111–120 of 284 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair, the DOJ actually tried to stop this but was overruled by the courts.
To be fair, the DOJ's motives were completely tainted by Trump's hostility toward CNN.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair, the DOJ actually tried to stop this but was overruled by the courts.
To be fair, the DOJ's motives were completely tainted by Trump's hostility toward CNN.
It’s crazy to me how one judge gets to decide the fate of a 100 billion dollar merger. Humans are fallible.
Well, the judge has to base the decision on a whole bunch of laws. It's not like judges get to decide this on their own.
At the same time, AT&T stock is down in after hours trading. Does this mean that investors believe this merger will be bad for AT&T, or at least for short-term profits?
Maybe tomorrow's reaction will be different as the entire market will weigh in on the decision.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can they appeal the case in higher courts?
The merger is set to close next Monday. DOJ can file for a stay, but the judge warned them that would be unwise. I think the DOJ will just take it as a loss.
What would they have to lose?
> The judge indicated during the trial that he wasn’t buying Shapiro’s projection. After his testimony, Leon said he was "confused." Further explanation from Shapiro didn’t help. "I’m not sure I got it, but it’s too late and too hot to belabor the point any further," the judge said. Amazing on so many different levels. (Shapiro is the economist whose model the DOJ based their case off of).
The courts seem to be letting telecoms consolidate to a degree that is unprecedented (Bell, at least, had a fairly narrow scope), because they think the internet means these companies have competition. I think they're severely under-estimating the power these companies have and the risk that these mergers create to both consumers and our democracy.
>to lead the next generation in innovation. Meanwhile I have 300k internet in Pasadena, CA. That's the fastest they offer. My roommate doesn't care and won't upgrade to Spectrum. Why is it whenever I read the above it means the opposite?
Yet more media consolidation. And this one has the inherent conflicts of interest you get when a distributor buys out a producer. And of course the idea of protecting the public interest isn't a thing anymore in DC.
I'm not sure I understand the conflicts. Isn't Netflix essentially doing the same thing? Consolidating production and distribution?
It’s crazy to me how one judge gets to decide the fate of a 100 billion dollar merger. Humans are fallible.
Well, the judge has to base the decision on a whole bunch of laws. It's not like judges get to decide this on their own.