AT&T to acquire T-Mobile USA

[Antenna]

AT&T Threatens to Sue FCC If T-Mobile Pullout Ignored

By Todd Shields - Nov 25, 2011

AT&T Inc. (T) said it plans to sue the Federal Communications Commission if the agency doesn’t let the company withdraw its application to buy a smaller rival for $39 billion.

The FCC is obligated by its own rules to honor AT&T’s move to rescind its application to acquire T-Mobile USA Inc., Wayne Watts, general counsel for AT&T, said today in a blog entry.

“We have every right to withdraw our merger from the FCC, and the FCC has no right to stop us,” Watts said in the entry on the company’s public policy blog. “Any suggestion the agency might do otherwise would be an abuse of procedure which we would immediately challenge in court.”

AT&T and T-Mobile parent Deutsche Telekom AG withdrew their FCC applications yesterday after agency Chairman Julius Genachowski asked fellow commissioners on Nov. 22 to send the deal to a hearing, signaling an attempt to scuttle the merger.

The Justice Department already has sued to block the transaction as anticompetitive, with a U.S. district court trial set to commence in February.

AT&T’s move is “a request” that the FCC “will consider,” agency spokeswoman Tammy Sun said in an e-mailed statement yesterday. Sun referred a reporter today to that statement and declined to comment further.

The FCC should publish the order that would send the merger to a hearing, Harold Feld, legal director of Washington-based advocacy group Public Knowledge that opposes the merger, said in an e-mailed statement yesterday.

“It is sure to contain conclusions that AT&T would like to keep quiet,” Feld said.

‘You’re Done’

With AT&T’s withdrawal, the FCC could dismiss the application with prejudice, Feld said. The effect would be to tell AT&T, “‘You’re done. Don’t come back to us with anything like this again,’” he said.

FCC staff members said during a Nov. 22 conference call that they had concluded the deal would diminish competition and lead to job losses. The agency didn’t find evidence that the deal would significantly speed broadband deployment, according to the FCC staff, who spoke under ground rules that forbade identification.

SOURCE:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/print/...e-pullout.html

[silentjudge]

Boy does AT&T sound mad as hell. Not quite in the position for them to be threatening the government.

Sent from my Atrix 4G

[andyhrn]

Boy does AT&T sound mad as hell. Not quite in the position for them to be threatening the government.

Sent from my Atrix 4G

Because probably there was some reassurance the deal would came trough. But instead there's a going to be a hearing about the merger where att might be asked about how efficiently it has spent a government (taxpayers) money to create a new jobs and upgrade the network to keep service prices low.

[Telekom]

I've seen posters saying this merger failing may actually negatively impact T-Mobile. Is that an accurate assumption?

Sent from my LG-P999 using HowardForums

Well, it means that whoever buys T-Mobile will buy it at a price less than 39B since the price of the company will not be worth the 39B that T offered. Any way that it goes the company will stop being T-Mobile at some point since DT has clearly chosen to exit the US market.

[Antenna]

Here is something I know one of our members will like...

Attachment 75473Attachment 75474

From:

http://www.howardforums.com/showthre...ve-devil/page5

AT&T begins to throttle 3G/HSPA+ users at 2.3GB on grandfathered $30 plan.

T-Mobile's users don't get throttled until 5GB on legacy plans (including the $30 plan, and $20 preferred android plan).

As our beloved member would say: pathetic! Glad I will not be annexed into this

[terryjohnson16]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-1...-takeover.html

http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/article.php?a=9353

[ilvla2]

I have to wonder if AT&T's ultimate goal is not to get a merger to go though, but to do so much damage to T-Mobile that they will go bankrupt and end up getting them at a fire sale. I mean, why shell out 39 Billion to buy your competitor when you can destroy them and get them for half that?

[terryjohnson16]

I have to wonder if AT&T's ultimate goal is not to get a merger to go though, but to do so much damage to T-Mobile that they will go bankrupt and end up getting them at a fire sale. I mean, why shell out 39 Billion to buy your competitor when you can destroy them and get them for half that?

Remember they factoring in spectrum primarily, the hardware assets, and finally the customers into that $39 billion. Remember, for them to have to bid today, on what T-Mobile has in auction, it would cost them in the billions, for both of the full nationwide PCS and AWS spectrum bands, a percentage of cellular 850 they own, towers/switches, and other assets/contracts T-Mobile owns.

They trying to get everything all at once. Plus, if you add up that T-Mobile owns, the price might be even more than $39 Billion. But, DT figures AT&T's bidding price, is the highest they will get, and they pounced on the offer. But, the government, customers, companies, and workers all hate the idea of T-Mobile being sold.

Hopefully, if AT&T has to pay $6 billion dollars for the breakup fee, maybe T-Mobile should give that money to Apple, to get an AWS support iPhone in 2012.

They trying to also remove T-Mobile as the cheaper GSM carrier, which will bring more roaming revenue to them, and more OEM contracts to them.

[ilvla2]

Hopefully, if AT&T has to pay $6 billion dollars for the breakup fee, maybe T-Mobile should give that money to Apple, to get an AWS support iPhone in 2012.

That would be cool! I would like to see them finish their 3G rollout here in NorCal too, if they had 3G here in our area and more across the North State I'd drop AT&T in a minute, but it's still GPRS and EDGE outside of the Bay Area, Redding, Chico, Yuba City and Marysville. I get 3G pretty much everywhere up here now with Verizon and AT&T, and even HSPA+ w/Enhanced Backhaul in some places (Ukiah, Boonville, Philo, Redwood Valley, Willits, Fort Bragg, Lakeport, Clearlake), if T-Mobile could work on their coverage in our area a bit more, and fill in all their GPRS and EDGE areas with 3G, they could really dominate.

[jet1000]

AT&T begins to throttle 3G/HSPA+ users at 2.3GB on grandfathered $30 plan.

This is more false information. If one actually reads the post, AT&T sent the user the information that his usage was in the top 5% and suggested he use wifi to avoid reduced speeds in "future bill cycles". Throttling did not occur at 2.3GB as Antenna claims. In addition, the data used is 2.3GB in only 9 days which equals a rate of 7.66 GB for the month. The amount permitted before throttling is actually higher than the 5GB that T-Mobile permits. But Antenna incorrectly reported that too.

Antenna also left out a recent post in that same thread of a user who used over 2.7 GB the last two months and did not receive a throttling notice or reduced speeds, further debunking Antenna's claims that AT&T begins to throttle at 2.3GB.

So yes, it is pathetic that T-Mobile throttles after 5GB and they have been throttling longer than any other carrier.

[terryjohnson16]

That would be cool! I would like to see them finish their 3G rollout here in NorCal too, if they had 3G here in our area and more across the North State I'd drop AT&T in a minute, but it's still GPRS and EDGE outside of the Bay Area, Redding, Chico, Yuba City and Marysville. I get 3G pretty much everywhere up here now with Verizon and AT&T, and even HSPA+ w/Enhanced Backhaul in some places (Ukiah, Boonville, Philo, Redwood Valley, Willits, Fort Bragg, Lakeport, Clearlake), if T-Mobile could work on their coverage in our area a bit more, and fill in all their GPRS and EDGE areas with 3G, they could really dominate.

There was some talk about an AT&T roaming agreement for T-Mobile customers, as part of the breakup fee.

[Antenna]

This is more false information. If one actually reads the post, AT&T sent the user the information that his usage was in the top 5% and suggested he use wifi to avoid reduced speeds in "future bill cycles". Throttling did not occur at 2.3GB as Antenna claims. In addition, the data used is 2.3GB in only 9 days which equals a rate of 7.66 GB for the month. The amount permitted before throttling is actually higher than the 5GB that T-Mobile permits. But Antenna incorrectly reported that too.

Antenna also left out a recent post in that same thread of a user who used over 2.7 GB the last two months and did not receive a throttling notice or reduced speeds, further debunking Antenna's claims that AT&T begins to throttle at 2.3GB.

So yes, it is pathetic that T-Mobile throttles after 5GB and they have been throttling longer than any other carrier.

Uh no, they warning was sent at 2.3GBs on 3G. As you have proven before, one post is as good as 1000.

Users are reporting throttled speeds, indicating they have tripped the cap. Some report throttles at 4GB.

T-mobile clearly identifies its throttle points, unlike vague "top 5%" like AT&T

Sent from my HTC Incredible S

[Antenna]

There was some talk about an AT&T roaming agreement for T-Mobile customers, as part of the breakup fee.

Yes, we will be allowed to use AT&T data network, while roaming, as part of the breakup agreement

Sent from my HTC Incredible S

[ilvla2]

There was some talk about an AT&T roaming agreement for T-Mobile customers, as part of the breakup fee.

Well, we already get here in RSA 344 (being a former Edge Wireless Market), T-Mobile voice and data roams in-market onto AT&T in dead spots, and the same for all former Edge Wireless areas. However, since T-Mobile can't access AT&T 3G bands, the roaming is only EDGE.

Edit-AT&T also roams onto T-Mobile here in-market in dead spots, as do Verizon and USCC onto each other in dead spots. USCC gets to roam 3G on Verizon, while Verizon doesn't allow use of USCC's 3G network (STUPID, not network related), so they only get 1X on USCC.

[jet1000]

Uh no, they warning was sent at 2.3GBs on 3G.

Yes, I know when the warning was sent. However, your original post said:

"AT&T begins to throttle 3G/HSPA+ users at 2.3GB on grandfathered $30 plan. "

That was the false information. The user did not get throttled at 2.3GB nor have I seen any report from that user that he was throttled at all.