably screwed.
At the minimum, what could they do to maintain the status quo? Grandfather in all the existing plans and contracts, including the month-to-month post-contract service. Since T-Mobile doesn't have a LTE strategy, old plans would be limited to 3G (up to HSDA+). T-Mobile customers would get better coverage from the addition of ATT's towers for the volume offloaded to the tmo infrastructure. These plans would exist indefinitely, and any customers wishing to take advantage of faster data (LTE) can either add it on or sign a new contract (at unfavorable rates).
At the minimum, what could they do to maintain the status quo? Grandfather in all the existing plans and contracts, including the month-to-month post-contract service. Since T-Mobile doesn't have a LTE strategy, old plans would be limited to 3G (up to HSDA+). T-Mobile customers would get better coverage from the addition of ATT's towers for the volume offloaded to the tmo infrastructure. These plans would exist indefinitely, and any customers wishing to take advantage of faster data (LTE) can either add it on or sign a new contract (at unfavorable rates).
Sign a two year contract now (or when a notice that soon no new customers will be accepted to Tmo and be redirected to AT&T or something like that) to keep the cheap plans for as long as possible and take advantage of your SIM card and switch it when you want a new phone.
I think if you're on contract you're safe for the duration of the contract. Worst case is that they change the terms and you're released.
I suspect when AT&T takes the keys they will make offers to "buy out" existing customers into mainstream AT&T phones/plans, so they can proceed with dismantling the existing T-Mobile data network in favor of their new vision as quickly as possible.
I suspect when AT&T takes the keys they will make offers to "buy out" existing customers into mainstream AT&T phones/plans, so they can proceed with dismantling the existing T-Mobile data network in favor of their new vision as quickly as possible.
There was also no viable next-generation (4G) solution for T-Mobile. It currently has no LTE infrastructure, which makes me question AT&T's claim of rolling out wireless broadband to 95% of the US populations (think rural areas). Remember, these are the same people who don't have broadband access because they're out of range of the nearest DSL equipment installation.
The only thing AT&T gains is access to the spectrum which T-Mobile won in the AWS auction, and the chance to do it right.
The only thing AT&T gains is access to the spectrum which T-Mobile won in the AWS auction, and the chance to do it right.
Just because DT was shopping TMo around, doesn't mean the pricing was unsustainable. On the February earnings call, the big concern was surrounding customer churn, while ARPU was improving over what it had been. www.bgr.com/2011/02/25/t-mobile-takes-a-beating-in...
IMO, this has more to do with DT not being happy with having a #4 carrier on their balance sheet. But I somewhat agree that the way to increased customer base is to upgrade the network and therefore an infusion of money or an acquisition of resources will help to boost that.
IMO, this has more to do with DT not being happy with having a #4 carrier on their balance sheet. But I somewhat agree that the way to increased customer base is to upgrade the network and therefore an infusion of money or an acquisition of resources will help to boost that.
While this could be the best of both worlds, it's at least as likely to be the worst of both from a customer perspective. I've been a GSM user since the mid 90s with Omnipoint through Voicestream and onto TMobile and I've NEVER been under contract. I've had some experience with Cingular/AT&T and have been underwhelmed. I hope for the best, but brace for the worst.
I would like to see this assimilation scrutinized by the regulators, but in our current plutocratic political climate I can't imagine that happening.
I would like to see this assimilation scrutinized by the regulators, but in our current plutocratic political climate I can't imagine that happening.
One thing I'd like to add that nobody seems to have mentioned is that I would rather have medium-speed data (existing 3G, say) at a reasonable price than superfast data at a high price and no alternative.
I don't care that T-Mobile didn't have an LTE roadmap! Their existing infrastructure was GOOD ENOUGH. If keeping the status-quo kept down prices, then I was all for it.
If caps are necessary, then how about some carrier offer a speed-capped REAL-unlimited plan instead of bytes-capped high speed one? What good does a gigabit/second plan do if it means you blow through your entire monthly allotment in 40 seconds (hypothetically, of course)?
I don't care that T-Mobile didn't have an LTE roadmap! Their existing infrastructure was GOOD ENOUGH. If keeping the status-quo kept down prices, then I was all for it.
If caps are necessary, then how about some carrier offer a speed-capped REAL-unlimited plan instead of bytes-capped high speed one? What good does a gigabit/second plan do if it means you blow through your entire monthly allotment in 40 seconds (hypothetically, of course)?
Oh boy! One more step toward the reunification of the old "Ma Bell". What was the reason AT&T got divested in the first place?
"Simply don't own the spectrum"....... T-Mobile has PLENTY of AWS spectrum (that's where LTE deploys into) it won in the auction 5 years ago. Heck, its probably the biggest reason ATT bought them. Read: www.phonescoop.com/articles/article.php?a=99&p...
Combined with AT&T's spectrum, yes, but on their own, no, they don't.
"Despite its acquisition of AWS spectrum in which it has deployed HSPA, T-Mobile USA urgently needs additional spectrum to keep up with its three larger competitors in the mobile broadband arena."
www.glgroup.com/News/T-Mobile-USAs-Push-For-Spectr...
"Despite its acquisition of AWS spectrum in which it has deployed HSPA, T-Mobile USA urgently needs additional spectrum to keep up with its three larger competitors in the mobile broadband arena."
www.glgroup.com/News/T-Mobile-USAs-Push-For-Spectr...
T-Mobile would have also had to invest significantly to build this infrastructure from the ground up. From a purely technological standpoint, the merge is the right thing to do.
The execution is what will matter, and hopefully ATT won't mess it up.
The execution is what will matter, and hopefully ATT won't mess it up.
I think the biggest positive from this will be improved coverage for both parties.
I'd like to think I'm not being naive with this statement but I really hope this makes more aggressive pricing schemes. What makes me realize my wish is completely wishful thinking is comparing them to residential ISP providers in my area (Comcast and FIOS) this is not the case.
I'd like to think I'm not being naive with this statement but I really hope this makes more aggressive pricing schemes. What makes me realize my wish is completely wishful thinking is comparing them to residential ISP providers in my area (Comcast and FIOS) this is not the case.
I would like to think that AT&T's customer service will be improved by T-Mobile's long history of delighting their customers, but buried in the press release was a statement that AT&T is the only mobile operator whose employees are unionized. Typically, not a good sign of a workforce that can pivot.
This post has been removed.
As a canadian I can relate to the lack of competition in the US as a bad thing for consumers.
I think Peter has really covered the important effects of the merger quite well, although I admit I don't personally know about the business aspects.
One last thing is I liked the jabs at AT&T that T-Mobile put in their TV ads, and I will miss seeing them. But if the service improves (as per point 5) this will be a thing of the past
I think Peter has really covered the important effects of the merger quite well, although I admit I don't personally know about the business aspects.
One last thing is I liked the jabs at AT&T that T-Mobile put in their TV ads, and I will miss seeing them. But if the service improves (as per point 5) this will be a thing of the past
Make sure you cite your sources! :)
www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/g8bw3/att_is_getti...
www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/g8bw3/att_is_getti...
Objections:
I start with the classic objection: high concentration of market power. The likely result is the loss of Sprint as an effective national player. But a merger would also create a GSM monopoly. AT&T would become the sole national GSM carrier. As a result, AT&T would become not only the participant in an oligopolistic market consolidation-- it would also make them a GSM monopoly in the US. The GSM technology presents a substantial exit barrier for customers.
Why would this matter? GSM is the system used by the vast majority of the world. One can buy the right handset and use it everywhere. Unless the carrier has locked the handset to prevent consumers from "straying." AT&T has already shown hostility to customers seeking to unlock handsets the company sold them. T-Mobile has a far more embracing policy in this matter.
Then there are AT&T's policies forcing data plans onto customers:
I am told that if an AT&T customer manages to buy an unlocked smart phone from other sources, AT&T threatens to force the customer into accepting a monthly data plan-- even if the customers only want to use the device with their home wifi. I am not sure whether AT&T actually enforces this threat, but I am assured they do by one customer who ran into this barrier. (Today such consumers could theoretically migrate to T-Mobile, where such medieval practices don't exist.)
The EU has forced carriers to remove such anti-consumer barriers.
Mitigation Remedies:
Failing complete rejection of this acquisition: require rather extensive concessions from AT&T:
* Cease selling locked phones. All AT&T-sold handsets must be sold unlocked. Now that they have a virtual monopoly over GSM service in the US they have no basis for restricting customers.
* Stop forced bundling of internet data plans. Consumers should have the right to reject data plans when they don't want them.
* An even more radical idea: allow AT&T customers to purchase separate voice and data from separate carriers. If a MVNO (virtual carrier) wants to resell data plans that undercut AT&T then the customers benefit. Require AT&T to handle billing just the way they do for charity SMS campaigns and landline long distance.
* If AT&T offers capped data plans, they must provide easy ways for customers to determine when they are approaching their cap. Provide SMS-based queries and even allow customers to opt in to an automatic alert service-- this sends messages when the customer is approaching the top of their billing tier.
* Require AT&T to offer favorable financial terms for MVNO's to compete for customers-- and the rates must be low enough to allow the competitors to undercut AT&T rates-- as T-Mobile does today. (Create the basis for a new swell of competition.)
* Require AT&T to provide T-Mobile customers with a free trade in. If a customer owns a 3G or 4G GSM phone that is incompatible with the AT&T network (but is compatible with the T-Mobile network), AT&T must offer a like value phone at no cost to the consumer.
* Require AT&T to practice network neutrality on their wireless systems.
* Forbid AT&T from signing exclusive deals with handset manufacturers. A wise observer noted that the exclusive Iphone deal with Apple was the last straw for T-Mobile. It resulted in dramatic increases in churn.
o Perhaps force AT&T to accept direct manufacturer-to-consumer handset sales. AT&T would be required to allow manufacturers to use space at AT&T-owned retail locations (and the AT&T website) to promote and sell GSM handsets.
Marc Schnapp
I start with the classic objection: high concentration of market power. The likely result is the loss of Sprint as an effective national player. But a merger would also create a GSM monopoly. AT&T would become the sole national GSM carrier. As a result, AT&T would become not only the participant in an oligopolistic market consolidation-- it would also make them a GSM monopoly in the US. The GSM technology presents a substantial exit barrier for customers.
Why would this matter? GSM is the system used by the vast majority of the world. One can buy the right handset and use it everywhere. Unless the carrier has locked the handset to prevent consumers from "straying." AT&T has already shown hostility to customers seeking to unlock handsets the company sold them. T-Mobile has a far more embracing policy in this matter.
Then there are AT&T's policies forcing data plans onto customers:
I am told that if an AT&T customer manages to buy an unlocked smart phone from other sources, AT&T threatens to force the customer into accepting a monthly data plan-- even if the customers only want to use the device with their home wifi. I am not sure whether AT&T actually enforces this threat, but I am assured they do by one customer who ran into this barrier. (Today such consumers could theoretically migrate to T-Mobile, where such medieval practices don't exist.)
The EU has forced carriers to remove such anti-consumer barriers.
Mitigation Remedies:
Failing complete rejection of this acquisition: require rather extensive concessions from AT&T:
* Cease selling locked phones. All AT&T-sold handsets must be sold unlocked. Now that they have a virtual monopoly over GSM service in the US they have no basis for restricting customers.
* Stop forced bundling of internet data plans. Consumers should have the right to reject data plans when they don't want them.
* An even more radical idea: allow AT&T customers to purchase separate voice and data from separate carriers. If a MVNO (virtual carrier) wants to resell data plans that undercut AT&T then the customers benefit. Require AT&T to handle billing just the way they do for charity SMS campaigns and landline long distance.
* If AT&T offers capped data plans, they must provide easy ways for customers to determine when they are approaching their cap. Provide SMS-based queries and even allow customers to opt in to an automatic alert service-- this sends messages when the customer is approaching the top of their billing tier.
* Require AT&T to offer favorable financial terms for MVNO's to compete for customers-- and the rates must be low enough to allow the competitors to undercut AT&T rates-- as T-Mobile does today. (Create the basis for a new swell of competition.)
* Require AT&T to provide T-Mobile customers with a free trade in. If a customer owns a 3G or 4G GSM phone that is incompatible with the AT&T network (but is compatible with the T-Mobile network), AT&T must offer a like value phone at no cost to the consumer.
* Require AT&T to practice network neutrality on their wireless systems.
* Forbid AT&T from signing exclusive deals with handset manufacturers. A wise observer noted that the exclusive Iphone deal with Apple was the last straw for T-Mobile. It resulted in dramatic increases in churn.
o Perhaps force AT&T to accept direct manufacturer-to-consumer handset sales. AT&T would be required to allow manufacturers to use space at AT&T-owned retail locations (and the AT&T website) to promote and sell GSM handsets.
Marc Schnapp
While I agree, I can only say "good luck". Who is going to enforce this? FCC? FTC? Congress? That's funny. They have all but proven they are corrupt beyond fixing at this point. I'm a believer in free market, but let's face it, we don't truly have a free market here in the USSA. When government agencies get involved, corruption reigns. And even though I believe in the concept, I recognize that free market never works either because of the greed in the culture.
I (my family) was contemplating switching TO AT&T (tried ATT not that bad where I live) because $120 for All lines Unlim. Text 2 Lines Unlim min + 1 line 200 min and 1 line Unlim. Data also i have connections... Now my question is to wait or to switch now... but the monopoly risk increases by 250% at least....
follow this discussion
share:
26 users following this discussion, including:
This discussion has been viewed 2846 times.
Last activity .