I’ve read through the ruling. What I see is animus towards a weak case. Certainly, that was brought by the administration, but I see nothing that indicates the ruling was anything other than based on the particulars brought before the court.
-
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
- Thread starter TheBigA
- Start date
the DOJ wanted to cancel this merger for all the wrong reasons.
right reasons to kill this merger:
1. media monopoly.
2. control of content that would violated rules of negotiating for deals with rival providers of pay TV while DirecTV and UVerse get the channels for basically free due to parents company ownership.
3. may affect the internet as well as the net neutrality rules are gone as of Monday (unless Congress approves the repealing of the FCC's repeal of it).
the wrong reasons for killing this merger:
1. the president's personal grudge against CNN, which is owned by Time Warner subsidy Turner Networks.
2. pettiness of the Republican party on the president's behalf.
3. hypocrisy of the Republican control government to denine this merger, whe at the same time, they are more favorable to the ongoing Sinclair Broadcasting Group/Tribune Media merger, and that merger has a bigger impact on broadcast tv and that Sinclair leans right while CNN leans left.
right reasons to kill this merger:
1. media monopoly.
2. control of content that would violated rules of negotiating for deals with rival providers of pay TV while DirecTV and UVerse get the channels for basically free due to parents company ownership.
3. may affect the internet as well as the net neutrality rules are gone as of Monday (unless Congress approves the repealing of the FCC's repeal of it).
the wrong reasons for killing this merger:
1. the president's personal grudge against CNN, which is owned by Time Warner subsidy Turner Networks.
2. pettiness of the Republican party on the president's behalf.
3. hypocrisy of the Republican control government to denine this merger, whe at the same time, they are more favorable to the ongoing Sinclair Broadcasting Group/Tribune Media merger, and that merger has a bigger impact on broadcast tv and that Sinclair leans right while CNN leans left.
By legal definition, this does not create a monopoly. A (primarily) distributor is buying a (primarily) content company. It doesn’t reduce choice simply by occurring. Yes, AT&T now owns the content, and payment across divisions amounts to moving funds from one line of the balance sheet to another. That’s not illegal, either. Part of the value of the content, as a whole, was the money other distributors will pay for the content. They would logically explore some exclusive content for their customers, but mostly as value-added material.
Net neutrality is gone. There is no basis to deny a merger on what Congress might or might not do at some indeterminate point.
Net neutrality is gone. There is no basis to deny a merger on what Congress might or might not do at some indeterminate point.
Some pretty good analysis here:
https://variety.com/2018/politics/news/att-antitrust-division-justice-department-1202844806/
https://variety.com/2018/politics/news/att-antitrust-division-justice-department-1202844806/
Here's a pretty detailed analysis of the decision:
https://variety.com/2018/politics/news/att-antitrust-division-justice-department-1202844806/
As I said, the government's case was using a 20th century argument in a 21st century marketplace.
https://variety.com/2018/politics/news/att-antitrust-division-justice-department-1202844806/
As I said, the government's case was using a 20th century argument in a 21st century marketplace.
No, the Judge attempted to re-legislate antitrust law. The DOJ will appeal. If this horrendous decision isn't overturned, it'll result in content and distribution being concentrated and streaming services unable to offer competitive prices for content. Judge Leon may petulantly deny a stay, but the Appeals Court will grant one. AT&T would be foolish to execute the merger prior to knowing the outcome of the appeal as that could cost them big time. Maybe Stephenson should do it so his shareholders fire him once the financial loss hits.
Just because you don't like the decision doesn't mean the judge is the reason.
https://deadline.com/2018/06/att-completes-time-warner-acquisition-1202411103/
An Update on AT&T/Time Warner
An Update on AT&T/Time Warner
The merger is complete.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/att-time-warner-acquisition-complete-today-2018-06-14/
"The deadline to complete the merger was next week, but the closing came swiftly after the Justice Department signaled it wouldn't ask the court to postpone the merger while it pondered an appeal of the judge's decision."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/att-time-warner-acquisition-complete-today-2018-06-14/
"The deadline to complete the merger was next week, but the closing came swiftly after the Justice Department signaled it wouldn't ask the court to postpone the merger while it pondered an appeal of the judge's decision."
The merger is complete.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/att-time-warner-acquisition-complete-today-2018-06-14/
"The deadline to complete the merger was next week, but the closing came swiftly after the Justice Department signaled it wouldn't ask the court to postpone the merger while it pondered an appeal of the judge's decision."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/att-time-warner-acquisition-complete-today-2018-06-14/
"The deadline to complete the merger was next week, but the closing came swiftly after the Justice Department signaled it wouldn't ask the court to postpone the merger while it pondered an appeal of the judge's decision."
Just because you don't like the decision doesn't mean the judge was paid off. Keep in mind that originally, the man in charge of the government's case said he saw nothing wrong with the merger. Until he was told to change his opinion. Perhaps the anger you have should be directed at him, not the judge.
Just because you don't like the decision doesn't mean the judge was paid off. Keep in mind that originally, the man in charge of the government's case said he saw nothing wrong with the merger. Until he was told to change his opinion. Perhaps the anger you have should be directed at him, not the judge.
Remember, essentially every "expert" interviewed by the media said that the DoJ had no case because non-monopolistic vertical integration does not increase market share on any one rung of the ladder.
Show your proof there was a payoff. You made a serious allegation of criminal wrongdoing. I’m guessing you can’t back it up.
I don't see that this merger is any worse than the Comcast/NBC/Universal merger (which should not have been permitted either).
I agree with you there Frank, but, as I've written several times in this thread, a past mistake should not bind the government to repeat it in the future. The Comcast announcement regarding Fox shows the exact danger of this ruling. If left unchecked there will be a fast concentration of content with distribution and a lot of emerging distribution enterprises (e.g. Sling) will be hard pressed to get fair terms for the same content.
Gee....that doesn't seem to be a problem in the music industry, where three record labels control 90% of the world's music, and have driven music royalties to the point where none of the streaming companies can make a profit. Where's the justice there? The Copyright Royalty Board, which decides the royalty rate, continues to grant increases. Congress is on the verge of approving the Music Modernization Act that will increase royalties even more. The record labels at one time held an ownership stake in Spotify, but recently have begun to sell because there's no money in distribution.
- Status