/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/21696755/acastro_200804_1777_dish_0001.0.jpg)
The Dish ‘fix’ for the T-Mobile-Sprint merger seems more shortsighted than ever
AT&T throws Dish a lifeline, but it’s a steep climb ahead.
www.theverge.com
Dish And ATT sign Deal !
- Thread starter tanman
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 74
- Views 8K
www.theverge.com
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.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19367783/acastro_191108_1777_t-mobile_0001.0.jpg)
Predictably, T-Mobile’s merger promises weren’t enough to make a carrier out of Dish
Too few conditions and too much trust in big companies.
www.theverge.com
I’m a free market guy. I happen to believe that with more competition, the freer the market.
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.
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:
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 .
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 .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!The Dish ‘fix’ for the T-Mobile-Sprint merger seems more shortsighted than ever
AT&T throws Dish a lifeline, but it’s a steep climb ahead.
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.
If that means I would finally get to watch my local proffesion sports teams on ATTSW, then I'm all for it.
AT&T deal grants Dish 'a new lease on life' - analyst | Light Reading
Dish upgrade from MoffettNathanson's Craig Moffett holds that a new long-term network service agreement with AT&T reduces the risk of a Dish bankruptcy while also giving Dish critical time to build its 5G network.
www.lightreading.com
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.
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.
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 ?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
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.
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.
Hopper 3 Software Version H308 40.0 Remote Control Color Button Menu Shortcut List
- charlesrshell
- Replies: 1
