WSJ article about AT&T looking @ Cricket / Leap

I can't view that article, according to the site I have to pay to read it.

 

Here's the relevant part of it (it's very short anyway):

 

I just got through to the WSJ article, no payment required.

COtech

 

Oh joy. Just when we have some good competition going one of the greedy big two carrier's has to come in and look to swallow it up. When will the Feds say enough is enough already? Also why would they want to take on a CDMA network?

 

In my opinion this should be blocked. Leap (Cricket) runs in mostly mid sized metro areas where AT&T already has service and plenty of spectrum. AT&T won't gain any service areas from this, they will just add customers and kill a competitor off. This is clearly an attempt by AT&T to try to "leap" themselves to number 1 as fast as they can but killing off another company in service areas they are already solid in, AT&T doesn't need Cricket market areas at all!

 

I couldn't agree more Dan, well said.

AT&T even thinking about buying Leap doesn't make an ounce of sense, IMO.

 

Joe changed the URL - it doesn't go to WSJ directly now, although I think it is supposed to be a paid article. I'm a subscriber, so sometimes I can't tell since I can see it all.

 

AT&T has absolutely no need for the spectrum,
plus AT&T coverage is mostly superior to Cricket, and has 850 mhz in alot of Cricket's home areas.
AT&T is definitely Anti-CDMA so this would not mix well.

AT&T should just accept the 'new' reality that they are now "2nd" to Verizon with customers & coverage,
and this is a foolish way to try to make it back into 1st.

In fact I would want to leave a company that doesn't care as much about it's customers,
but touting their business and doing anything to get back on top.
To me, this is their way of throwing a temper tantrum, lol. :loony:

IMO, Be happy with what you got, and try to make the best of it.

Yup, and Sprint made some similar mistakes, like buying Nextel, and look what happened to them. :browani:

 

I agree with what has been said. AT&T should focus on expanding 3G and make their network more reliable instead of being obsessed with the number of customers they have. Verizon has become the only serious competitor to AT&T because they have a good network, not because they bought this or that. If a consolidation is imminent, I rather Cricket go to one of the smaller of the big guys like T-Mo or Sprint, this way we can help build serious competition between 3 carriers instead of just 2 carriers.

 

I hope they would have to divest some areas, Georgia 11 for example (Vidalia). At&t started out here as Bellsouth Mobility (PCS) then they came to town as old At&T and bought US Cellular (old Cone Cellular) then that became Cingular and it combined with the Bellsouth PCS. Then they changed the name back to the new At&t. They kept all the towers and spectrum from US Cellular A side and US Cellular had a very solid network here.

Cricket is new to town, but they bought Hargray Wireless and have a decent network . I guess if the merger were to go through they would probably give the 1900 from Cricket to Verizon (Alltel) because Alltel only has 850 here. Guess we will have to wait and see...

 

Umm isn't that how Verizon managed to get their good network? By buying out Alltel and many other well established mom and pop carrier's over the last 10 years?

 

Can you say Airtouch, GTE, Unicel, Alltel, Midwest, Century Tel, Western Wireless, Some Qwest assets and the numbers weve forgot about over the years.

 

Verizon at least gained some non served areas from buying out Alltel plus they had to divest a fair amount to get the merger approved. I don't think AT&T would even gain one market area from buying out Leap (Cricket) Wireless. Personally if Cricket merges with anybody it needs to be Metro PCS. They both have similar plans and a target market, plus they use compatible technology and don't overlap in coverage. Cricket and Metro PCS have attempted a merger before but it failed, hopefully in the future they can agree to a deal. That way these two companies may not be taken over by the big two that don't need either company.

 

The other benefit would be the fact that a combined Metro/Cricket would have about 10 to 12 million customers, which would nearly equal what Alltel had before the gobble-up by Verizon.

Both companies are growing and performing well considering the economic condition. They are both value leaders and have carved a good niche for themselves.

It's too bad the earlier merge attempt didn't work out. One can only imagine where they would be now (as a combined entity).