Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
- Posts: 19826
- Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
- Title: Incipient toppler
- Location: Swimming in Lake Ed
- Has thanked: 570 times
- Been thanked: 579 times
I've been watching this out of the corner of my ass for a while now. I was somehow thinking there was no way this was going to happen. As a cable-cutter I don't give too many fucks; the conglomeration of dwindling markets, yada, won't much affect me. Still, wtf?
https://www.wsj.com/articles/judge-is-s ... 1528832942
A federal judge said Tuesday that AT&T's $85.4 billion purchase of Time Warner is legal, clearing the path for a deal that gives the pay-TV provider ownership of cable channels such as HBO and CNN as well as film studio Warner Bros. From a report:
U.S. District Judge Richard Leon announced his decision in a packed courtroom, ruling that antitrust enforcers at the Justice Department had not proven their case against the merger. The decision, in one of the biggest antitrust cases in decades, is a milestone victory for AT&T as it looks to reposition itself in a rapidly evolving media landscape. Its deal for Time Warner, valued at roughly $80 billion, has been pending since October 2016. The acquisition means AT&T will be the nation's top pay-TV distributor, through its ownership of DirecTV, as well as the owner of some of the country's most sought-after channels: Time Warner's Turner networks -- including CNN, TBS and TNT -- as well as HBO, the most popular U.S. premium network.
Having said all that, I have to admit that the judge in question is actually not too bad
OTOH, what have you done for me lately?
I don't really give that much of a fuck but I'd like to see the bank records for said judge the the past 2 and next 20 years.
- Posts: 70707
- Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:33 pm
- Title: Yes, that one.
- Location: Chicago
- Has thanked: 3154 times
- Been thanked: 1166 times
It didn't do AOL any good to merge with Time Warner. Or Time to merge with Warner.
I'd say the Judge did not do AT&T any favors.
So now let the market decide.
Any man writes a mission statement spends a night in the box.
-- our mission statement plappendale
- Posts: 21432
- Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
- Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan
- Has thanked: 1382 times
- Been thanked: 1173 times
I guess that explains this other headline I just saw:
Netflix and Alphabet will need to become ISPs, fast
This week completely scrambled the video landscape, and its implications are going to take months to fully understand.
First is the district court’s decision to approve the merger of AT&T and Time Warner announced just moments ago. That will create one of the largest content creation and distribution companies in the world when it closes. It is also expected to encourage Comcast to make a similar bid for 21st Century Fox, further consolidating the market. As Chip Pickering, CEO of pro-competition advocacy org INCOMPAS put it, “AT&T is getting the merger no one wants, but everyone will pay for.”
But the second major story was the final (final final) repeal of the FCC’s net neutrality rules yesterday that will allow telecom companies like AT&T to prioritize their own content over that of competitors. In the past, AT&T didn’t have all that much content, but the addition of Time Warner now gives them a library encompassing Warner Bros. to TBS, TNT, HBO and CNN. Suddenly, that control over prioritization just got a lot more powerful and profitable.
The combination of these two stories is spooking every video on demand service, from YouTube to Netflix . If Comcast bids and is successful in buying 21st Century Fox, then connectivity in the United States will be made up of a handful of gigantic content library ISPs, and a few software players that will have to pay a premium to deliver their content to their own subscribers. While companies like Netflix and Alphabet have negotiated with the ISPs for years, the combination of these two news stories puts them in a significantly weaker negotiating position going forward.
While consumers still have some level of power — ultimately, ISPs want to deliver the content that their consumers want — a slow degrading of the experience for YouTube or Netflix could be enough to move consumers to “preferred” content. Some have even called this the start of the “cable-ification” of the internet. AT&T, for instance, has wasted no time in creating prioritized fast lanes.
I don't really know if the above doom and gloom is correct, but I didn't really expect this merger would be approved.
Remember how they said movie studios could not also own movie theaters? (ancient history, but that's how the government viewed it in the past) That's the analogy I heard. One company is not supposed to control both the content and the distribution channels.
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.