If AT&T is allowed to buy T-Mobile...

[draggar]

Right now (accoridng to Q1 2011 numbers):
Verizon has 104M subscribers
AT&T has 97M
Sprint has 50M
T-Mo has 33M
Metro has 8M
ClearWire has 6M
US Cellular has 6M
Leap has 5M

That's 309 million subscribers. 201 million between the two top carriers.

If AT&T is allowed to buy T-Mobile that means they'll have roughly 130 million subscribers. That means almost half of the subscribers in the USA will be either Verizon or AT&T.

The government will have no real reason to reject further consolidation. Verizon could by Sprint and they'll be at 147M subscribers.

That means 277 million (out of 309 million) subscribers will be under the two main carriers. There is no way a smaller company can compete with that. You'll see the others fold within a few years.

With almost 50% of the market share under one roof and about 40% under another this means there is virtually no competition (seriously, has there ever been an instance where two companies who control this much of something that is pretty much a necessity now ever been good?). We already see AT&T jacking up their price plans while offering less.

Also, don't forget the tens of thousands of T-Mobile employees who will most likely lose their job within a year. Yeah, the executives will make sure they still have their jobs but the workers (store level, low level corporate) who depend on those paychecks are the ones who will lose their jobs. The same will go for any other company who get bought out. We saw it when Cingular bought AT&T wireless, again when AT&T bought Cingular, and once again when Sprint bought Nextel.

Other than people who are unhappy with T-Mo and are in a contract, is there any benefit to this?

[Acro]

The main profit is from cross-carrier costs: they will be eliminated, hence more $$$ for the golden boys.

[draggar]

The main profit is from cross-carrier costs: they will be eliminated, hence more $$$ for the golden boys.

Well, considering most AT&T phones won't work on Verizon's network and vice versa then we won't have to worry about that. They'll find other ways to make more $$$.

Atleast if Sprint could buy T-Mo, while the network would be a mess they'd have the customer base to be able to compete better with AT&T and Verizon.

[Acro]

Mergers eliminate those cross-carrier fees (regardless of the underlying infrastructure). For every call a T-Mobile subscriber makes to an AT&T line there is currently a fee to interconnect. Millions of calls later, this adds up. Of course they will also downsize their personnel, support etc.

[Gerry]

Those "fees" are being really closely examined now. The fees and taxes charged and collected by phone companies, cell phone companies, and cable/satellite providers - even people in the industry have no idea what the fees are or to whom collects surcharge tax actually goes to.

Safe to say a $69.99 per month mobile plan is going to cost you nearly $83 bucks even if you make no calls, receive no calls, and keep you phone turned off.

[Mike Cruz]

I have the "$69.99 umlimited plan with T-Mobile, I pay a little less than $90 a month for it.

[Gerry]

I have the "$69.99 umlimited plan with T-Mobile, I pay a little less than $90 a month for it.

Ditto. Between my wife and I, 69.99 for me, 29.99 for her (we share same minutes), we pay about $124 every month.

[Donald Aquilano]

I've been a T-Mobile customer for over 10 years now but if they merge w/ AT&T I'll be looking elsewhere. Never liked AT&T always found they had shitty service.

[south]

I've been a T-Mobile customer for over 10 years now but if they merge w/ AT&T I'll be looking elsewhere. Never liked AT&T always found they had shitty service.

Same here.

[draggar]

The way things are going no matter who you're with you'll either be with Verizon or AT&T.

[Gerry]

Sprint is good, Virgin Mobile was awesome, AT&T sucks.

Try calling on an AT&T link to someone else on an AT&T link and figure out who is dropping who. Extremely annoying and pathetic service to have this happen repeatedly.

[Raider]

Hard to believe T-Mobile and ATT have that many subscribers.... I wonder how many ATT will have when the 2 year contracts end for the Iphone and they jump to Verizon?.

From my experience with both providers, the only 2 good things about T-Mobile is the introductory prices and the ability to receive a signal underground. Other than that, they have the same drop call issues as ATT and the same crappy reception, Customer service isn't anything to brag about either....

Verizon rules

[draggar]

Underground coverage is from one of two things -

Low frequency (800Mhz(ish) which is going away. Lower frequency has better penetration than higher frequencies (but uses more energy and doesn't go as far plus doesn't handle the demand as well as higher frequencies).

"Leakers" - cables that act like antennas along subway rails and tunnels. I know AT&T, V, S, and T-Mo have them in most of the NYC tunnels.

[Mike Cruz]

ATT is terrible. Sprint is horrid, at least down here in Florida, it's almost impossible to get a hold of someone with Sprint without first getting the "The Sprint subscriber you are trying to reach is currently unavailable". T-Mobile has been amazing, I can't remember one time I had a dropped call, the only time I have bad reception, believe it or not is when I am actually in my house and at that point I am hooked up to wifi. I have had my line with T-mobile for about 8 years now. If I were to ever leave, it would be to Verizon, but that won't be any time soon because everything is pretty good.

[Gerry]

T-Mobile has been amazing, I can't remember one time I had a dropped call...

Wait until you are outside the TMob area and it rolls over to AT&T (automatic now) service and you're talking to someone else using AT&T. I got so fed up I just quit using my phone on some calls when I see I am in AT&T service.

[Raider]

I don't think the FCC has given the green light yet, have they?

[draggar]

I don't think the FCC has given the green light yet, have they?

No and it's taking a long time which isn't bad news for those of us against the merger. There is a lot of support against it.

[Infoproliferati]

AT&T ought to do whatever is necessary to boost its GSM network coverage. As GSM is the global standard, AT&T has already got a competitive advantage over Verizon. Verizon can't convert its CDMA network to GSM faster than AT&T can put up new towers. Which begs the question: what the !@#% is AT&T waiting for? The company needs to extend its network reach and that should be its prime focus. Then it would really be poised to lead for a really long time.

The carriers have already figured the market for new subscribers is almost saturated, if not already. The only way to grow is to acquire the smaller guys. All the carriers are already focusing on the new market for connected devices (machines); tvs, smart homes, e-readers, watches, mhealth devices, industrial and fleet sensors, automobiles, smart meters etc. I haven't followed the numbers recently, but the last I checked AT&T was ahead of the next carrier, Verizon, by almost 3 million machine subscriptions (Sprint comes a cery close 3rd and has probably invested more than AT&T or Verizon to adapt for machine connections). That's where the new war for new subscribers will be; the connectable devices.

[draggar]

There are always new sources of customers - new businsesses popping up, people just qualiftying for one, cross-carrier switches (thanks to WLNP), and so on.

Yes, the mass-subscriber growth of 1999-2007/2008 is over now. Everyone who wants a cell phone and qualifies for one has one.

You are right -carriers should concentrate on network growth but it is extremely expensive and time consuming. Sadly, right now it's cheaper to just buy out a smaller company.

[Gerry]

Yes, the mass-subscriber growth of 1999-2007/2008 is over now. Everyone who wants a cell phone and qualifies for one has one.

It may be over in the USA. Other parts of the world are still booming and growing in their networks, coverages, and sales of mobile devices.