Merger musings

I am moderately surprised by a the ruling in some ways.
Stuff that I thought they was going to force them to sell was left alone.

Some stuff I though was safe, was hacked.

List of major dumps.

CMA 45 Oklahoma city, OK
That is one I though was safe?????

CMA 292 Sherman-Denison, TX
That is so close to Dallas that there should be good coverage by multiple
carriers.

CMA 293 Owensboro, KY
That is a small area with no real competitors, no real surprise.

CMA 326 to 330... Various Arkansas plots.
Cingular has such a solid hold over that state that it makes perfect sense
why they chopped them.

CMA 357 Connecticut, Litchfield.
With cinguar's solid hold over one cellular band in that state, and the
demand, that make perfect sense.

CMA 443 Kentucky, Fulton.
No real flock of providers there, so no surprise.

CMA 494,496 Mississippi. Yalobusha/Barton.
Can't really say...

CMA 517 Missouri, Barton.
Odd.. I didn't realize that cingular had enough of a presence on PCS in that
area to cause problems.
It would have helped fill in an 800Mhz hole.

CMA 598 Oklahoma, grant.
Taking into account the other Oklahoma divesture, it makes sense.

CMA 657 Texas, Jack.
Considering the 292 divesture, it makes sense.

CMA 662 Texas, Cherokee.
I seen that coming from a mile away. AKA It makes perfect sense to me.

Add to that, the divesture of other spectrum holdings
that put them over a specified limit in each market,
which makes perfect sense to me.

Things that I thought the FCC was going to go after.
Certain RSAs in Florida.
But Florida was completely untouched!

The licenses in Texas that ATT just got was a thumb waiting to get hit.
But.. The thumb survived to another day.
I am surprised that the FCC didn't go after
CMA 670,669,281,112,671.. Exc...
The network that ATT bought must have been pretty poor for them to not worry
about it.


Ow.... And one more thing for all the ATT users........

ALL YOUR CELL BELONG TO US!!!!!!!! MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHahhahaa.... :-)

---

› See More: Merger musings

"N9WOS" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I am moderately surprised by a the ruling in some ways.
> Stuff that I thought they was going to force them to sell was left alone.
>
> Some stuff I though was safe, was hacked.
>
> List of major dumps.
>
> CMA 45 Oklahoma city, OK
> That is one I though was safe?????
>
> CMA 292 Sherman-Denison, TX
> That is so close to Dallas that there should be good coverage by multiple
> carriers.
>
> CMA 293 Owensboro, KY
> That is a small area with no real competitors, no real surprise.
>
> CMA 326 to 330... Various Arkansas plots.
> Cingular has such a solid hold over that state that it makes perfect sense
> why they chopped them.
>
> CMA 357 Connecticut, Litchfield.
> With cinguar's solid hold over one cellular band in that state, and the
> demand, that make perfect sense.
>
> CMA 443 Kentucky, Fulton.
> No real flock of providers there, so no surprise.
>
> CMA 494,496 Mississippi. Yalobusha/Barton.
> Can't really say...
>
> CMA 517 Missouri, Barton.
> Odd.. I didn't realize that cingular had enough of a presence on PCS in
that
> area to cause problems.
> It would have helped fill in an 800Mhz hole.
>
> CMA 598 Oklahoma, grant.
> Taking into account the other Oklahoma divesture, it makes sense.
>
> CMA 657 Texas, Jack.
> Considering the 292 divesture, it makes sense.
>
> CMA 662 Texas, Cherokee.
> I seen that coming from a mile away. AKA It makes perfect sense to me.
>
> Add to that, the divesture of other spectrum holdings
> that put them over a specified limit in each market,
> which makes perfect sense to me.
>
> Things that I thought the FCC was going to go after.
> Certain RSAs in Florida.
> But Florida was completely untouched!
>
> The licenses in Texas that ATT just got was a thumb waiting to get hit.
> But.. The thumb survived to another day.
> I am surprised that the FCC didn't go after
> CMA 670,669,281,112,671.. Exc...
> The network that ATT bought must have been pretty poor for them to not
worry
> about it.
>
>
> Ow.... And one more thing for all the ATT users........
>
> ALL YOUR CELL BELONG TO US!!!!!!!! MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHahhahaa.... :-)
>
>

Something you may not be considering is that with the merger, they may not
be giving up all assets in a given market. Only the ones where ATT and
Cingular both had different market shares. They are required to sell the
ATT side of the market, not their own. Coverage is not being given away,
only conglomeration and like-market shares. Its the old A carrier and B
carrier. Where Cingular was A carrier and ATT was B carrier, now Cingular is
both A and B, and must give up either the A side or the B side.
CT

> Something you may not be considering is that with the merger, they may
not
> be giving up all assets in a given market. Only the ones where ATT and
> Cingular both had different market shares.

In all the divestures, both companies had a moderate market share.
But what got me, is some of those places were in areas where I thought
that there would be plenty of competition.

And some places that they didn't mention was areas that, on the surface,
appeared to hold very little competition.

But the FCC, and the DOJ evidently have more information than I do.

> They are required to sell the
> ATT side of the market, not their own.

The main divestures are limited to the ATT side.
But cingular can sell the spectrum holdings from either company
to fulfill the pure spectrum related divestures.

> Coverage is not being given away,
> only conglomeration and like-market shares.

To some extent....

> Its the old A carrier and B
> carrier. Where Cingular was A carrier and ATT was B carrier, now Cingular
> is
> both A and B, and must give up either the A side or the B side.

Surprisingly, that hasn't been a deciding factor.
The FCC has pretty much treated the cellular A B bands
with the same regard as they have treated the PCS bands.

They pretty much has went totally on available competitors, and market
share.
A good amount of the divestures where PCS related,
with no 800Mhz spectrum in relation to it.

And in the majority of the areas where cingular and att
own both the A and B bands, they showed a surprising
lack of concern when you compare it to how they strictly
limited cellular ownership in the past..
Like along Florida, and in large portions of Texas.

It wouldn't be surprising if they were PCS bands that both companies owned.
But to see them give a company both 800Mhz blocks is new!
I guess it is a moderate shock whenever something new happens.
Even when it makes logical sense, it is still hard to get accustomed to it.

I can see why they would have no concern on the east cost of Florida.
The PCS providers have saturated the area.
But it is surprising that they had no problems with the lower parts of
Texas.
I didn't think the PCS providers had a competitive system in the waste lands
of Texas.
It looks like the 800Mhz carriers would have market advantage,
but the FCC and DOJ didn't see any problem with it.
They may have concluded that the system ATT just bought
was in such a sad shape,that it wasn't worth the trouble of divesting it.

As I said, they have more information than me, so what can I really say?

> But it is surprising that they had no problems with the lower parts of
> Texas.
> I didn't think the PCS providers had a competitive system in the waste
> lands of Texas.
> It looks like the 800Mhz carriers would have market advantage,
> but the FCC and DOJ didn't see any problem with it.
> They may have concluded that the system ATT just bought
> was in such a sad shape,that it wasn't worth the trouble of divesting it.

..............EDIT..................

I have pretty much figured out why they have no problem with it.
ATT's licenses were pretty much just that..... licenses.....
ATT has no 800Mhz network in those areas.
You can't divest a network that doesn't exist.
And a network that doesn't exist, can't cause competitive harm.

So cingular is just basically getting bare spectrum.

No other companies have used the licenses they have in that area.
So giving them another unbuilt license won't help the situation.

There was one network before the merger, and there will still be one
afterward.

Brian Oakley wrote:


>
> Something you may not be considering is that with the merger, they may not
> be giving up all assets in a given market. Only the ones where ATT and
> Cingular both had different market shares. They are required to sell the
> ATT side of the market, not their own. Coverage is not being given away,
> only conglomeration and like-market shares. Its the old A carrier and B
> carrier. Where Cingular was A carrier and ATT was B carrier, now Cingular is
> both A and B, and must give up either the A side or the B side.
> CT
>


I think it would be fair to everyone reading this thread to know that
while Cingular may be selling the licensed spectrum acquired from ATTWS,
they won't be selling the cell sites acquired - they'll convert these
assets to Cingular spectrum where necessary.


--
jer email reply - I am not a 'ten'

> I think it would be fair to everyone reading this thread to know that
> while Cingular may be selling the licensed spectrum acquired from ATTWS,
> they won't be selling the cell sites acquired - they'll convert these
> assets to Cingular spectrum where necessary.

That is true in regard to the spectrum related divestures.
(ie) the areas where thy are worrying about cingular having too much
spectrum.

But the ones I has listed originally are full divestures of the complete att
business in those areas.
It includes the provision for cingular to keep anything extra from att that
is above the minimum
divesture required to constitute a complete system in some areas.

..............quote...........................
L. "Wireless Business Divestiture Assets" means, for each mobile wireless
business to be divested under this Final Judgment, all types of assets,
tangible and intangible, used by defendants in the operation of the mobile
wireless businesses to be divested (including the provision of long distance
telecommunications services for wireless calls). "Wireless Business
Divestiture Assets" shall be construed broadly to accomplish the complete
divestitures of the entire business of AT&T Wireless in each of the
following MSA and RSA license areas as required by this Final Judgment and
to ensure that the divested mobile wireless businesses remain viable,
ongoing businesses:

(a) Oklahoma City, Oklahoma MSA (CMA 045);

(b) Connecticut RSA-1 (CMA 357), provided that defendants may retain 10 MHz
of AT&T Wireless's PCS spectrum, provided that 10 MHz of contiguous PCS
spectrum throughout the RSA is divested to an Acquirer;

(c) Kentucky RSA-1 (CMA 443), provided that defendants may retain 15 MHz of
AT&T Wireless's PCS spectrum in Fulton county and 10 MHz of AT&T Wireless's
PCS spectrum in the other counties contained within the RSA, provided that
30 MHz of contiguous PCS spectrum in Fulton county and 20 MHz of contiguous
PCS spectrum in the other counties contained in the RSA is divested to an
Acquirer;

(d) Oklahoma RSA-3 (CMA 598); and

(e) Texas RSA-11 (CMA 662), provided that defendants may retain 25 MHz of
AT&T Wireless's PCS spectrum in Sabine county, and 20 MHz of AT&T Wireless's
PCS spectrum in Angelina, Nacogdoches, and San Augustine counties, provided
that 10 MHz of contiguous PCS spectrum throughout the RSA is divested to an
Acquirer.

Wireless Business Divestiture Assets shall include, without limitation, all
types of real and personal property, monies and financial instruments,
equipment, inventory, office furniture, fixed assets and furnishings,
supplies and materials, contracts, agreements, leases, commitments, spectrum
licenses issued by the FCC and all other licenses, permits and
authorizations, operational support systems, cell sites, network
infrastructure, switches, customer support and billing systems, interfaces
with other service providers, business and customer records and information,
customer contracts, customer lists, credit records, accounts, and historic
and current business plans which relate primarily to the wireless business
being divested, as well as any patents, licenses, sub-licenses, trade
secrets, know-how, drawings, blueprints, designs, technical and quality
specifications and protocols, quality assurance and control procedures,
manuals and other technical information defendants supply to their own
employees, customers, suppliers, agents, or licensees, and trademarks, trade
names and service marks or other intellectual property, including all
intellectual property rights under third-party licenses that are capable of
being transferred to an Acquirer either in their entirety, for assets
described in (1) below, or through a license obtained through or from the
divesting defendant, for assets described in (2) below; provided that
defendants shall only be required to divest Multi-line Business Customer
contracts, if 50 percent or more of the Multi-line Business Customer's
subscribers reside or work within any of the five (5) license areas
described herein, and further, any subscribers who obtain mobile wireless
services through any such contract retained by defendants and who are
located within the five (5) geographic areas identified above, shall be
given the option to terminate their relationship with defendants, without
financial cost, within one year of the closing of the Transaction.
Defendants shall provide written notice to these subscribers within 45 days
after the closing of the Transaction.

...............end quote.................

N9WOS wrote:

>>I think it would be fair to everyone reading this thread to know that
>>while Cingular may be selling the licensed spectrum acquired from ATTWS,
>>they won't be selling the cell sites acquired - they'll convert these
>>assets to Cingular spectrum where necessary.
>
>
> That is true in regard to the spectrum related divestures.
> (ie) the areas where thy are worrying about cingular having too much
> spectrum.
>
> But the ones I has listed originally are full divestures of the complete att
> business in those areas.
> It includes the provision for cingular to keep anything extra from att that
> is above the minimum
> divesture required to constitute a complete system in some areas.
>
> .............quote...........................
> L. "Wireless Business Divestiture Assets" means, for each mobile wireless

[....]


I smell a fire sale coming on.

--
jer email reply - I am not a 'ten'

In article <[email protected]>, Jer <[email protected]>
wrote:

> N9WOS wrote:
>
> >>I think it would be fair to everyone reading this thread to know that
> >>while Cingular may be selling the licensed spectrum acquired from ATTWS,
> >>they won't be selling the cell sites acquired - they'll convert these
> >>assets to Cingular spectrum where necessary.
> >
> >
> > That is true in regard to the spectrum related divestures.
> > (ie) the areas where thy are worrying about cingular having too much
> > spectrum.
> >
> > But the ones I has listed originally are full divestures of the complete
> > att
> > business in those areas.
> > It includes the provision for cingular to keep anything extra from att that
> > is above the minimum
> > divesture required to constitute a complete system in some areas.
> >
> > .............quote...........................
> > L. "Wireless Business Divestiture Assets" means, for each mobile wireless
>
> [....]
>
>
> I smell a fire sale coming on.

My favorite Fire Sale is when in 1985 Texaco bought Getty and just about
gave away Getty retail stations in the Northeast (along with a refinery)
to Powertest, along with the right to use the "Getty" name; such that
Getty in the Northeast now is what used to be "powertest".

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Thu, 28 Oct 2004 18:55:56 -0500, Jer
<[email protected]> wrote:

>I smell a fire sale coming on.

I smell an auction of valuable spectrum to the highest bidder.

--
Best regards,
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/>

In article <[email protected]>,
John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:

> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Thu, 28 Oct 2004 18:55:56 -0500, Jer
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >I smell a fire sale coming on.
>
> I smell an auction of valuable spectrum to the highest bidder.

Same thing. They only have 60 days to sell. Potential Buyers know they
MUST sell.

On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 00:25:00 GMT, Jack Zwick <[email protected]>
said in alt.cellular.cingular:

>My favorite Fire Sale is when in 1985 Texaco bought Getty and just about
>gave away Getty retail stations in the Northeast (along with a refinery)
>to Powertest, along with the right to use the "Getty" name; such that
>Getty in the Northeast now is what used to be "powertest".

Getty in the Northeast now is Lukoil. Has been for over 2 years. The
stations still say Getty, but the company was sold.