AT&T CEO Promises Lower Costs If Merger With DirecTV Passes, But Not For Consumers

rated by 0 users
This post has 7 Replies | 0 Followers

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 26,707
Points 1,208,010
Joined: Sep 2007
ForumsAdministrator
News Posted: Wed, Jun 25 2014 11:11 AM
AT&T and DirecTV are trying to convince lawmakers that a proposed $48.5 billion merger between the two companies--that’s forty-eight and a half billion dollars--and so far the best argument they have going in their favor is the promise of lower costs when comes to pricey negotiations for rights to video content.

It what seems like a couple of lines from an Onion article, Reuters reports that Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut) asked AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson point blank if he could promise that these cost savings will be passed on to consumers. “No sir, I can’t,” was the reply.

DirecTV
Image Source: Flickr (Adam Kutzko)

However, Stephenson did state that he hoped it would slow the price increases for consumers. (What a mench.)

In sum, AT&T and DirecTV promise lower costs for themselves (thereby allowing them to better compete against companies that are already at a disadvantage because of their size), but not any for consumers, and that’s supposed to convince U.S. lawmakers that this merger is good for the market.

AT&T
mage Source: Flickr (Mike Mozart)

It sounds like Stephenson is making a different argument that the one he thinks he’s making.
  • | Post Points: 110
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 3,798
Points 40,665
Joined: Jan 2010
Location: New York
Inspector replied on Wed, Jun 25 2014 2:26 PM

lol love the way he thinks :), its good for the market alright, their market :(.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 135
Points 1,240
Joined: Apr 2014
Rosec14 replied on Wed, Jun 25 2014 6:18 PM

Hahaha. "It sounds like Stephenson is making a different argument than the one he thinks he's making."

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 3
Points 15
Joined: Jun 2014
EricSkiba replied on Wed, Jun 25 2014 6:23 PM

People still pay for television?

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 10
Points 50
Joined: Jul 2013

i say no to this, we dont need another monopoly, because of rising prices we need to target the underlying causes, content creator wanting rpoviders of content to pay more, and place in no regulations on content creators and how they can do bussiness (no exclusivity, same rates for all)

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 8
Points 70
Joined: Sep 2011
AGorski replied on Wed, Jun 25 2014 9:10 PM

Lower prices? Lol. Why can't at&t explain why phone bill went from $140/m to $430/m? Fuckers.

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 11
Points 80
Joined: Jul 2013

Yay for big business..."We control.. So we'll charge whatever the fuck we want!".

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 4
Points 35
Joined: May 2014
Location: California

So the consumers get nothing while AT&T gain everything. Fucking assholes! Who cares if a multi-billion dollar company saves money if consumers aren't going to save money as well. I'd like to get the CEO's of AT&T, Comcast and apple in a line so I can kick them all in the balls. Damn evil companies!

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (8 items) | RSS