Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    Robert M.
    Guest
    http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...293&e=3&u=/the
    deal/20040505/bs_deal_thedeal/consumergroupspantelecomdeal

    "This merger proposes an unacceptable level of concentration at the
    national level, clearly in violation of the merger guidelines," the
    Consumer Federation of America and Consumers Union said in a joint
    filing that was made public on Tuesday.


    The petition was one of three the FCC (news - web sites) received by
    Monday's deadline for groups and businesses to formally oppose the
    merger. Their filing kicks off what is likely to be an eight-month war
    of words between the companies and activists over the effects of the
    wireless telecom merger.


    Mark Cooper, research director at Consumer Federation of America, said
    in the filing that the deal hurts consumers because it would reduce the
    number of phone and broadband providers. Less competition results in
    higher prices, he said.


    In many local markets Cingular and AT&T Wireless are the largest and
    second-largest cell phone providers, which shows they already have
    market power, Cooper said. Consumers have even fewer options in markets
    where Cingular's corporate parents, BellSouth Corp. and SBC
    Communications Inc., offer landline service, he said.


    The filing also disputes the claim by Cingular and AT&T Wireless that
    the deal would reduce the number of national cell-phone companies from
    six carriers to five. "A closer look shows that this set of competitors
    is almost never present in even the largest 100 markets," Cooper said.
    That means at best the merger would leave four players in most big
    cities and far fewer in smaller markets.


    Besides the activists, Thrifty Call Inc., a defunct Bell company rival
    in San Marcos, Texas, also petitioned the FCC to block the deal. It said
    Cingular would have roughly 39% of U.S. wireless subscribers if the deal
    were approved. That level of concentration will result in
    "anticompetitive incentives and opportunities" for Cingular, the group
    charged.


    The FCC is expected to complete its review in early 2005. Telecom
    observers expect regulators to approve the deal, though they may require
    the companies to divest assets in some markets.



    See More: Cingular Deal to boost prices and lower quality of service




  2. #2
    Bernard Farquart
    Guest

    Re: Cingular Deal to boost prices and lower quality of service


    "Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message news:robert156-

    <snip>

    > The FCC is expected to complete its review in early 2005. Telecom
    > observers expect regulators to approve the deal, though they may require
    > the companies to divest assets in some markets.


    Your point?





  3. #3
    XFF
    Guest

    Re: Cingular Deal to boost prices and lower quality of service

    "Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

    > In many local markets Cingular and AT&T Wireless are the largest and
    > second-largest cell phone providers, which shows they already have
    > market power, Cooper said. Consumers have even fewer options in markets
    > where Cingular's corporate parents, BellSouth Corp. and SBC
    > Communications Inc., offer landline service, he said.


    What is the supposed connection between the ILEC and the wireless
    carriers in any given market? In other words, if there are 6 mobile
    carriers to chose from in Dallas and in Los Angeles, what difference
    does it make whether SBC is the ILEC or not?

    > The filing also disputes the claim by Cingular and AT&T Wireless that
    > the deal would reduce the number of national cell-phone companies from
    > six carriers to five. "A closer look shows that this set of competitors
    > is almost never present in even the largest 100 markets," Cooper said.
    > That means at best the merger would leave four players in most big
    > cities and far fewer in smaller markets.


    I'd like to have a second look at that closer look. There are
    extremely few (if any) top 100 markets that do not have at least 6
    mobile carriers to choose from.

    > Besides the activists, Thrifty Call Inc., a defunct Bell company rival
    > in San Marcos, Texas, also petitioned the FCC to block the deal. It said
    > Cingular would have roughly 39% of U.S. wireless subscribers if the deal
    > were approved. That level of concentration will result in
    > "anticompetitive incentives and opportunities" for Cingular, the group
    > charged.


    Actually, without any divestitures, the combined Cingular/AWS would
    have about 46 M customers, which is just over a quarter (27.8%) of all
    mobile customers. This clown should get his facts straight before
    sending petitions to the FCC.



  4. #4
    Robert M.
    Guest

    Re: Cingular Deal to boost prices and lower quality of service

    In article <[email protected]>,
    [email protected] (XFF) wrote:

    > "Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:<[email protected]>...
    >
    > > In many local markets Cingular and AT&T Wireless are the largest and
    > > second-largest cell phone providers, which shows they already have
    > > market power, Cooper said. Consumers have even fewer options in markets
    > > where Cingular's corporate parents, BellSouth Corp. and SBC
    > > Communications Inc., offer landline service, he said.

    >
    > What is the supposed connection between the ILEC and the wireless
    > carriers in any given market? In other words, if there are 6 mobile
    > carriers to chose from in Dallas and in Los Angeles, what difference
    > does it make whether SBC is the ILEC or not?


    They can leverage their near monopoly position as an ILEC to promote
    their cellular sevrice.


    >
    > > The filing also disputes the claim by Cingular and AT&T Wireless that
    > > the deal would reduce the number of national cell-phone companies from
    > > six carriers to five. "A closer look shows that this set of competitors
    > > is almost never present in even the largest 100 markets," Cooper said.
    > > That means at best the merger would leave four players in most big
    > > cities and far fewer in smaller markets.

    >
    > I'd like to have a second look at that closer look. There are
    > extremely few (if any) top 100 markets that do not have at least 6
    > mobile carriers to choose from.
    >
    > > Besides the activists, Thrifty Call Inc., a defunct Bell company rival
    > > in San Marcos, Texas, also petitioned the FCC to block the deal. It said
    > > Cingular would have roughly 39% of U.S. wireless subscribers if the deal
    > > were approved. That level of concentration will result in
    > > "anticompetitive incentives and opportunities" for Cingular, the group
    > > charged.

    >
    > Actually, without any divestitures, the combined Cingular/AWS would
    > have about 46 M customers, which is just over a quarter (27.8%) of all
    > mobile customers. This clown should get his facts straight before
    > sending petitions to the FCC.



    But they are not talking National Market share, think market share in
    each of the 100 markets. It was that kind of logic that shot down the
    Office Depot-Staples marriage.



  • Similar Threads