AT&T's proposed merger with BellSouth sailed through the federal
antitrust review.
The Justice Department says it found nothing anticompetitive about
the combination of two of the nation's largest telcos.
Now, the next regulatory clearance for the deal is expected to come
tomorrow from the Federal Communications Commission.
The blessings from regulators come despite a request by lawmakers to
delay the moves.
Last month, Reps. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., and John Conyers,
D-Mich. -- the Republican chairman and ranking Democrat of the House
Judiciary Committee -- asked antitrust regulators to wait on a merger
approval until a federal judge has cleared two prior telco mergers.
A federal district court judge in Washington is still hearing
arguments on whether the mergers between SBC and AT&T, as well as
Verizon (VZ - commentary - Cramer's Take) and MCI are in the public
interest.
The lack of complications and onerous conditions attached to the
Justice Department's approval, plus early signs that the FCC wasn't
looking to make any demands, was seen as a good sign by some Wall
Streeters.
The U.S. Federal Communications Commission postponed a vote on AT&T
Inc.'s proposed $81 billion purchase of BellSouth Corp. after
Democrats on the panel demanded more public comment on the
transaction.
Commissioners Michael Copps and Jonathan Adelstein asked for the
delay today in a letter to Republican Chairman Kevin Martin. The FCC
is the last regulatory hurdle AT&T, the largest U.S. phone company,
must surmount to complete the deal.
The move puts off a vote for at least 10 days to allow more public
input. Copps and Adelstein criticized this week's approval of the
purchase without conditions by the Justice Department, signaling it
would face scrutiny at the FCC. Martin may lack a majority to approve
the deal because the newest member, Republican Robert McDowell, is
widely expected to recuse himself from the vote, leaving a 2-2 tie on
the five-member panel.
``To win Democratic support and reduce partisan controversy, the
Republicans would likely need to make some further concessions'' than
those enacted in phone company mergers last year, analyst Blair Levin
of Stifel, Nicolaus & Co. wrote today in a note. ``We continue to
believe AT&T and BellSouth will be very reluctant to go beyond modest
additions.''
More than 10,000 parties, including members of Congress, have urged
the commission to conduct a thorough review of the proposed
transaction, Copps and Adelstein said in their letter. Proposals made
in the last 48 hours to address their concerns ``raise a number of
significant questions and complex technical issues for us to
consider,'' the letter said.
[MORE]
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 20:34:26 GMT, John Navas
<spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
><http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=axvNrqDUTrLQ>
>
> The U.S. Federal Communications Commission postponed a vote on AT&T
> Inc.'s proposed $81 billion purchase of BellSouth Corp. after
> Democrats on the panel demanded more public comment on the
> transaction.
>
> Commissioners Michael Copps and Jonathan Adelstein asked for the
> delay today in a letter to Republican Chairman Kevin Martin. The FCC
> is the last regulatory hurdle AT&T, the largest U.S. phone company,
> must surmount to complete the deal.
>
> The move puts off a vote for at least 10 days to allow more public
> input. Copps and Adelstein criticized this week's approval of the
> purchase without conditions by the Justice Department, signaling it
> would face scrutiny at the FCC. Martin may lack a majority to approve
> the deal because the newest member, Republican Robert McDowell, is
> widely expected to recuse himself from the vote, leaving a 2-2 tie on
> the five-member panel.
>
> ``To win Democratic support and reduce partisan controversy, the
> Republicans would likely need to make some further concessions'' than
> those enacted in phone company mergers last year, analyst Blair Levin
> of Stifel, Nicolaus & Co. wrote today in a note. ``We continue to
> believe AT&T and BellSouth will be very reluctant to go beyond modest
> additions.''
>
> More than 10,000 parties, including members of Congress, have urged
> the commission to conduct a thorough review of the proposed
> transaction, Copps and Adelstein said in their letter. Proposals made
> in the last 48 hours to address their concerns ``raise a number of
> significant questions and complex technical issues for us to
> consider,'' the letter said.
>
> [MORE]
Best news going. Democrats refuse to be a rubber stamp.
>
> Best news going. Democrats refuse to be a rubber stamp.
>
Hmmm... I'm as liberal as they come, but with all of the problems in this
country right now, is the merger of two regional phone companies the one
issue the dems decided to finally grow a pair?
The Democratic party rolls over more than a pack of dogs at an obedience
school.
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 22:16:36 -0600, Todd Allcock
<elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote in
<4531c328$0$19716$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>:
>At 14 Oct 2006 23:16:49 +0000 www.ttdown.com wrote:
>
>> Best news going. Democrats refuse to be a rubber stamp.
>>
>Hmmm... I'm as liberal as they come, but with all of the problems in this
>country right now, is the merger of two regional phone companies the one
>issue the dems decided to finally grow a pair?
>
>The Democratic party rolls over more than a pack of dogs at an obedience
>school.
Worse, when it does decide to hold some ground, it picks the wrong
fights for no good reasons. [sigh]
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 22:16:36 -0600, Todd Allcock
<elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote:
>At 14 Oct 2006 23:16:49 +0000 www.ttdown.com wrote:
>
>>
>> Best news going. Democrats refuse to be a rubber stamp.
>>
>Hmmm... I'm as liberal as they come, but with all of the problems in this
>country right now, is the merger of two regional phone companies the one
>issue the dems decided to finally grow a pair?
>
>The Democratic party rolls over more than a pack of dogs at an obedience
>school.
Duh, In case you didn't know it the Long Distance that SBC bought,,
and assumed the name of - AT&T is hardly a regional outfit.
At 15 Oct 2006 09:25:30 +0000 www.ttdown.com wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 22:16:36 -0600, Todd Allcock
> <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote:
>
> Duh, In case you didn't know it the Long Distance that SBC bought,,
> and assumed the name of - AT&T is hardly a regional outfit.
AT&T was a shell of it's former self when SBC bought them. They'd already
divested themselves of their manufacturing (Lucent) business and their
wireless business and were basically just another mediocre LD company.
SBC bought them more for the AT&T name than anything else.
As far as any anti-competitive effect of the merger, how does it affect
competition? Although they're both large companies, they have different
areas in which they are the major landline provider- it's not like there
is any market they compete head-to-head in, where a customer can say,
"I'm switching my landline service from BellSouth to AT&T!" with a small
exception of LD, where a BS LD customer can choose between their local
provider's LD or AT&T, but it's not too hard to argue that the LD market
has plenty of competition.
Since we all only have one provider of twisted pair wiring entering our
home, and "competition" in landline telephone is defined as a bunch of
competing resellers, does it really matter if the folks in Florida have
the same landline phone company as those in Oklahoma?
Either way, my comments were more anti-Democratic party than pro-merger-
I'd rather have the party fighting to save, say, our teens from
experiencing the horrors of war, than saving Georgia from experiencing
the horrors of AT&T!
Re: AT&T BellSouth Purchase Hits Snag as FCC Delays Vote
Wasn't Bellsouth one of the orginal entities spun off when the feds broke up
AT&T the first time???????
"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:bqtvi2dvobsqft8efsn8788eotn7lio9cl@4ax.com...
> <http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=axvNrqDUTrLQ>
>
> The U.S. Federal Communications Commission postponed a vote on AT&T
> Inc.'s proposed $81 billion purchase of BellSouth Corp. after
> Democrats on the panel demanded more public comment on the
> transaction.
>
> Commissioners Michael Copps and Jonathan Adelstein asked for the
> delay today in a letter to Republican Chairman Kevin Martin. The FCC
> is the last regulatory hurdle AT&T, the largest U.S. phone company,
> must surmount to complete the deal.
>
> The move puts off a vote for at least 10 days to allow more public
> input. Copps and Adelstein criticized this week's approval of the
> purchase without conditions by the Justice Department, signaling it
> would face scrutiny at the FCC. Martin may lack a majority to approve
> the deal because the newest member, Republican Robert McDowell, is
> widely expected to recuse himself from the vote, leaving a 2-2 tie on
> the five-member panel.
>
> ``To win Democratic support and reduce partisan controversy, the
> Republicans would likely need to make some further concessions'' than
> those enacted in phone company mergers last year, analyst Blair Levin
> of Stifel, Nicolaus & Co. wrote today in a note. ``We continue to
> believe AT&T and BellSouth will be very reluctant to go beyond modest
> additions.''
>
> More than 10,000 parties, including members of Congress, have urged
> the commission to conduct a thorough review of the proposed
> transaction, Copps and Adelstein said in their letter. Proposals made
> in the last 48 hours to address their concerns ``raise a number of
> significant questions and complex technical issues for us to
> consider,'' the letter said.
>
> [MORE]
>
> --
> Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
> John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
Re: AT&T BellSouth Purchase Hits Snag as FCC Delays Vote
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 11:29:49 -0400, "DavidT" <njt1955@comcast.net> wrote
in <5LSdnX_oALtyzq_YnZ2dnUVZ_r6dnZ2d@comcast.com>:
>Wasn't Bellsouth one of the orginal entities spun off when the feds broke up
>AT&T the first time???????
Yes. SBC is putting Ma Bell back together again.
>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>news:bqtvi2dvobsqft8efsn8788eotn7lio9cl@4ax.com.. .
>> <http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=axvNrqDUTrLQ>
>>
>> The U.S. Federal Communications Commission postponed a vote on AT&T
>> Inc.'s proposed $81 billion purchase of BellSouth Corp. after
>> Democrats on the panel demanded more public comment on the
>> transaction.
>>
>> Commissioners Michael Copps and Jonathan Adelstein asked for the
>> delay today in a letter to Republican Chairman Kevin Martin. The FCC
>> is the last regulatory hurdle AT&T, the largest U.S. phone company,
>> must surmount to complete the deal.
>>
>> The move puts off a vote for at least 10 days to allow more public
>> input. Copps and Adelstein criticized this week's approval of the
>> purchase without conditions by the Justice Department, signaling it
>> would face scrutiny at the FCC. Martin may lack a majority to approve
>> the deal because the newest member, Republican Robert McDowell, is
>> widely expected to recuse himself from the vote, leaving a 2-2 tie on
>> the five-member panel.
>>
>> ``To win Democratic support and reduce partisan controversy, the
>> Republicans would likely need to make some further concessions'' than
>> those enacted in phone company mergers last year, analyst Blair Levin
>> of Stifel, Nicolaus & Co. wrote today in a note. ``We continue to
>> believe AT&T and BellSouth will be very reluctant to go beyond modest
>> additions.''
>>
>> More than 10,000 parties, including members of Congress, have urged
>> the commission to conduct a thorough review of the proposed
>> transaction, Copps and Adelstein said in their letter. Proposals made
>> in the last 48 hours to address their concerns ``raise a number of
>> significant questions and complex technical issues for us to
>> consider,'' the letter said.
>>
>> [MORE]
>>
>> --
>> Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
>> John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
>
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
Re: AT&T BellSouth Purchase Hits Snag as FCC Delays Vote
In article <s4t4j2hs3g9abg15ngu609s3nqr1p2q27o@4ax.com>, dont@bother.com wrote:
>"DavidT" <njt1955@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>Wasn't Bellsouth one of the orginal entities spun off when the feds broke up
>>AT&T the first time???????
>
>Yep. The world has changed a lot since then...
Yes, we've had massive media consolidation so that there are in fact fewer
players available today to transport your information. This is just another
step on the road to extremely restricted compitition. Welcome to the world
of the oligarchy.
Re: AT&T BellSouth Purchase Hits Snag as FCC Delays Vote
On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 13:29:24 GMT, rico_001@hotmail.com (Rico) wrote in
<L4LZg.465$Zn1.83@bignews2.bellsouth.net>:
>In article <s4t4j2hs3g9abg15ngu609s3nqr1p2q27o@4ax.com>, dont@bother.com wrote:
>>"DavidT" <njt1955@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Wasn't Bellsouth one of the orginal entities spun off when the feds broke up
>>>AT&T the first time???????
>>
>>Yep. The world has changed a lot since then...
>
>Yes, we've had massive media consolidation so that there are in fact fewer
>players available today to transport your information. This is just another
>step on the road to extremely restricted compitition. Welcome to the world
>of the oligarchy.
There's no sign of that yet -- there's clearly more intense competition
in all forms of communications than in the past.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
Re: AT&T BellSouth Purchase Hits Snag as FCC Delays Vote
>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com>
>wrote in message news:mcbfj2p3gm2mnins8b2s566o8p5477g764@4ax.com...
> There's no sign of that yet -- there's clearly more intense competition
> in all forms of communications than in the past.
>
> --
> Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
> John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
>
You may see it that way. I sure don't. Case in point, Entercom just bought
the
local CBS owned stations. True they'll have to divest one or two of them
because
of FCC regulations and or poor performance. Unless there are PBS, College,
High School
and the like stations broadcasting, then there are only TWO major players
telling me what I get to hear.
Sure, I have the choice NOT to listen, but again, IMO, there is LESS
competition.
--
Andrew D. Sisson
LG VX8100 VZW AC II SINCE APRIL 1993
SonyEricsson Z525a CINGULAR NATION SINCE MARCH 2006
Re: AT&T BellSouth Purchase Hits Snag as FCC Delays Vote
On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 20:28:44 GMT, "Andy S"
<adsisson@NOSPAMrochester.rr.com> wrote in
<0eRZg.62823$uH6.23937@twister.nyroc.rr.com>:
>>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com>
>>wrote in message news:mcbfj2p3gm2mnins8b2s566o8p5477g764@4ax.com...
>> There's no sign of that yet -- there's clearly more intense competition
>> in all forms of communications than in the past.
>You may see it that way. I sure don't. ...
Much lower prices are a sure sign of intense competition.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
Re: AT&T BellSouth Purchase Hits Snag as FCC Delays Vote
> On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 20:28:44 GMT, "Andy S"
> <adsisson@NOSPAMrochester.rr.com> wrote in
> <0eRZg.62823$uH6.23937@twister.nyroc.rr.com>:
>
>>>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com>
>>>wrote in message news:mcbfj2p3gm2mnins8b2s566o8p5477g764@4ax.com...
>>> There's no sign of that yet -- there's clearly more intense competition
>>> in all forms of communications than in the past.
>
>>You may see it that way. I sure don't. ...
>
>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com>
>wrote in message news:0s5gj25tg95kulk96m59j255ife4r1uiqr@4ax.com...
>
> Much lower prices are a sure sign of intense competition.
>
> --
> Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
> John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
>
And as usual, you quote only that witch "proves" YOUR point.
I quoted the part relevant to my reply. " there's clearly more intense
competition
in all forms of communications than in the past." ALL FORMS not just
cellular.
I responded to that and YOU ignored that.
--
Andrew D. Sisson
LG VX8100 VZW AC II SINCE APRIL 1993
SonyEricsson Z525a CINGULAR NATION SINCE MARCH 2006
Re: AT&T BellSouth Purchase Hits Snag as FCC Delays Vote
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in
news:0s5gj25tg95kulk96m59j255ife4r1uiqr@4ax.com:
> On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 20:28:44 GMT, "Andy S"
> <adsisson@NOSPAMrochester.rr.com> wrote in
> <0eRZg.62823$uH6.23937@twister.nyroc.rr.com>:
>
>>>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com>
>>>wrote in message news:mcbfj2p3gm2mnins8b2s566o8p5477g764@4ax.com...
>>> There's no sign of that yet -- there's clearly more intense competition
>>> in all forms of communications than in the past.
>
>>You may see it that way. I sure don't. ...
>
> Much lower prices are a sure sign of intense competition.
>
OK- I'll bite. Where do you see much lower prices for comparable service?
Re: AT&T BellSouth Purchase Hits Snag as FCC Delays Vote
At 20 Oct 2006 00:26:43 +0000 John Navas wrote:
> >You may see it that way. I sure don't. ...
>
> Much lower prices are a sure sign of intense competition.
While often true, where are you seeing "much lower prices?" Certainly
not in wireless- things have seemed to bottom out in last couple of
years, and in someways are increa ing (while per-minute rates are staying
low, the point-of-entry keeps rising. T-Mobile's entry level plan is now
$30, Sprint at $35, Cingular and Verizon are $40, I believe. Two or
three years ago, entry level plans were $20-30.)
The lower costs in telecommunications are just as contributable to
technology as they are to competition.
Having said that, I fail to see how the AT&T/Bell South merger is anti-
competitive. Both entities, while in the same business, have different
trade areas (at least in local wireline telephony.)
NEWS: AT&T-BellSouth Antitrust OK 
Linear Mode
