AT&T responds to DOJ, tells FCC that the merger with T-Mobile will bring 5,000 jobs back to U.S.
According to AT&T, completion of the deal will allow it to "Help solve our nation’s spectrum exhaust situation and improve wireless service for millions." Letting the deal close will bring LTE coverage from AT&T to an additional 55 million Americans, covering 97% of the population, according to the carrier. The deal will also result in billions of additional investment and also result in tens of thousands of jobs, and is in the best interest of the operator's customers and the U.S. according to AT&T.
Sprint had a different response to the news, of course. The nation's third largest carrier has been battling against the deal and praised the DOJ for putting consumers' interest first, applauding the DOJ for making the decision that it says will save American jobs, contrary to what AT&T has been saying.
Hours before the DOJ announcement, AT&T offered something of a bribe to the FCC. The carrier said that if the $39 billion deal is approved by the FCC, it would repatriate 5,000 outsourced call center jobs and promised not to layoff any domestic call center employees employed at the time of the merger. In addition, AT&T said it was pour $8 billion into its infrastructure, a move that the Economic Policy Institute suggests could add 96,000 more jobs in the States. While the DOJ has obviously weighed in with its opinion on the deal, the FCC still has yet to make a ruling on the transaction.
source: BGR, TmoNews
5. Yeeee posted on 01 Sep 2011, 03:59 0 0
yea 41 percent of the t mobile stores are gonna close down cuz they are a mile away from att stores
6. remixfa posted on 01 Sep 2011, 06:59 1 0
but hey, they may be cutting around 20k jobs in the merger.. but they will bring back 5000 from overseas!! isnt that what's important!?!?! oi
11. vvelez5 posted on 01 Sep 2011, 10:55 0 0
Don't forget the possible 96,000 jobs for adding infrastructure as said by the Economic Policy Institute.
15. remixfa posted on 01 Sep 2011, 11:40 0 0
and for only a billion dollars in taxpayer money. what a deal!!! Its nice to know that construction workers are making about 100k a piece for infrastructure..
oh wait.. their not. i wonder where all that extra money goes.. lol hhhhhhmmmmmm
16. Corgan Bruce III, Esquire (unregistered) posted on 01 Sep 2011, 12:34 0 0
If the construction workers are union, they probably are...
20. att.arn.rno posted on 01 Sep 2011, 18:39 0 0
True - I work for AT&T and there are internal departments I call in the Phillipines. It may make new jobs, but I really doubt they'd do it here.
There's a reason I just switched to T-Mobile.
2. snowgator posted on 01 Sep 2011, 01:04 1 0
Yeah, I guess I got a little excited yesterday. But the DOJ can oppose the merger all they want. The FCC has the final say. Still think it ends up being approved, but maybe with a ton of restrictions and concessions.
I guess I am not so much against it as I am sad to see the 4 carrier market be lost. Truthfully, there has been a fair amount of investigation on this, and the basic few worries about this remain-
Will there still be competition or will AT&T have an unfair advantage?
Will there still be the chance for a smaller carrier to rise up and become a national #4?
What are the options for T-Mobile without AT&T?
3. AhmadAlsayegh posted on 01 Sep 2011, 01:20 2 1
Bring 5000 jobs back to U.S...and screw things for millions!
4. Droid_X_Doug posted on 01 Sep 2011, 01:36 3 1
The question regarding lost competition kind of answers itself - anytime you remove competitors from a market, prices rise, service levels drop and innovation/capital investment generally slows. AT&T is blabbing about how much they would be investing in infrastructure in a combination with T-Mobile, but unasked (or answered) is what would their level of investment be if they were faced with the continuing market competition of 3 other significant competitors? Most of the claimed investment is just the minimum of what AT&T needs to make to stay relevant in the market.
Is there a chance for a smaller carrier to rise up and replace T-Mobile? Yes, but it is increasingly slim. The primary growth opportunity for a potential replacement for T-Mobile (if they were swallowed by AT&T) would come as a result of subscriber loss from the other 3. There is probably a better chance of VZW and Sprint stealing customers from each other (with the most likely outcome being a net gain for VZW).
The best option for T-Mobile absent AT&T would be to cut a deal with VZW or Sprint. Sprint needs T-Mobile more than VZW does, so I would look for a combination with Sprint. T-Mobile will get cash, spectrum and access to AT&T's network if the merger gets turned down by the Feds. That will make T-Mobile more valuable than it was before AT&T's merger offer. They could potentially grow their business organically, but that requires investment that D-T doesn't seem to want to make any longer.
8. jsjr76 posted on 01 Sep 2011, 09:11 1 0
Ever heard of pirates? Well there ya have it. De La Vega and his merry band are just out to come as close to a monopoly as they can. Using the "Laws of Diminishing returns" as justification??? Well of course they'll use that, the 34 million consumers that they'll acquire that cost relatively NOTHING to provide air time to will generate WAAAAYYYYY more revenue than spending 3.8 billion on building some damn towers. But history has proven time and time again that when you start eliminating competition, quality suffers alongside the consumer. CrapT&T was too busy %&*#ing Apple to give two craps about their customer, figuring that the iPhone was god in box. Well their network suffered (so did the customer), they rank dead last in 19 out of 25 major metropolitan areas, and now they figure that if they buy T-Mo that the world will smile and thank them. Right! So the government may be dumb and borderline useless, but they ain't stupid. They, the DoJ, and FCC are smart enough to know that even if they acquire T-Mo's towers, they aren't gaining any ground because those towers are already being used! All that will happen is a Duopoly with Sprint getting run into the dirt, and then its Mafia rules. They are trying to pass it off as though they will now have all this "extra" spectrum that's just sitting there and we will all have this glorious experience. Funny, they suddenly take an interest about the time T-Mo and Sprint get the green light for the next gen iPhone. A little suspicious.... More dropped calls in more places, there's nothing new about AT&T
9. WirelessCon posted on 01 Sep 2011, 10:07 1 0
T-Mobile is going away no matter what happens. So all of those jobs are lost anyways.
If the government see 5,000 jobs as important, this merger will go through.
12. vvelez5 posted on 01 Sep 2011, 11:04 1 0
Here's the thing. In any form of true competition someone eventually loses. When a company feels like they are done and are no longer willing to pursue their venture why can't they sell off their assets to a bidder they choose? I'm a true capitalist and I see this as competition working, T-Mo lost and AT&T is reaping the rewards. There still is competition and there will be more competition. Fiat had to buy Chrysler to stick their head into the American market with their 500. The less the government intrudes on business dealings the more competition you will see. Many people are unhappy with AT&T for several reasons as others are with other Wireless Companies. I have more than 4 options at the moment for a wireless provider (including prepaid companies) and most people here either have AT&T or Verizon because they prefer it. If they didn't like AT&T they would go to a different carrier.
14. darth8ball posted on 01 Sep 2011, 11:38 1 0
1. 5,000 outsourced jobs to be repatriated if they were outsourced for monetary reasons this will drive up the price of calling plans and devices.
2. 39 billion to buy Tmo, 8 billion to the US cellular infrastructure 47 billion spent... the calling plans and device pricing will rise to recover the losses
3. The new AT&T will control the major amout of data spectrum available for the public use, which will drive up the pricing of competitors data plans.
easy as 1,2,3 the reasons why this is BS and not good for a economically troubled nation.
17. jacko (unregistered) posted on 01 Sep 2011, 12:37 0 0
Just the fact that AT&T is saying, alright, alright, we won't lay off as many people as.... we were going to.... ? shows that AT&T was going to lay off A LOT of people, that jobs would ultimately be lost, and in the end, all this merger does is cost them more money up front to take away one competitor thus paving the way for higher fees for us & more money for them. I think our wireless industry is already an oligopoly, and to take away even more competition would further pave the road for Sprint to be taken over and an oligopoly to become even more of a reality. Just think, in some countries people can get what we get for just a fraction of the cost. Why is America being screwed up it's @$$?
18. Corgan Bruce III, Esquire (unregistered) posted on 01 Sep 2011, 12:43 0 0
5000 jobs repatriated versus 96000 TEMPORARY jobs, plus the fact that once AT&T decides to "streamline" a year or two down the road, layoffs and terminations WILL happen.
The other thing that nobody has pointed out: overlay a T-Mobile map over an AT&T map. Very few differences. They won't be covering too many holes with this deal.
This whole thing is a sham, and as conservative and smaller government as I am, it is in the people's best interest that this DEAL not go through.
19. darth8ball posted on 01 Sep 2011, 13:01 0 0
I agree with your first and third points 100%
As for the overlap of service, AT&T wants the data spectrum that TMO has. They even have some in their back pocket that they purchased last year but have yet to use. Once they begin to force out the smaller carriers in areas they don't have coverage in already, they can pick up their spectrum and towers to expand their coverage nationwide. They used this same ploy when they "merged" with Cingular Wireless and in the Northeast they put Cingular customers on the degrading system and basically put them out of business gobbling up their client base.
21. tmorep (unregistered) posted on 01 Sep 2011, 20:25 0 0
thats funny Fkin assHLs.......they say their not gonna fire anyone but yet they dont think about employees in the front line dealing with customers..... they say they will try to savee employees but yet i get my Fkin letter saying that if i get fired they will provide a severance pay......this is bull