AT&T to Acquire T-Mobile USA for $39 Billion

[goobot]

3. No contracts. Phone costs can be amortized monthly with a reasonable interest and with no pre-payment penalty

Ha, you do know that means everyone will be forced to pay 500-700 for a smart phone? Not to mention you already have that option to buy full price and have no contract so you are basically asking them to remove the option most wanted. Yes you can pay that fine monthly put then people cant upgrade mid way and get another cheap phone or just make it part of your monthly fee. It is fine how it is.

 

[Obi-Wan Kubrick]

I don't like this. I'm worried they will become to big and get lazy. Also less competition.

 

[JAT]

Not sure why anyone would believe that their bills will go down as well as their speeds/coverage going up

Well, that is what has been happening for wired internet/phone. (notably, not TV providers, however) Apparently we shouldn't compare wired with wireless in telecommunications, though.

 

[diamond.g]

So much for the hope of an unlocked US iPhone, for the oh so important international roaming at not screw you rates...

 

[rdlink]

EXACTLY!

If the govt were per say to take control and say same spectrums across all carriers, you suddenly take coverage out the scenario. GOOD! Then companies actually have to compete for consumers like they do in other countries in Europe and Asia (visiting India, I got some really cheap service).

While I am in no way in favor of this merger, when we start holding India's economy up as a beacon for the US to follow we're getting a little ridiculous.

Fact is, all of you who kept running out and buying iPhones on at&t's network, and rewarding their evil and incompetent practices are to blame. Same ones who will line up to pay $200 for football tickets when the lockout is over, then complain about overpaid athletes.

 

[thewill586]

Quote:Originally Posted by thewill586
3. No contracts. Phone costs can be amortized monthly with a reasonable interest and with no pre-payment penalty

Ha, you do know that means everyone will be forced to pay 500-700 for a smart phone? Not to mention you already have that option to buy full price and have no contract so you are basically asking them to remove the option most wanted. Yes you can pay that fine monthly put then people cant upgrade mid way and get another cheap phone or just make it part of your monthly fee. It is fine how it is.

No, it isn't fine the way it is. Nothing is for free. Your paying that subsidy back every month, so why not do it without an artificial 2 year contract? If hardware and service costs were billed separately, you would see when you would pay off your phone. You wouldn't have to wait 1 or 2 months to qualify for the next phone upgrade; just pay off the balance and stand in line for the next iPhone. Monthly service plans would also be lower without the embedded phone subsidy.

 

[JoeG4]

Nah, not with AT&T and VZW - they'd nuke the subsidy and keep the prices the same.

Also: What if AT&T buys Sprint as well? XD

 

[AidenShaw]

You wouldn't have to wait 1 or 2 months to qualify for the next phone upgrade; just pay off the balance and stand in line for the next iPhone.

Or, if you have more than one brain cell, buy a Verizon ThunderBolt instead of the Iphone.

 

[Rot'nApple]

Bring back Chad! And the Dell dude!

And we've seen the Verizon dude brought back and that T-Mo iPhone guy...

So that's what?... Four guys and one hot chick! You know what I'm thinking???...

What?! No!!!! Obviously you didn't know what I was thinking...

I was thinking of a tv sitcom. Call it "The Big Bang 2!"

Man get your mind out off the gutter!
/
/
/

 

[Rot'nApple]

You tell him! Kickem in da b a l l s!

Is that like a Kevin Costner's movie, Dances with Wolves, Sioux indian name?

 

[magbarn]

The first real smart phone changed the playing field.

Agree with o brien's ny times article you posted. Basically, by Apple not giving the iPhone to all major us phone carriers, they've indirectly left us with only 2 viable choices left for cell phone providers... I for one expect in the not so distant future a 500 minute & 500 mb Data "value plan" for $79 with YouTube & Facebook "channels" sold separately.

 

[MacAddict1978]

in the economy today that is just 25k more people drawing unemployment. It would not be a big deal if unemployment was at 4-5% but with it around 10% and average unemployed time over 6 months that is an issue.

No kidding. There are Tmobile and AT&T stores smack next to each other pretty much everywhere. AT&T also is an all union company. Tmobile is not union. If you work for Tmobile you're screwed.

Granted, the AT&T stores may need extra staffing to support the extra customer traffic that will come from the store closures that are definitely going to happen, but maybe by 1-3 employees per site closure. The real downside is, until this is approved, both companies have to go on like it won't be just in case. Otherwise, they could do a hiring freeze to help lessen the blow.

Independent dealers may benefit as it would simplify things.

 

[MacAddict1978]

While I am in no way in favor of this merger, when we start holding India's economy up as a beacon for the US to follow we're getting a little ridiculous.

Fact is, all of you who kept running out and buying iPhones on at&t's network, and rewarding their evil and incompetent practices are to blame. Same ones who will line up to pay $200 for football tickets when the lockout is over, then complain about overpaid athletes.

To quote C3PO, "We're doomed." And really, India can offer cheap cell service. Their entire country spends 15 hours a day in call centers speaking broken english while they read out of manuals doing the jobs we sent over there. They don't have time to talk on their own phones. They're too busying ticking us off on ours.

 

[adamchronister8]

I'm not looking forward to this merger. I'm not familiar with AT&T's service, but T-Mobile is such a pain to use. Even in areas with good coverage as soon as I go inside my calls start breaking up. I know it's not my phone either because it happens to my friends too. Oh well, at least AT&T's internet service isn't too bad apart from the lousy DNS servers.

 

[michaelcyee]

I've been on T-Mobile for years on their Pay As You Go plan (before that I used to have Tracfone). just as long as I can get 1000 minutes for $100 I will be happy.

 

[butterfly0fdoom]

Uh no all GSM is standard frequencies, although there are a set number, QUad phones work just about all GSM services around the world.
Iphones are Quad GSM

iPhone 4 is a 5/penta band phone.

There are four main GSM frequencies used worldwide. The Americas use 850/1900 while the rest of the world uses 900/1800. There are four main UMTS frequencies used worldwide. The Americas generally use 850/1900 while the rest of the world generally uses 900/2100. T-Mobile and few other carriers are weirdos and use 1700/2100 for UMTS. The iPhone is quad-band GSM and covers all frequencies world-wide. The iPhone, iPhone 3G and iPhone 3GS were only tri-band UMTS, so they covered 850/1900/2100. This resulted in relatively poor coverage overseas. The iPhone 4 has a pentaband baseband, but 1700 is disabled.

I'm glad you're happy with AT&T in AZ, but the two places I do business, the San Francisco Bay Area and New York, have been an AT&T disaster area.

Then I must have been living in an odd bubble for the past ten years since I haven't have any problems with AT&T in the Bay Area for the past ten years.

No, it isn't fine the way it is. Nothing is for free. Your paying that subsidy back every month, so why not do it without an artificial 2 year contract? If hardware and service costs were billed separately, you would see when you would pay off your phone. You wouldn't have to wait 1 or 2 months to qualify for the next phone upgrade; just pay off the balance and stand in line for the next iPhone. Monthly service plans would also be lower without the embedded phone subsidy.

The original iPhone was sold under a similar model. You paid full price for the phone and had access to a discounted plan, although you still had a two-year contract. While sales were good, the iPhone 3G, which followed the traditional subsidy model was far more successful.

Google also tried the "full price phone for non-contract use" model for the Nexus One, but it didn't work so well, either (the lack of a proper distribution channel and abysmal product support were definitely contributing factors). That said, the Nexus S doesn't seem to be doing too well, either.

I think to Americans, the idea of paying $600 for a phone is absolutely unfathomable, even if it were possible to pay less on the monthly bill. I can't imagine the uptake on T-Mobile's Even More Plus plans to be very large.

 

[Derekuda]

Hooray! More coverage for ATT and hopefully better customer service as well. As a former T-mobile customer, I always thought they had the #1 customer service as far as cell providers go. It's what kept me with them for a number of years.

 

[alent1234]

There are four main GSM frequencies used worldwide. The Americas use 850/1900 while the rest of the world uses 900/1800. There are four main UMTS frequencies used worldwide. The Americas generally use 850/1900 while the rest of the world generally uses 900/2100. T-Mobile and few other carriers are weirdos and use 1700/2100 for UMTS. The iPhone is quad-band GSM and covers all frequencies world-wide. The iPhone, iPhone 3G and iPhone 3GS were only tri-band UMTS, so they covered 850/1900/2100. This resulted in relatively poor coverage overseas. The iPhone 4 has a pentaband baseband, but 1700 is disabled.




Then I must have been living in an odd bubble for the past ten years since I haven't have any problems with AT&T in the Bay Area for the past ten years.



The original iPhone was sold under a similar model. You paid full price for the phone and had access to a discounted plan, although you still had a two-year contract. While sales were good, the iPhone 3G, which followed the traditional subsidy model was far more successful.

Google also tried the "full price phone for non-contract use" model for the Nexus One, but it didn't work so well, either (the lack of a proper distribution channel and abysmal product support were definitely contributing factors). That said, the Nexus S doesn't seem to be doing too well, either.

I think to Americans, the idea of paying $600 for a phone is absolutely unfathomable, even if it were possible to pay less on the monthly bill. I can't imagine the uptake on T-Mobile's Even More Plus plans to be very large.

the monthly discount is usually not worth it for most people. and if you have to get 2 or more phones paying $1200 or more than $2000 at once for cell phones is a major purchase killer

 

[SkippyThorson]

I guess she wins again. iPhone for her. So there's no need to subsidy lock the iPhone for the US market anymore, is there?

Well I guess that's one optimistic outlook. Here's to no more subsidy lock! It's absolutely true, that it makes less sense now. I look forward to this being a reality one day.

 

[butterfly0fdoom]

the monthly discount is usually not worth it for most people. and if you have to get 2 or more phones paying $1200 or more than $2000 at once for cell phones is a major purchase killer

That was my point......

 

[diamond.g]

the monthly discount is usually not worth it for most people. and if you have to get 2 or more phones paying $1200 or more than $2000 at once for cell phones is a major purchase killer

That was my point......

And even then we get stiffed in the subsidy department. In other countries the more you pay the free-er your phone is. Which would naturally get people to either pay more for monthly service, or get more used to the true costs of phones.

There is no incentive in America to keep your phone when your contract is up as your bill doesn't go down.

 

[butterfly0fdoom]

There is no incentive in America to keep your phone when your contract is up as your bill doesn't go down.

Unless you want to be grandfathered into your plan, like my mom being grandfathered into her ancient $20 plan that doesn't exist in the post-paid world anymore.

 

[stroked]

Does this mean free ATT to ATT customer calling will now transform into free ATT to ATT and Tmobile customer calling?

That would be great, especially if I get to keep my fav 5 too.

 

[stormsweeper]

the monthly discount is usually not worth it for most people. and if you have to get 2 or more phones paying $1200 or more than $2000 at once for cell phones is a major purchase killer

The no-subsidy smartphone plans at T-Mo break even at 1 year for many of their phones. At two years, the TCO is rather less than the subsidized plans.

Of course, people are, generally speaking, terrible at weight short vs. long term considerations.

 

[Ammo]

This is a great thing for current AT&T customers. They should expect better cell phone reception (something they're working hard at currently) among other things.

New York and San Fran are well known problem areas and this will go a long way toward fixing the network (so will LTE, for that matter, because it will take the strain off the HSPA+ towers).

Verizon will NOT buy Sprint. That move would be blocked by the FCC. FCC is hell bent on having 3 major carriers and won't screw that one up.

You could see this purchase benefitting Sprint because they'll likely receive a certain amount of assets that the FCC won't allow (think Verizon/Alltel).

The HPSA+ advantage while both Verizon and AT&T rollout LTE cannot be emphasized enough. That is a **HUGE** competitive advantage for AT&T. HUGE.

Think of it this way: Both companies' LTE coverage will be spotty for the next 3-5 years. Would you rather be able to drop to HSPA+ (the same speed as Sprint's WiMax 4G)? or would you rather drop to EV-DO? One is still blazing fast (see articles on T-Mobile's HSPA+ Network), while the other is like falling off a cliff. And you can't do voice and data at the same time.

AT&T is on the way back, I think. Competition will always exist because the government won't allow a duopoly (I think they'll bail out Sprint before they allow a Verizon purchase).