NEWS: AT&T-BellSouth Antitrust OK

The U.S. Federal Communications Commission postponed a vote on AT&T Inc.'s proposed $81 billion purchase of BellSouth Corp. after Democrats on the panel demanded more public comment on the transaction.

Commissioners Michael Copps and Jonathan Adelstein asked for the delay today in a letter to Republican Chairman Kevin Martin. The FCC is the last regulatory hurdle AT&T, the largest U.S. phone company, must surmount to complete the deal.

The move puts off a vote for at least 10 days to allow more public input. Copps and Adelstein criticized this week's approval of the purchase without conditions by the Justice Department, signaling it would face scrutiny at the FCC. Martin may lack a majority to approve the deal because the newest member, Republican Robert McDowell, is widely expected to recuse himself from the vote, leaving a 2-2 tie on the five-member panel.

``To win Democratic support and reduce partisan controversy, the Republicans would likely need to make some further concessions'' than those enacted in phone company mergers last year, analyst Blair Levin of Stifel, Nicolaus & Co. wrote today in a note. ``We continue to believe AT&T and BellSouth will be very reluctant to go beyond modest additions.''

More than 10,000 parties, including members of Congress, have urged the commission to conduct a thorough review of the proposed transaction, Copps and Adelstein said in their letter. Proposals made in the last 48 hours to address their concerns ``raise a number of significant questions and complex technical issues for us to consider,'' the letter said.

Wasn't Bellsouth one of the orginal entities spun off when the feds broke up AT&T the first time???????

On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 11:29:49 -0400, "DavidT" wrote in :

Yes. SBC is putting Ma Bell back together again.

Yep. The world has changed a lot since then...

Yes, we've had massive media consolidation so that there are in fact fewer players available today to transport your information. This is just another step on the road to extremely restricted compitition. Welcome to the world of the oligarchy.

fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.

On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 13:29:24 GMT, rico snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com (Rico) wrote in :

There's no sign of that yet -- there's clearly more intense competition in all forms of communications than in the past.

You may see it that way. I sure don't. Case in point, Entercom just bought the local CBS owned stations. True they'll have to divest one or two of them because of FCC regulations and or poor performance. Unless there are PBS, College, High School and the like stations broadcasting, then there are only TWO major players telling me what I get to hear. Sure, I have the choice NOT to listen, but again, IMO, there is LESS competition.

On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 20:28:44 GMT, "Andy S" wrote in :

Much lower prices are a sure sign of intense competition.

And as usual, you quote only that witch "proves" YOUR point. I quoted the part relevant to my reply. " there's clearly more intense competition in all forms of communications than in the past." ALL FORMS not just cellular. I responded to that and YOU ignored that.

John Navas wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

OK- I'll bite. Where do you see much lower prices for comparable service?

While often true, where are you seeing "much lower prices?" Certainly not in wireless- things have seemed to bottom out in last couple of years, and in someways are increa ing (while per-minute rates are staying low, the point-of-entry keeps rising. T-Mobile's entry level plan is now $30, Sprint at $35, Cingular and Verizon are $40, I believe. Two or three years ago, entry level plans were $20-30.)

The lower costs in telecommunications are just as contributable to technology as they are to competition.

Having said that, I fail to see how the AT&T/Bell South merger is anti- competitive. Both entities, while in the same business, have different trade areas (at least in local wireline telephony.)