Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why AT&T’s deal for T-Mobile must be blocked

marketwatch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 56 posts

Re: Why AT&T’s deal for T-Mobile must be blocked

#11

Post by yalogin »

warfangle wrote: post #8
yalogin wrote: post #6

Yep. AT&T would not even let you use a different smartphone even if you already are on the iPhone data plan! Of course they don't let you use a smartphone without a data plan at all. So this sucks.

They won't? When I got my Nexus One back in april, I just put my iPhone's sim card into my Nexus One and blammo, works fine. Same data plan. Grandfathered in to the unmetered plan, too. I still hate AT&T more than anything and wish to the silicon gods that I could cut both them and Cablevision out of my life like the malignant tumors they are.

Nope. They don't. I am an iPhone user but bought a Nexus one to develop on and put a sim card from an old dumb phone into it after disabling the data option on the phone. AT&T immediately recognized the smartphone and automatically added the data plan to my bill. When I called them they said I cannot even use my iPhone sim with the Nexus one as they come under two different data plans even though its costs the same freaking amount of money.

Re: Why AT&T’s deal for T-Mobile must be blocked

#12

Post by gpapilion »

baggachipz wrote: post #4

We can bitch and moan all we want, but the truth is that this deal will absolutely go through. If there's enough outcry, expect a dog-and-pony show on C-SPAN; in the end, they'll approve the merger with a "stern warning." Count on it.

I actually doubt this merger will go through. This would put AT&T far ahead of Verizon in term of subscribers, even if they are less desirable due to the low ARPU. There isn't enough churn in the wireless market to balance the AT&T and Verizon out over a reasonable time, and Sprint would now be a distant third. Effectively this will shut anyone else out of the National carrier business, and eliminate the possibility of any new MVNOs, since customer acquisition costs would be very high, and you only have two parties to negotiate licenses with.

Re: Why AT&T’s deal for T-Mobile must be blocked

#14

Post by baggachipz »

gpapilion wrote: post #12
baggachipz wrote: post #4

We can bitch and moan all we want, but the truth is that this deal will absolutely go through. If there's enough outcry, expect a dog-and-pony show on C-SPAN; in the end, they'll approve the merger with a "stern warning." Count on it.

I actually doubt this merger will go through. This would put AT&T far ahead of Verizon in term of subscribers, even if they are less desirable due to the low ARPU. There isn't enough churn in the wireless market to balance the AT&T and Verizon out over a reasonable time, and Sprint would now be a distant third. Effectively this will shut anyone else out of the National carrier business, and eliminate the possibility…

I totally agree with you, except for your first sentence. :)

Re: Why AT&T’s deal for T-Mobile must be blocked

#15

Post by harryh »

gpapilion wrote: post #12
baggachipz wrote: post #4

We can bitch and moan all we want, but the truth is that this deal will absolutely go through. If there's enough outcry, expect a dog-and-pony show on C-SPAN; in the end, they'll approve the merger with a "stern warning." Count on it.

I actually doubt this merger will go through. This would put AT&T far ahead of Verizon in term of subscribers, even if they are less desirable due to the low ARPU. There isn't enough churn in the wireless market to balance the AT&T and Verizon out over a reasonable time, and Sprint would now be a distant third. Effectively this will shut anyone else out of the National carrier business, and eliminate the possibility…

You care to put your money where your mouth is? I've got 500 bucks that says you're wrong.

Re: Why AT&T’s deal for T-Mobile must be blocked

#16

Post by hyperbovine »

Bud wrote: post #2

Mr. Arends makes a very strong argument. And really, if you need a shorthand way to understand this issue, all you need to know is that the Bush Administration stripped away the limits on one company's ownership of spectrum. Republicans talk a good game about the "free market", but it's internally inconsistent talk; you can't have a free market if the number of players in said market gets below a certain level. 4-5 i…

Bush's term ended in 2008. I think that's a salient point.

Re: Why AT&T’s deal for T-Mobile must be blocked

#17

Post by iamdave »

bgentry wrote: post #3

This quote summarizes the whole issue for me: Two weeks ago, as it happens, I took my business away from AT&T. The reason? Simple. T-Mobile offered me a better deal. Lower prices. No two-year contract. And monthy savings because I brought my own phone. It was a free market. So I moved. And now, that choice is gone. Sure, you can choose between companies A, B, & C. All of which cost roughly the same, nickel & dime you…

For me, it's about the price. I'm paying $50/mo for TRUE unlimited data, unlimited text and 500 minutes. Tethering at no additional cost, literally the very same day Android 2.2 came for the Galaxy S/Vibrant and brought mobile AP + tethering, I cancelled my ISP plan.

Not to mention the support you get from Tmob. When my bank screwed up an authorized payment that cleared the checkbook, yanked it back, Tmobile immediately went to the front-lines to fix it, and when the bank refused to cooperate, they just gave me three months of free service.

This buy out cannot be passed.

Re: Why AT&T’s deal for T-Mobile must be blocked

#18

Post by [deleted] »

derobert wrote: post #10
suprgeek wrote: post #7

The author captures this point perfectly: AT&T and T-Mobile merger will create a "GSM Monopoly" in the American market. This will be bad news for any customer who has to use GSM handsets as Europe, Asia, etc have GSM. So if you ever have to travel internationally you are better off with GSM phones. AT&T must not be allowed to Monopolize this key market.

Everyone is moving to LTE, so this really doesn't sound like a huge deal, at least in the medium-to-long term. You will be able to get LTE from AT&T/T-Mobile, Sprint, and Verizon, at least.

[deleted]

Re: Why AT&T’s deal for T-Mobile must be blocked

#19

Post by Schultzy »

Bud wrote: post #2

Mr. Arends makes a very strong argument. And really, if you need a shorthand way to understand this issue, all you need to know is that the Bush Administration stripped away the limits on one company's ownership of spectrum. Republicans talk a good game about the "free market", but it's internally inconsistent talk; you can't have a free market if the number of players in said market gets below a certain level. 4-5 i…

What's so bad about a monopoly in a free market?

Doesn't that just create opportunity for some other carrier, perhaps a currently small regional company, to step up and fill that hole?

If the pain is big enough, there will be competition. If we mandate competition, it's not a FREE market.

Re: Why AT&T’s deal for T-Mobile must be blocked

#20

Post by gergles »

Schultzy wrote: post #19
Bud wrote: post #2

Mr. Arends makes a very strong argument. And really, if you need a shorthand way to understand this issue, all you need to know is that the Bush Administration stripped away the limits on one company's ownership of spectrum. Republicans talk a good game about the "free market", but it's internally inconsistent talk; you can't have a free market if the number of players in said market gets below a certain level. 4-5 i…

What's so bad about a monopoly in a free market? Doesn't that just create opportunity for some other carrier, perhaps a currently small regional company, to step up and fill that hole? If the pain is big enough, there will be competition. If we mandate competition, it's not a FREE market.

It's impossible to compete with a national wireless carrier due to a multi-billion dollar barrier to entry in the form of a spectrum license.
Post reply on HN