Dish And ATT sign Deal ! (1 Viewer)

Register Today to see less ads! It's Free!
Register Today to see less ads! It's Free!

edisonprime

SatelliteGuys Pro
Dec 12, 2012
2,626
890
55901
Oh great… That much closer to a monopoly. I happen to believe that the more competition, the better. I personally see more competition is both better for the customers and the employees. The only thing that monopolies are good for are for the top executives. I can’t stand any corporate mergers, especially when both companies are in the same field. When two companies merge that are in separate fields is slightly better, but I still don’t like corporate takeovers even with that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheKrell

Poorsha

Member
Jun 4, 2020
9
11
Riverside, CA
Oh great… That much closer to a monopoly. I happen to believe that the more competition, the better. I personally see more competition is both better for the customers and the employees. The only thing that monopolies are good for are for the top executives. I can’t stand any corporate mergers, especially when both companies are in the same field. When two companies merge that are in separate fields is slightly better, but I still don’t like corporate takeovers even with that.
Not all corporate mergers are bad.
 

edisonprime

SatelliteGuys Pro
Dec 12, 2012
2,626
890
55901
Mergers are free market capitalism in action. Big fish eat the little fish.
Actually in some exceptions, smaller companies acquire bigger companies, such as Kmart acquiring Sears. That being said I still consider more competition of what would be a free market. Although it can be said as well that you also don’t want to oversaturate the market on some exceptions. Hell, look at the North American video game crash of 1983. But I still think in many markets you still have leeway.
 

DishSubLA

SatelliteGuys Master
Apr 9, 2006
5,286
1,141
They are replacing the network...i would just relax...the fcc would get very upset if every customer had to buy a new phone because of a network switch....just sayin
FCC has known about this for YEARS and have absolutely NO INTEREST in the matter, and that includes the FCC under the current Administration. The reason is because the FCC supports wireless companies moving to all digital (5G/4G/LTE), as the shut down of analog will allow some of that spectrum to be repurposed as 4G/LTE by the same wireless carriers, and the FCC sees that as a benefit to consumers (I'll be able to use my data at the same time I am talking to someone on the smartphone :)). I am not certain if a few of those CDMA bands my be repurposed for other uses.

The greatest number of consumers who will be required to have a new phone are older aged customers who still use Cell Phone (like the old Flip phones--not SmartPhones) or some older SmartPhones that use CDMA for VOICE calls with no VoLTE capability, and these people have no desire for any new phones nor any desire for a SmartPhone because what they have works for their needs and desires just fine.

I agree, it does not seem right that it is upon THOSE customers to pay for the new phone--or at least there is NO FCC requirement for carriers to pay to replace those phones--but it is up to each carrier/MVNO to decide if they want to provide new, compatible phones to their customers or if the carriers/MVNO require the customer to obtain a new, compatible phone on their own. It is what it is. Not pretty. The FCC is giddy, excited to see the change to all digital, and seem to have no empathy for the consumers who will PAY for this change.
 
Last edited:

DishSubLA

SatelliteGuys Master
Apr 9, 2006
5,286
1,141
Dish--through its Boost, etc MVNO--teaming with AT&T was inevitable as Dish is suing T-Mobile (unless Dish was withdrew its suit) regarding the shut-down of CDMA. So, I would think Dish went and found a new wireless company to host is MVNO business. Boost, etc. customers were going to have to pay for new phone even if Dish stayed with T-Mobile, so there was no change there. If fact, this new deal brought no real change other than Dish and T-Mobile probably prefer new business partners at this point as T-Mobile made public statements that seemed as if they were upset at Dish regarding the suit.

FWIW, I think T-Mobile was counting on the money there were going to get hosting Boost, etc., and likely felt that Dish had no choice but to stay with T-Mobile, but Dish may have decided that if T-Mobile would not be accommodating (T-Mobile is being firm, but not necessarily unfair, on its date of ending CDMA, unlike Verizon who keep postponing their CDMA end date), then Dish would take it's $5 Billion business elsewhere. The problem was that these good, kind, old folks (as I am one, as well :)) just REFUSED to get new phones no matter how many notices they have received informing them of their phone's looming uselessness at making phone calls, so Dish was in a jam, and T-Mobile just didn't care. So, now lawsuit followed by taking 5$ billion worth of business from T-Mobile to AT&T. At least the customers will get the same below par coverage and signal quality :).
 

DishSubLA

SatelliteGuys Master
Apr 9, 2006
5,286
1,141
That Verge article is so typically LAZY. It was T-Mobile and Sprint (and Dish, as well) who pushed the DOJ for Dish to be the new 4th carrier because it was the ONLY way T-Mobile and Sprint would EVER be allowed to merge, satisfying the DOJ's only problem to the T-Mobile/Sprint merger: not to end up with only 3 wireless companies, and Sprint and T-Mobile were desperate for this merger to happen this time for sure. Dish was the ONLY interested party to the deal that would get the DOJ's approval. Nobody else was even remotely interested. So, for T-Mobile and Sprint, it was a Dish deal or NOTHING!

Further, the Verge article makes the same imposed error of many other tech journals: that Dish want to compete with Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile's consumer wireless business. Dish's stated goal from day one has been to build out a new 5G network with Enterprise uses and customers as its clients who have legitmate need and desire for the advantages that 5G offers, not to compete for consumers in the consumer mobile phone market. Boost, etc. does not have to be successful in the long run, and we may likely end up with, practically speaking, only 3 CONSUMER wireless companies after all, with Dish finding its place in the Enterprise market using 5G as its business success, and its MVNO business just a place holder.
 

TomT127

SatelliteGuys Pro
Apr 3, 2014
154
92
Sugar Land, TX
Yeah, I could see DISH spinning off their satellite and Sling streaming TV services to that new entity (DIRECTV) in exchange for a big ownership stake in it. The new DIRECTV company that will come into existence any day now will be 70% owned by AT&T and 30% by investor group TPG, but with both companies equally represented on the board of directors.

Maybe DISH will trade them their TV services in exchange for something like a 40% stake, leaving AT&T with 42% of the enlarged company and TPG with 18%. Or perhaps TPG gives DISH some cash as part of the transaction in exchange for a bit larger piece of the company, e.g. TPG at 30% and DISH at 28%. Something along those lines is how I could see the deal going down. I don't think anyone is going to outright buy either satellite TV service at this point.

By spinning off their legacy TV business, it would leave DISH focused on their growing wireless business, just as AT&T is now focused on their wireless and broadband businesses.
If that means I would finally get to watch my local proffesion sports teams on ATTSW, then I'm all for it.
 

mdonnelly

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Aug 26, 2004
7,945
2,612
Mustang, OK
Actually in some exceptions, smaller companies acquire bigger companies, such as Kmart acquiring Sears. That being said I still consider more competition of what would be a free market. Although it can be said as well that you also don’t want to oversaturate the market on some exceptions. Hell, look at the North American video game crash of 1983. But I still think in many markets you still have leeway.
Competition requires some amount of regulation to keep the big players from acquiring the little players and shutting them down. That's why we have anti-trust laws. A completely free market leads to monopolies, and competition dies.
 

Don in CT

SatelliteGuys Master
Pub Member / Supporter
Dec 4, 2013
7,813
9,317
Central CT
Actually in some exceptions, smaller companies acquire bigger companies, such as Kmart acquiring Sears. That being said I still consider more competition of what would be a free market. Although it can be said as well that you also don’t want to oversaturate the market on some exceptions. Hell, look at the North American video game crash of 1983. But I still think in many markets you still have leeway.
K-Mart buying Sears was a last gasp effort for both companies to stay afloat. It didn't work for either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell

TheKrell

A mighty and noble race originating on Altair IV.
Pub Member / Supporter
Jan 4, 2007
31,641
26,417
Fairfax, VA
K-Mart buying Sears was a last gasp effort for both companies to stay afloat. It didn't work for either.
The problems with Kmart and Sears were all exacerbated by Eddie Lampert who IMHO never intended his many "last gasp efforts" to work. I gather from my son-in-law the lawyer that Lampert has actually defended himself in court by saying that he's just incompetent, and never intended to drive both companies into the ground.
 

Juan

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Sep 14, 2003
27,579
6,344
Moscow Russia
FCC has known about this for YEARS and have absolutely NO INTEREST in the matter, and that includes the FCC under the current Administration. The reason is because the FCC supports wireless companies moving to all digital (5G/4G/LTE), as the shut down of analog will allow some of that spectrum to be repurposed as 4G/LTE by the same wireless carriers, and the FCC sees that as a benefit to consumers (I'll be able to use my data at the same time I am talking to someone on the smartphone :)). I am not certain if a few of those CDMA bands my be repurposed for other uses.

The greatest number of consumers who will be required to have a new phone are older aged customers who still use Cell Phone (like the old Flip phones--not SmartPhones) or some older SmartPhones that use CDMA for VOICE calls with no VoLTE capability, and these people have no desire for any new phones nor any desire for a SmartPhone because what they have works for their needs and desires just fine.

I agree, it does not seem right that it is upon THOSE customers to pay for the new phone--or at least there is NO FCC requirement for carriers to pay to replace those phones--but it is up to each carrier/MVNO to decide if they want to provide new, compatible phones to their customers or if the carriers/MVNO require the customer to obtain a new, compatible phone on their own. It is what it is. Not pretty. The FCC is giddy, excited to see the change to all digital, and seem to have no empathy for the consumers who will PAY for this change.
They have to replace every SIM card so that the phones will authenticate on the att network...that alone will cost money..does boost have billing information so they can mail them ?
 

Jon J

SatelliteGuys Pro
Lifetime Supporter
Nov 16, 2005
517
376
Music City, USA
They have to replace every SIM card so that the phones will authenticate on the att network...that alone will cost money..does boost have billing information so they can mail them ?
Does replacing the SIM card mean our CDMA phones will continue to work?
 

Don in CT

SatelliteGuys Master
Pub Member / Supporter
Dec 4, 2013
7,813
9,317
Central CT
The problems with Kmart and Sears were all exacerbated by Eddie Lampert who IMHO never intended his many "last gasp efforts" to work. I gather from my son-in-law the lawyer that Lampert has actually defended himself in court by saying that he's just incompetent, and never intended to drive both companies into the ground.
K-Mart and Sears were sinking ships long before Lampert took over. They goal was to avoid bankruptcy by merging. Nothing could save those companies from going under.
 
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell
Register Today to see less ads! It's Free!

Users who are viewing this thread

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Latest posts

Top