More Thoughts on the AT&T/T-Mobile Merger

I think claims of increased competition are a joke. With that said, I think the analyst that compared AT&T and VZW to Coke and Pepsi brought up an interesting point. We accept Coke and Pepsi dominating the market. They have the same "entrenched duopoly" mentioned by Sprint in reference to AT&T and VZW.

So why is that OK and VZW/AT&T bad? Is it because soda are cheap compared to monthly cell bills? Is it because it's "always" been just Coke and Pepsi? Is it because we know a single can of Coke will never be $5, but we don't know that our cell bills won't one day be $150/line?

 

Because there is only a finite amount of spectrum, so adding a competitor to the market is next to impossible since AT&T and VZW will own the vast majority of that limited resource. There is no spectrum or other limited resource stopping a 3rd competitor from challenging Coke and Pepsi.


It may be difficult for a #3 to emerge in the soft drink market, it would be nigh impossible for a #3 (size wise compared to VZW and AT&T, I'm not forgetting Sprint) to start up.

 

True enough. When there is finite supply in a market, especially an artificially created finite supply, I think the fewer the companies the better + increased regulation. Normally I am not a big pro-regulation kinda guy, but in markets like this, I think it is necessary.

 

I would agree that with the proper regulations three or four national carriers would work well with LTE on the way.

Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk

 

I have absolutely no problem with the proposed AT&T/T-Mobile merger. When I did a search on my Zip Code to find the carriers who offer coverage here, I found that out of the 9 carriers that are licensed to cover this area, only 3 have actually built anything and offer coverage. The fact that these carriers are being allowed to sit on spectrum like this is absolutely ridiculous. If they have no intention of ever building anything, they should NOT be allowed to keep this valuable resource!