Posted on 12/05/2016 6:56:25 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
During his campaign for President, Donald Trump declared that he would not approve a proposed merger between AT&T and Time Warner on the grounds the deal represented “too much concentration of power in the hands of too few.” But as with so much else when it comes to Trump, it appears that vow is negotiable.
On Thursday, the Financial Times reported that Trump’s transition team assured AT&T they would review the deal with an open mind, and that company executives came away confident that the deal would pass regulatory scrutiny.
I oppose the merger. I hope DJT puts poison pills in the deal. This does not promote competition.
I don’t like it either. They’re after Time Warner for several movie and entertainment rights and have already bought Directv. They’re going after the entire online and DBS streaming as an eventual goal to dominate IMO. Not good.
DJT will cut some sort of deal and then have an infomercial press conference at AT&T HQ in Dallas promoting what a great deal it is for America.
What was the last mega merger a Republican President opposed?
Meh. There’s so much more digital content entertainment outside of it, that it’s inconsequential in that regard. If it works, then it’s great. If AT&T pulls some stuff, then they’ll lose money and people will still have plenty of other content to amuse themselves with.
The tail is bigger than the head in this arena.
I’m a ‘bust the trust’ guy myself, but I guess we’ll just have to wait and see.
I agree. I would like the government to make a blanket statement that No One is “too big to fail” and then investors can make choices based on the idea that if things don’t work out, they could lose their shirts.
So I have Direct TV which AT&T just bought.
I already have an old AT&T cellphone account so I can for free now see Direct TV on my phone anywhere for as long as I want for free.
Time warner just changed it’s name to Spectrum. I have a home phone and 5 gig internet from Time Warner for $14.99 a month for unlimited internet.
If anything, if I package what I have I will lose my great deals.
I was told NEVER to change my internet or cell deal.
Spectrum right away raised the home phone cost, so I may cut that. Why $400 a year to keep a historical family number on a highly unused line?
I don’t think Trump will approve this merger, especially with his disdain for the mainstream media. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised that Comcast may have to spin off NBC Universal some time after January 20, 2017.
Why would AT&T do this? to grow a monopoly? No.
AT&T is historically in the “phone business.” AT&T has publicly stated its intention to RETIRE the phone network that we all grew up with. The ‘phone company’ was an asset based model selling switched telephony from a physically defined analog-then-digital central office based model. AT&T is public with their intentions to essentially let that business dry up and replace it with an all-IP-based service offering over a software-defined network. Consumer home phones are a known-dying business. Business switched telephone and data services are a dying business. Etc etc. In other words, the business model that made AT&T a world leader for 100 or so years is today a going out of business model. AT&T knows that, and is taking steps to preserve and grow revenues in markets and channels consistent with the brand.
This is not conjecture - read their annual reports. watch their CEO Stephenson on the cable finance shows.
AT&T bought DirecTV for spectrum (DTV had a lot of wireless spectrum), for their knowledge of the content business, *AND* because DTV had a customer profile that aligned to the AT&T customer base — unlike DISH. Publicly, AT&T intends to un-bundle desirable content from the transport and network layers, with the effect of providing customer more choice that are a la carte and on demand.
I am a share holder (significantly so) and am pleased with where they are going.
Like another poster, I like being able to watch my DTV content on *ANY* connected device I own, or log into.
AT&T+ DTV+ TW would employ over 300,000 *U.S.* employees, with I think about 270,000 (?) U.S. employees now. How about we cheer for their success, eh?
I have no problem with success
I think the market is best served when there is competition. I cheer competition.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.