AT&T Cleared by Judge to Buy Time Warner • Hacker News Board

Re: AT&T Cleared by Judge to Buy Time Warner

#281

Post by basch » Sat, Jun 16, 2018, 2:56 PM UTC

jadedhacker wrote: post #107

Media consolidation infographic from 2011. Back then, six companies controlled 90% of the market. I wonder where we're at now? http://www.businessinsider.com/these-6-corporations-control-...

This 90% is absurd. What about:

ATT - DirecTV, Time Warner (WB, Turner, HBO)

Verizon - Yahoo, AOL

Comcast - XFinity, NBCUniversal

Disney - 21st Century Fox?

Sony - Pictures, Television, Music/Publishing

Netflix

Amazon

Google/Youtube

Facebook

Microsoft

National Amusements (CBS/Viacom(Paramount))

Fox Broadcasting/Fox Sports

Sinclair Broadcast Group/Tribune Company?

Vivendi - Canal+, Universal Music Group

Bertelsmann - Random House, Penguin, RTL, BMG

Lionsgate

Crown Castle - Hallmark

Discovery - Scripps Interactive, TLC, Animal Planet, US Networks

AMC Networks

Kobalt

Warner Music Group - Warner/Chappell

News Corp

Tronc

Time inc

Hearst Corporation

Gannett

Advanced Publications

Meredith Corp

HarperCollins

New York Times Company

Wenner Media

Getty

Gray

Nexstar

Tegna

iHeartMedia (ClearChannel)

AMC Theaters

Madison Square Garden

Regal

Cinemark

MindGeek

Televisa

Univision Communications

Sprint/T-Mobile?

Charter Communications (Bright House Networks, Spectrum Internet formerly Time Warner Cable)

Dish

Cox

Altice USA (Optimum Online, Suddenlink Communications)

CenturyLink

Frontier

Re: AT&T Cleared by Judge to Buy Time Warner

#282

Post by dschuler » Sun, Jun 17, 2018, 8:39 PM UTC

makomk wrote: post #156

dschuler wrote: post #114

It's interesting that the Trump administration was eager to block this deal (Trump has made statements in favor of preventing this merger), while enthusiastically repealing net neutrality. Maybe expecting consistency here is reading too much into the tea leaves. 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-te…

The fundamental philosophy at play here, I think - so far as there is one - is that government regulation cannot and should not be used to try and regulate away the negative effects of lack of competition, that instead it should ensure that a competitive marketplace exists and let the market take care of it. If I recall correctly, there's an explanation of this position from Ajit Pai's FCC, which in particular refere…

That makes sense. Thanks for the insight.

Re: AT&T Cleared by Judge to Buy Time Warner

#283

Post by dschuler » Sun, Jun 17, 2018, 8:40 PM UTC

droopybuns wrote: post #201

dschuler wrote: post #114

It's interesting that the Trump administration was eager to block this deal (Trump has made statements in favor of preventing this merger), while enthusiastically repealing net neutrality. Maybe expecting consistency here is reading too much into the tea leaves. 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-te…

This move makes AT&T the largest private debt holder in the United States. https://www.dallasnews.com/business/att/2017/06/30/can-att-k... It’s tough to be nimble with financial responsibility this large. It is not obvious to me that this is a good thing for the shareholders. It’s for this reason that I’d rather see us focus on incentives for local ISP competition rather than regulatory burdens designed to keep eleph…

I was wondering about the debt involved to pull off this deal, thanks for the link.

Re: AT&T Cleared by Judge to Buy Time Warner

#284

Post by windows_tips » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 5:21 PM UTC

rosser wrote: post #101

windows_tips wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there actually a market for things like CNN? It seems that CNN being shoved in your face is kind of its thing.

I mean as opposed to, say, Netflix or Hulu. AT&T can, under the present legal regime, perfectly legitimately say, "Here's all this 'free' content for you. You'll have to subscribe to the 'Not Our Content' package to access those other services..." But, sure. Let's run with your example: imagine you had an ISP who let you read Fox News for free, but charged you to visit CNN.

Is this the HN position, AT&T: charge us for your content ?