It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


FCC approves AT&T/DirecTV merger but the Comcast/TWC merger was called off – WHY??

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 03:52 PM
This legitimate question is actually the point of this thread – Why??
Secondary, has this merger not gotten the attention it deserves??

In April, Comcast called off the merge with TWC because it was apparent the FCC and U.S. Justice Department weren’t going to approve it. Now, last week, the FCC approved the AT&T/DirecTV merger. Why??

Comcast walks away from merger
AT&T/DirecTV merger approved by FCC

Both deals involve tens of millions of customers and are very similar when it comes to acquisition cost - $49 billion and $45 billion, respectively.
I can’t find anything special about the AT&T/DirecTV deal, as opposed to the failed Comcast/TWC merge.

Of course, the AT&T CEO says:

AT&T is "now a fundamentally different company with a diversified set of capabilities and businesses"

And the details should be made available in the coming weeks, but I’ve been through a few articles and even the AT&T website where they talk about the consumer choices that come with the merge, but nothing is said about lowering prices we pay.

It’s funny and sad because tries to act there’s hope - source

“Fewer, bigger companies often mean less competition, with less incentive to innovate”

They go on –

“But Consumer Reports and its policy and advocacy arm, Consumers Union, don't believe that bigger companies do better for their customers. In fact, the opposite is often true. The largest companies have earned low scores for value, service, and customer satisfaction in our recent consumer surveys. Tellingly, the AT&T-DirecTV merger statement said nothing about lower prices or better customer service, high priorities for most consumers."

"We've been skeptical about the AT&T-DirecTV merger from the beginning," says Delara Derakhshani, policy counsel for Consumers Union. "It raises real concerns about the consolidation of pay TV options in markets where AT&T and DirecTV already offer competing services."
"These conditions are a positive step to help consumers, but they do not address the underlying problem of consolidation in the video marketplace, " Derakhshani said. "Looking ahead, we urge the FCC to stay focused on keeping the Internet open and spurring competition."

Yeah, so Delara Derakhshani, policy counsel for Consumers Union, is going to “urge” the FCC to stay focused on keeping the internet open and spurring competition AFTER this huge merger!??!!!?

I’m just lost on this whole merger thing. Should we just chock this one up as another loss of Us and a win for Them? Does anyone have any insight as to why one merger failed while another succeeded?

Is this similar to the ACA where we have to approve it “to see what’s in it”? a la Pelosi.

Or is this a case of “What difference does it make?” a la Clinton.

This is the Education and Media forum… someone please educate me!!
Thanks ATS!

posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 03:55 PM
Probably because AT&T / Direct TV aren't the two largest cable providers in the country? That's my guess.

posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 03:56 PM
Because ATT/Direct TV offered better bribes?

It's BS either way.

posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 10:58 PM
a reply to: six67seven

I hate this merger. I like DirecTV, I hate ATT.

posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 11:02 PM
Guess that explains why my DirecTV says "now part of the AT&T family"...

posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 11:07 PM
Comcast TWC = too similar boogeyman monopoly

AT&T DirecTV= just enough disparity to ensure monopoly

Just a hillbillies guess... no worries, as time goes on, Comcast will get their TWC... they just may have to grease the wheels a bit since it seems monopolies are the norm.... think Sirius / XM merger... lol

What option do the folks have if they want sat radio? perhaps the web will provide the competition, who knows...

it all seems a bit too cozy to me...

posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 11:09 PM

originally posted by: Metallicus
Probably because AT&T / Direct TV aren't the two largest cable providers in the country? That's my guess.

Yep, that would have created a massive cable company and that could threaten could create unfair competition. ATT and Direct TV become a large company but, no one that dominates a particular market. Now if Direct TV and DISH tried to merge they would likely be denied.

posted on Jul, 30 2015 @ 08:53 AM
a reply to: Metallicus

That and they technically don't provide the same service. One is terrestrial communications, the other is satellite communications. Also, for anyone that has honestly tried either... both of their services are absolutely awful. The dish goes out practically any time it rains or snows. AT&T is painfully slow. Wanna add HBO, or some sports channel to watch a particular game? It can take up to two days for your equipment to update. Seriously. Also, both of those services require contracts (or they'd have people jumping ship left and right). Just several key differences off the top of my head, but this merger is nowhere near the same thing.

new topics

top topics


log in