AT&T Reverses Course and Spins Off WarnerMedia for $43B Merger with Discovery

ATT at its roots was a monopoly.

Texted my old coworker who's still there and he says he thinks it's going to get blocked.

ATT will argue it's a different vertical and they're just trying to diversify

In regards to mobile, The DOJ has specifically said they would block any M&A activity between the top four carriers.

This is no diff than the NBC and Comcast merger.
 
This is no diff than the NBC and Comcast merger.

1. NBC / Comcast was in 2009. Totally different environment today (credit markets, as they have to get billions in debt to consummate the trasnaction, and regulatory)
2. Neither company was a top 2 wireless carrier in the country
3. Current regulators still look at the NBC / Comcast merger as a disaster.
4. Time Warner would have to sell off some of their TV stuff to avoid certain types of legislation, but they still hold 10% stake in Hulu


This is completely different from that transaction. I'm not saying it's not going to go through b/c ATT has a legitimate leg to stand on...

But this will be scrutinized. Heavily. This deal will be subject to lots of amendments if it goes through.

I used to work in the headquarters and got homeys that are directors on the Home Solutions side.

Trust me, my g. This aint over.
 
Didnt att get real big back in the day and got taken down?

ATThistory.jpg
 
1. NBC / Comcast was in 2009. Totally different environment today (credit markets, as they have to get billions in debt to consummate the trasnaction, and regulatory)
2. Neither company was a top 2 wireless carrier in the country
3. Current regulators still look at the NBC / Comcast merger as a disaster.
4. Time Warner would have to sell off some of their TV stuff to avoid certain types of legislation, but they still hold 10% stake in Hulu


This is completely different from that transaction. I'm not saying it's not going to go through b/c ATT has a legitimate leg to stand on...

But this will be scrutinized. Heavily. This deal will be subject to lots of amendments if it goes through.

I used to work in the headquarters and got homeys that are directors on the Home Solutions side.

Trust me, my g. This aint over.

Comcast is a top two Cable company in America so I still dont see your point.
 
Comcast is a top two Cable company in America so I still dont see your point.

boy bye. :lol: :lol:

NBC doesn't sell TV. NBC didn't just purchase one of the top TV satellite providers. Comcast is half the size of ATT. NBCComcast merger did not go well according to regulators.

These are reasons why it's not the same.
 
boy bye. :lol: :lol:

NBC doesn't sell TV. NBC didn't just purchase one of the top TV satellite providers. Comcast is half the size of ATT. NBCComcast merger did not go well according to regulators.

These are reasons why it's not the same.

Girl bye.

Time warner isnt sellig tv this is not time warner cable beig bought.

Why you are comparing att in size to comcast beats me and shows you dont even understand the argument.

Comcast is a top dog in its industry and was able to buy NBC. There isnt anything Comcast does that ATT doesnt do that would make this merger different.
 
Girl bye.

Time warner isnt sellig tv this is not time warner cable beig bought. Which means ATT's TV business would have an unfair access to media, like how Comcast has an unfair access to NBC and its channel lineup, essentially price gouging other TV providers to flesh out competition.

ATT, like Comcast, sells TV. ATT, unlike comcast, also sells mobile phones.

NBC is SOLELY media and does not have any interests in selling TV. Time Warner Media is NOT solely media and has active interests in selling TV (WHICH IS DIFFERENT FROM THE CABLE BUSINESS, LIKE WHAT I SAID IN THE FIRST POST)

It is not the actual Cable subscribers, but they still have stakes in TV stations and Hulu, which could open them up to WAY more scrutiny if they don't divest those assets, EVEN IF IT'S SMALL b/c those stakes will trigger other federally mandated probes.

Kinda like what I said earlier.

Why you are comparing att in size to comcast beats me and shows you dont even understand the argument. If you don't think the sheer size of a transaction will draw eyeballs from the FCC and DOJ, you clearly are arguing just to argue.

Comcast is a top dog in its industry and was able to buy NBC. There isnt anything Comcast does that ATT doesnt do that would make this merger different and I've said several times earlier, regulators said that the merger didn't go so well and that they would've done more if they knew it would've came to this.


Have a seat, child. You're talking about things you don't know about. :lol:
 
Last edited:
Wonder what happens to the broadcasting rights that Time Warner fished out to the Lakers & Dodgers, They paid billions for that
 
You literally said TIme warner has intrest in selling TV.

Is it one mic or is it oochie wally?

Peon

active interests in selling TV

Which means they have interests in things like TV stations and Hulu aka SELLING TV.

Its burning your soul that you look like the dumbest guy in the room, especially when you try to be smart.

I know you take this NT serious famb but

View media item 2208783
we're done here.

:lol:
 
I actually like Verizon Fios. The internet speeds and plans they offer are 
smokin.gif


I wish this was out in CA. 
 
Couple points:

-Comcast and Verizon have a relationship because Comcast sold them spectrum a while back, and part of the deal was Comcast being able to be a Verizon MNVO.

-This deal in theory should go through, and ATT does have a legal foot to stand on, but regulations are gonna have them make concessions. Handullz is right, the Universal Comcast deal has not been popular. And with DOJ saying liberal leaning, they will be going through this with a fine toothed comb. Time Warner will had to shed some of their other interest.

-People claiming this is not a move that give makes ATT a monopoly is right. However, it will potentially give them monopolistic power is some areas. That is what lawyers and economist at the regulatory agencies will be concerned about.

ISP don't compete nationally like Mobile carriers. There are a ton of places where there is only one ISP, states where local politicians are paid off to prevent competition, and customers are stuck with only one option.

How easy will it be for ATT to flex on another cable company by price gouging them, or pulling their channels off their cable package. Then sell that same customer of Internet TV service over the competitors internet lines.

If you say then the answer would be the other company will just internet rates, that might be the answer in the short run, but in the long run 5G might give ATT a way to eat their other company's food too.

Then magically, ATT will make their TV service to not count towards you monthly data limit, but other competitors will count towards it.

Then they will obviously bundle, to make it seem the customer it getting lower prices at the sake of competition and options. Some consumers might even welcome it.

And the sales pitch they will get is that their are other companies just as diversified, with similar services, more regulation just means customers paying hire prices. That might be true at first, but in the long run they have even more monopolistic power to slowly turn the screws on customers.

The way for the market to fight back is for their to be a couple more equally sized, equally powerful companies to keep the honest. But now we're gonna trust large companies to compete, instead of implicitly colluding and bleeding customers of their consumer surplus. This probably won't end well for the common consumer.

-Some might see this as a simple merger of companies in different markets. But this is probably a play to set up a major finesse move in the future.

I still see them letting it fly though.
 
Last edited:
Like my ex co-worker will say television telling lies.

I'm remember working for at&t retail and the boss had both At&t and Verizon store fronts. I was shocked. Never again I will deal with a authorized retailer as a job.
 
Last edited:
ATT at its roots was a monopoly.

Texted my old coworker who's still there and he says he thinks it's going to get blocked.

ATT will argue it's a different vertical and they're just trying to diversify

In regards to mobile, The DOJ has specifically said they would block any M&A activity between the top four carriers.
Your friend is wrong.

AT&T was always planning to change certain things before this merger so they'll make the necessary concessions for this to go through.
 
Your friend is wrong.

AT&T was always planning to change certain things before this merger so they'll make the necessary concessions for this to go through.

This is like a college team punishing itself for NCAA violations.

Of course AT&T is going to head up the concessions early and try to strike first before the FCC and DOJ come in... But a growing liberal business climate + the NBC Comcast merger not going so well + AT&T's large mobile subscriber base means there will be more concessions than AT&T came with out the gate.

It may get to a point where each company says "nah, dis tew much"

He also said he THINKS that it will get blocked based on the vibe around the office, but wouldn't be surprised if it went through based on the different vertical argument.


For those saying "What could possibly go wrong?"

What if ATT/DirecTV goes to Walt Disney and says "hey, we like your channels, but we need to prioritize Time Warner channels, so we're moving ESPN2 out of the 20s / 30s / where ever it sits, and we're going to move it to the back of the lineup, or away from other sports channels. We're going to replace it with this new TNT Sports channel we've been working on... so... yeah... sorry"

Channel placement and costs between the cable companies and cable providers could get hairy, and the consumer ultimately pays because of it.

Another example: All data you stream over ATT's service is free for the HBO Go app, but not the Showtime app. More users will migrate over to the HBO Go app which means less users on the Showtime app which means Showtime has to make up the revenue elsewhere which leads to them charging more for their service which ultimately hurts the consumer.

The a-la-carte method is an option, but these companies generate revenue from ancillary channels, so why would they give you ESPN for $15 / month and decrease their channel diversity when they're getting $25 / month from your cable bill across a ton of channels where they can sell more ad space.


Hope I'm not coming off as a doosh in these responses, so if I am, lemme know.

Also, if you disagree with my logic, lemme know.
 
Expect Dish and T-Mobile to get bought up in the next couple years. Willing to bet money Comcast scoops up T-Mobile.

Dish badly wants to get in the mobile game, so I could see them going after T-Mobile.

But based on information from the DOJ, they will block any of the big four carriers purchasing one another.

I'm literally working on a deal now that works with Sprint retailers, and have looked at one verizon, tmobile, and another sprint deal in the same space, so I came across this information a few times.

T-Mobile and Sprint both have momentum, too... at 2015, Sprint's churn numbers and net adds were basura. They've since increased performance a ton.

For perspective, their bonds were trading at a 22% spread at the end of 2015... The spreads are now down to 2% - 6% spread, which means people are getting more comfortable with the Sprint's economics and ability to generate the coupon payments.
 
Expect Dish and T-Mobile to get bought up in the next couple years. Willing to bet money Comcast scoops up T-Mobile.

Dish badly wants to get in the mobile game, so I could see them going after T-Mobile.

But based on information from the DOJ, they will block any of the big four carriers purchasing one another.

I'm literally working on a deal now that works with Sprint retailers, and have looked at one verizon, tmobile, and another sprint deal in the same space, so I came across this information a few times.

T-Mobile and Sprint both have momentum, too... at 2015, Sprint's churn numbers and net adds were basura. They've since increased performance a ton.

For perspective, their bonds were trading at a 22% spread at the end of 2015... The spreads are now down to 2% - 6% spread, which means people are getting more comfortable with the Sprint's economics and ability to generate the coupon payments.

-The DOJ were proven right about there needing to be 4 big carriers. Blocking the T-Mobile and ATT might have been the best thing that as happen to the mobile consumer. T-Mobile got some spectrum when the deal broke down and that started them down the road they are on now. Sprint has taken forever to get it together but they seem to finally be on the right track

-Weren't there rumblings of a Dish T-Mobile merger a while back? I believe they were trying to get something down before the spectrum auction but things never materialized. But they, it is obvious Dish wants in on the mobile space, they have all that spectrum siting there.

And I really want to see the results of the TV spectrum auction. Might shed some light on who wants in on the mobile market.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom