• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

AT&T/Time-Warner merger

https://www.fiercecable.com/video/doj-asks-judge-to-force-at-t-to-sell-either-directv-or-turner

Here is another update on the AT&T/Time Warner Talks and its how the DOJ is responding

n its own post-trial brief issued last week, AT&T said that being forced to sell off either DirecTV or Turner would “destroy” the value proposition of the merger.

“Divesting DirecTV would eliminate the price decrease for millions of DirecTV consumers predicted by the government itself, and divesting Turner would eliminate the content innovations and the advertising benefits that put downward pressure on Turner prices. On this record, there is no basis to impose any remedies at all, much less divestitures that would destroy the value of the transaction,” AT&T wrote.

AT&T requested that no remedial judgments be placed on its acquisition of Time Warner.

As Judge Leon ponders the final arguments from both AT&T and the DOJ, AT&T is facing controversy over payments it made in late 2017 and early 2018 to Essential Consultants, a company created by President Donald Trump’s lawyer Michael Cohen. According to CNBC, AT&T paid Cohen $200,000 to provide “insights into understanding the new administration." It was Cohen’s Essential Consultants that made the $130,000 payment to actress Stormy Daniels to prevent her from publicly discussing an alleged affair she had with Trump.

AT&T told CNBC that Cohen “did no legal or lobbying work for us, and the contract ended in December 2017.”
Click to expand...
 
TVCOOL said:
CNN is still alive? I'm shocked they fell from Grace as the brand for Cable News.
Click to expand...

I think they still have a strong brand, but regular viewers want more definable opinion for evening talk shows. The CNN hosts are way too bland.

So it's bland vs. brand.
 
TVCOOL said:
CNN is still alive? I'm shocked they fell from Grace as the brand for Cable News.
Click to expand...

Define alive? Their top rated show is number 24, about the same as Fox's lowest rated show. They're basically an afterthought. I see them being forced to drop their rates to cable companies significantly as contracts expire or risk being dropped. CNN is no longer a must carry set of channels. Indeed, they have fallen far.
 
TVCOOL said:
CNN is still alive? I'm shocked they fell from Grace as the brand for Cable News.
Click to expand...

Well I kind of see what you mean though given that there are TV App Channels in recent years come into play like CBSN and Newsy doing National News and making attempts to get audiences away from CNN though also Al-Jazeera's Youtube Feed and BBC News taking on the International News content to go after CNN though.
 
http://thehill.com/policy/technology/390095-att-drops-court-challenge-over-ftcs-authority

Here is an update of the AT&T/Time Warner talks

AT&T is dropping a court challenge to the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) authority over telecommunications providers, ending a legal battle that critics said could have left the post-net neutrality internet with little oversight.

In a court filing on Wednesday, AT&T’s lawyers said that the telecommunications giant would not be petitioning the Supreme Court for a review of a federal appeals court decision that said the FTC had jurisdiction over them.

We have decided not to seek review by the Supreme Court, to focus instead on negotiating a fair resolution of the case with the Federal Trade Commission,” AT&T spokesman Michael Balmoris said in a statement to The Hill.
In February, the full 9th Circuit Court of Appeals had overturned an earlier ruling that said the FTC couldn’t take action against companies that engage in the telecommunications business because telecom companies are common carriers with less legal liability.

Critics worried that if AT&T had challenged the 9th Circuit decision and won at the Supreme Court, it would have left a major gap in regulatory oversight. All companies would have to do to avoid FTC enforcement action would be to operate a small telecommunications business.
Click to expand...
 
Completely different issue. Not related to this topic at all. Over 'updating' leads to these frequent errors.
 
I'm not surprised it was approved, but I was surprised there were no conditions. Stunning blow to the DOJ.

Truthfully their case wasn't very strong. As I said in another thread, so much of it was based on conjecture rather than actual fact.
 
http://www.kyma.com/news/whats-next-for-the-dojs-case-against-atttime-warner-deal/752308021


DOJ should absolutely appeal this decision. Judge Leon clearly did not consider the facts and his laughable warning to the government to not seek a stay proves his ruling was more about animus towards the administration than it was based on antitrust law and the facts of the case. DOJ has little to lose by appealing.

The merger is not nearly a done deal. DOJ is likely to prevail on appeal.

https://nypost.com/2018/06/07/time-warner-merger-could-still-fall-apart-if-att-wins-suit/
 
What indicates the DOJ is likely to win on appeal?

There's no indication the judge didn't consider the facts; reaching a conclusion one may disagree with is not proof of not considering the facts, or the conjecture, put forth. Nor does it "prove" a ruling was about animus to anyone. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, there's no basis for assuming anything about his ruling wasn't based on the relevant evidence and testimony before him.
 
That 'warning' really gives additional grounds to support an appeal. The judge showed an appalling lack of linking his ruling to the facts of the case instead displaying animus to the administration. I see DOJ both appealing and seeking a stay which Judge Leon may deny but the appeals court is likely to grant. Further, the appeal is likely to result in some concessions by AT&T to address antitrust concerns which is what the suit was about in the first place.
 
Read the ruling and the articles I posted. Unlike some posters on here, I post support for my contentions. DOJ will almost certainly appeal.
 
Neither of the articles you posted give any reason why the government might win on appeal. It was a weak case, as the judge stated.

Their only hope is that a stay would cause the deal itself to fall apart.

What no one considers is that the parties (AT&T and Time-Warner) could sign an extension to the merger agreement.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom