AT&T Looks To Ring Up T-Mobile: Sunday Thoughts
AT&T and T-Mobile just announced they’re looking at making two into one.
It’s interesting that on the heels of President Obama’s call to get high-speed wireless to 98% of the U.S. population, AT&T commits to expand 4G LTE (Long Term Evolution) deployment to an additional 46.5 million Americans, or to about 95% of the current U.S. population.
This really is no big surprise, actually, because T-Mobile has been on the blocks for a while and would have eventually found a buyer. Given the so-called “spectrum crunch,” one of the benefits for both companies is that they’ll be allowed to pool their spectrum resources.
Yet that raises the specter of what will some will see as antitrust concerns, which the government will likely study to death, but which ultimately will likely pass the “smell test,” with some typical conditions added. Part of that smell test is helped considerably by the idea of a foreign asset being bought by a U.S. company.
I found the AT&T statement here to be of particular interest.
Meanwhile, the Communications Workers of America issued a supportive statement.
I have to hop on a plane, but I love seeing how these convergences unfold.
Jimmy Schaeffler is chairman and CSO of Carmel-by-the-Sea-based consultancy The Carmel Group (www.carmelgroup.com).
Jimmy Schaeffler commented:
For a guy who professes lack of knowledge, here, Mr. RD, you sure brought forth a coherent and plausible argument. Thank you. Write again anytime, please. More is welcome.
Jimmy
Roger Drummer commented:
non expert interested bystander here. (but i realize my total lack of tech knowledge, so no need to pull punches if i’m in lunyville)
not a day goes by that the “spectrum crunch” isn’t legitimately addressed on these pages, as the “need” continually grows.
can improved efficiencies/technologies ever keep up with that kind of increase in demand?
and even though there is some harvesting to be done, spectrum never the less is a finite quantity, is it not?
on the other hand, even if one Mega-Cell Corp swallowed up all the other players for conservation’s sake, (or exclusive franchizes were granted a la early cable), and broadcasters gave up/sold off all they have, and went exclusively to multichannel providers, we’re still going to soon go wanting for more, are we not?
i love Leslie’s “like a gas” analogies, but could we not expand that analogy for how video likes to occupy available bandwidth, to how demand will expand to occupy any and all spectrum?
in my non expert opinion, this merger really kicks off what will be an interesting national debate on number of providers in a market, and anti trust vs finite spectrum/infinite demand issues.
and is there eventually a place in that debate for the “R” word, (price regulation), if need for spectrum conservation is deemed to trump need for competition?