Witness: US consumers will pay $571M more if AT&T-Time Warner merger is OK’d

Discussion in 'DISH Network Support Forum' started by brejust, Apr 12, 2018.

  1. brejust

    brejust Topic Starter SatelliteGuys Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2014
    Posts:
    184
    Likes Received:
    49
    Location:
    :) life
    “The merger will in fact harm consumers and the harm is significant in terms of the dollar amount,” Shapiro testified.
    Witness: US consumers will pay $571M more if AT&T-Time Warner merger is OK'd | WRAL TechWire
    ==============================================================
    You'll be Paying for AT&T's Purchase of Time Warner Through Your Cable Bill

    At the heart of Shapiro’s math is the fact that the merger will give AT&T control over a number of popular cable networks owned by Time Warner, including CNN, HBO, TBS, and TNT. That would give AT&T a significant advantage, as the company could raise the rates for competing cable companies to carry the channels. Those increased costs would trickle down to consumers.
    https://gizmodo.com/youll-be-paying-for-at-ts-purchase-of-time-warner-throu-1825192267
     
    HIFI and Justy5 like this.
  2. Radioguy41

    Radioguy41 SatelliteGuys Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2008
    Posts:
    1,161
    Likes Received:
    504
    Location:
    Lehighton, Pennsylvania
    There is so much potential conflict of interest in that merger as to make even a lawyer's head spin. :rolleyes:
     
  3. Justy5

    Justy5 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2018
    Posts:
    5
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    US
    You know something? What did we get or gain by AT&T buying DIRECTV? Not a darn thing! They are picking it apart. Keeping the good things they like and getting rid of the stuff they don't. Caller ID never hurt anyone nor Auto Tune. But, To AT&T it apparently does. The customer has no say in the matter. I mean watching DTV anywhere or outside the house is so so. The synergies have helped AT&T's bottom line. What did we get? Yearly increases by DIRECTV leading up to this merger. And AT&T continuing with this practice.
     
    HIFI, Pere845, osu1991 and 1 other person like this.
  4. rad

    rad Supporting Founder
    Supporting Founder Lifetime Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2003
    Posts:
    8,426
    Likes Received:
    845
    Location:
    Dripping Springs, TX
    Gee, I got a bigger discount on my combined DIRECTV/AT&T bill plus streaming on the DIRECTV app doesn’t count against my wireless data usage. Plus since the start of the TIme Warmer merger I’ve been getting HBO for free, so I’d say consumers are getting something.
     
    AlaJoe likes this.
  5. Radioguy41

    Radioguy41 SatelliteGuys Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2008
    Posts:
    1,161
    Likes Received:
    504
    Location:
    Lehighton, Pennsylvania
    Not all consumers, only DTV customers, which proves the point.
     
  6. rad

    rad Supporting Founder
    Supporting Founder Lifetime Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2003
    Posts:
    8,426
    Likes Received:
    845
    Location:
    Dripping Springs, TX
    Well I think AT&T stock holders would be upset if they gave free HBO to Verizon users. Of course they will give benefits to AT&T wireless customers to drive business, that’s the reason for doing it. As long as they don’t increase pricing to the other carries what’s the problem?
     
  7. Radioguy41

    Radioguy41 SatelliteGuys Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2008
    Posts:
    1,161
    Likes Received:
    504
    Location:
    Lehighton, Pennsylvania
    Gee, let's see, they acquire content so they can give it free to their own customers and charge everybody else. Nope, no problem there. :rolleyes:
     
    JSheridan likes this.
  8. rad

    rad Supporting Founder
    Supporting Founder Lifetime Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2003
    Posts:
    8,426
    Likes Received:
    845
    Location:
    Dripping Springs, TX
    Are they charging other customers for that contest now, yes. So yes if you are an AT&T/DIRECTV customer you will get a benefit from this, if not you will still be paying for what you've been paying for in the past. It's called having a marketing advantage.
     
    AlaJoe likes this.
  9. JSheridan

    JSheridan Full Time Resident
    Pub Member / Supporter Lifetime Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2008
    Posts:
    6,095
    Likes Received:
    4,169
    Location:
    USA
    BS. It's called an unfair advantage or a monopoly.
     
    Jillian2, HIFI and charlesrshell like this.
  10. rad

    rad Supporting Founder
    Supporting Founder Lifetime Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2003
    Posts:
    8,426
    Likes Received:
    845
    Location:
    Dripping Springs, TX
    And that's BS. If AT&T gets Time Warner they do not have a monopoly since there are many more content providers out there then just Time Warner. As for being an unfair advantage, I wouldn't call it unfair, but it is an advantage which is the point behind this. As long as AT&T doesn't block other companies from getting TW content at the same price as before with any annual price increases within historical averages what's the problem?
     
  11. JSheridan

    JSheridan Full Time Resident
    Pub Member / Supporter Lifetime Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2008
    Posts:
    6,095
    Likes Received:
    4,169
    Location:
    USA
    Yea right. They won't block other providers or raise prices for at least a year or two, or if we're lucky maybe three. :rolleyes:
     
    HIFI, Pere845 and TheKrell like this.
  12. mdram

    mdram SatelliteGuys Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2005
    Posts:
    3,493
    Likes Received:
    471
    Location:
    Md
    how many channels does att own now? how many after
    compare that to what comcast owns.

    then get back to me
     
  13. Radioguy41

    Radioguy41 SatelliteGuys Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2008
    Posts:
    1,161
    Likes Received:
    504
    Location:
    Lehighton, Pennsylvania
    You're completely missing the point, it's not a "marketing advantage", it's a controlling monopoly. AT&T buys up content then sells the rights to retransmit that content to itself (DTV) for less than what it charges competitors (or provides it for free)-that's the legal definition of an unfair monopoly. AT&T (DTV) provides premium content (HBO) for free (because it owns HBO) while it's competitors have to charge a fee because they had to pay for it-that's the legal definition of an unfair monopoly. You're looking at it from the viewpoint of an AT&T(DTV) customer which is why you're not seeing the big picture. You have to view the whole consumer market, not just one faction or segment.
     
  14. JSheridan

    JSheridan Full Time Resident
    Pub Member / Supporter Lifetime Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2008
    Posts:
    6,095
    Likes Received:
    4,169
    Location:
    USA
    According to that 'logic' then as long as somebody is fleecing you then it's alright for everybody to fleece you.

    Anyway, Comcast doesn't have national coverage like DirecTV has so the damage they can do is limited. If it were up to me none of the carriers would be allowed to own content.
     
  15. mdram

    mdram SatelliteGuys Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2005
    Posts:
    3,493
    Likes Received:
    471
    Location:
    Md
    and that is the only solution that makes sense
     
  16. rad

    rad Supporting Founder
    Supporting Founder Lifetime Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2003
    Posts:
    8,426
    Likes Received:
    845
    Location:
    Dripping Springs, TX
    OK, I see your point about AT&T not paying for HBO. But they why wasn't the same argument used against Comcast when they purchased NBC/Universal, do we know how much Comcast is paying to carry Bravo, CNBC, CNBC World, COZI, E!, Golf Channel, MSNBC, NBCSN, Olympic Channel, Oxygen, SyFy, Telemundo, Universal Kids, USA Network, all those channels could also be free to Comcast using your argument. Only difference is that AT&T has decided to pass along one of the benefits to the consumer which is free HBO.
     
    AZ. likes this.
  17. rad

    rad Supporting Founder
    Supporting Founder Lifetime Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2003
    Posts:
    8,426
    Likes Received:
    845
    Location:
    Dripping Springs, TX
    Comcast doesn't have national coverage but they are the largest MSO out there.
     
  18. JSheridan

    JSheridan Full Time Resident
    Pub Member / Supporter Lifetime Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2008
    Posts:
    6,095
    Likes Received:
    4,169
    Location:
    USA
    Like I said, IMHO none of the carriers should be allowed to own content.
     
  19. rad

    rad Supporting Founder
    Supporting Founder Lifetime Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2003
    Posts:
    8,426
    Likes Received:
    845
    Location:
    Dripping Springs, TX
    Where does that logic stop then? Petroleum companies not allowed to own gas stations? Grocery stores not allowed to carry house brands (which limit shelf space for name brands), doctors not allowed to own surgical centers as examples of similar situations.
     
  20. JSheridan

    JSheridan Full Time Resident
    Pub Member / Supporter Lifetime Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2008
    Posts:
    6,095
    Likes Received:
    4,169
    Location:
    USA
    My logic stops with me being against AT&T acquiring Time Warner. Period.
     

***

Separate names with a comma.

More...