

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Free Press and other opponents of the AT&T-T-Mobile merger had reason to cheer last week when a damning document AT&T filed with the FCC was accidentally posted on a public site.
Free Press and other opponents of the AT&T-T-Mobile merger had reason to cheer last week when a damning document AT&T filed with the FCC was accidentally posted on a public site. The partially redacted letter, which appeared on the FCC website for several hours on Thursday before it was yanked down, punctures a hole in AT&T's central pro-merger argument -- namely that only purchasing T-Mobile would allow it to expand its 4G LTE wireless data network to 97 percent of the population.
Turns out AT&T had considered expanding its network on its own but balked at the $3.8 billion price tag. "AT&T senior management concluded that, unless AT&T could find a way to expand its LTE footprint on a significantly more cost-effective basis, an LTE deployment to 80 percent of the U.S. population was the most that could be justified," AT&T counsel Richard Rosen wrote in the letter. So AT&T concluded that it made better strategic sense to pony up $39 billion to purchase T-Mobile.
The logic makes perfect sense if your ultimate aim is to effectively bludgeon wireless competition. If the deal goes through AT&T's primary rival, Verizon, will fall a distant second to AT&T in the wireless arena, and collectively the two will control 80 percent of that market. Can AT&T still pretend it had nobler intentions?
Yes, it can.
"There is no real news here," said AT&T spokeswoman Margaret Boles in a statement released in the wake of the leak. "The confidential information in the latest letter is fully consistent with AT&T's prior filings. It demonstrates the significance of our commitment to build out 4G LTE mobile broadband to 97 percent of the population following our merger with T-Mobile. Without this merger, AT&T could not make this expanded commitment."
Yes, it could, Margaret. It just doesn't want to. AT&T has long pinched pennies when it comes to providing adequate and comprehensive wireless service but has no problem unlocking its bank account if the end result is total market domination.
As Free Press has reported since the merger's announcement, it's not just wireless carriers who will get squashed if the merger goes through. As many as 20,000 workers -- likely drawn from T-Mobile's workforce -- stand to get the boot as a result of the deal. And let's not forget ordinary consumers. Less choice translates into a power dynamic in which AT&T -- and Verizon -- can dictate whatever rates or terms it wishes for customers who don't have other options to turn to. Unless, that is, you count hooking up two Dixie cups to string and bellowing communications to your neighbor.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Free Press and other opponents of the AT&T-T-Mobile merger had reason to cheer last week when a damning document AT&T filed with the FCC was accidentally posted on a public site. The partially redacted letter, which appeared on the FCC website for several hours on Thursday before it was yanked down, punctures a hole in AT&T's central pro-merger argument -- namely that only purchasing T-Mobile would allow it to expand its 4G LTE wireless data network to 97 percent of the population.
Turns out AT&T had considered expanding its network on its own but balked at the $3.8 billion price tag. "AT&T senior management concluded that, unless AT&T could find a way to expand its LTE footprint on a significantly more cost-effective basis, an LTE deployment to 80 percent of the U.S. population was the most that could be justified," AT&T counsel Richard Rosen wrote in the letter. So AT&T concluded that it made better strategic sense to pony up $39 billion to purchase T-Mobile.
The logic makes perfect sense if your ultimate aim is to effectively bludgeon wireless competition. If the deal goes through AT&T's primary rival, Verizon, will fall a distant second to AT&T in the wireless arena, and collectively the two will control 80 percent of that market. Can AT&T still pretend it had nobler intentions?
Yes, it can.
"There is no real news here," said AT&T spokeswoman Margaret Boles in a statement released in the wake of the leak. "The confidential information in the latest letter is fully consistent with AT&T's prior filings. It demonstrates the significance of our commitment to build out 4G LTE mobile broadband to 97 percent of the population following our merger with T-Mobile. Without this merger, AT&T could not make this expanded commitment."
Yes, it could, Margaret. It just doesn't want to. AT&T has long pinched pennies when it comes to providing adequate and comprehensive wireless service but has no problem unlocking its bank account if the end result is total market domination.
As Free Press has reported since the merger's announcement, it's not just wireless carriers who will get squashed if the merger goes through. As many as 20,000 workers -- likely drawn from T-Mobile's workforce -- stand to get the boot as a result of the deal. And let's not forget ordinary consumers. Less choice translates into a power dynamic in which AT&T -- and Verizon -- can dictate whatever rates or terms it wishes for customers who don't have other options to turn to. Unless, that is, you count hooking up two Dixie cups to string and bellowing communications to your neighbor.
Free Press and other opponents of the AT&T-T-Mobile merger had reason to cheer last week when a damning document AT&T filed with the FCC was accidentally posted on a public site. The partially redacted letter, which appeared on the FCC website for several hours on Thursday before it was yanked down, punctures a hole in AT&T's central pro-merger argument -- namely that only purchasing T-Mobile would allow it to expand its 4G LTE wireless data network to 97 percent of the population.
Turns out AT&T had considered expanding its network on its own but balked at the $3.8 billion price tag. "AT&T senior management concluded that, unless AT&T could find a way to expand its LTE footprint on a significantly more cost-effective basis, an LTE deployment to 80 percent of the U.S. population was the most that could be justified," AT&T counsel Richard Rosen wrote in the letter. So AT&T concluded that it made better strategic sense to pony up $39 billion to purchase T-Mobile.
The logic makes perfect sense if your ultimate aim is to effectively bludgeon wireless competition. If the deal goes through AT&T's primary rival, Verizon, will fall a distant second to AT&T in the wireless arena, and collectively the two will control 80 percent of that market. Can AT&T still pretend it had nobler intentions?
Yes, it can.
"There is no real news here," said AT&T spokeswoman Margaret Boles in a statement released in the wake of the leak. "The confidential information in the latest letter is fully consistent with AT&T's prior filings. It demonstrates the significance of our commitment to build out 4G LTE mobile broadband to 97 percent of the population following our merger with T-Mobile. Without this merger, AT&T could not make this expanded commitment."
Yes, it could, Margaret. It just doesn't want to. AT&T has long pinched pennies when it comes to providing adequate and comprehensive wireless service but has no problem unlocking its bank account if the end result is total market domination.
As Free Press has reported since the merger's announcement, it's not just wireless carriers who will get squashed if the merger goes through. As many as 20,000 workers -- likely drawn from T-Mobile's workforce -- stand to get the boot as a result of the deal. And let's not forget ordinary consumers. Less choice translates into a power dynamic in which AT&T -- and Verizon -- can dictate whatever rates or terms it wishes for customers who don't have other options to turn to. Unless, that is, you count hooking up two Dixie cups to string and bellowing communications to your neighbor.