AT&T wins: Judge clears $85 billion bid for Time Warner with no conditions

#3
#3
Franklin Pierce said:
T will now have both a Satellite TV company and a Cable TV company, in addition to their own phone services.
Click to expand...

It's always nice to see the consolidation into propaganda giants. It's easier that way.we don't have to rush out, get a variety of information, and have to think for ourselves.

Everyone accuses trump of attacking the freedom of the press when it's sold out to giant corporate monopolies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#4
#4
Orange_Crush said:
It's always nice to see the consolidation into propaganda giants. It's easier that way.we don't have to rush out, get a variety of information, and have to think for ourselves.

Everyone accuses trump of attacking the freedom of the press when it's sold out to giant corporate monopolies.
Click to expand...

nm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#7
#7
Just think about the long ago era when TV was free, and your phone bill was less than $50 per month.

Now, people are addicted to their phones and families pay $150 per month for their addiction.

TV and Internet bills are $150 - $200 per month, and people only watch about 25% of the channels they pay their TV provider for.

And every year the companies raise their rates even higher. Every year we continue to pay the ever higher prices.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#8
#8
Franklin Pierce said:
Just think about the long ago era when TV was free, and your phone bill was less than $50 per month.

Now, people are addicted to their phones and families pay $150 per month for their addiction.

TV and Internet bills are $150 - $200 per month, and people only watch about 25% of the channels they pay their TV provider for.

And every year the companies raise their rates even higher. Every year we continue to pay the ever higher prices.
Click to expand...

You seem to be missing something in this equation.
 
#11
#11
Franklin Pierce said:
Just think about the long ago era when TV was free, and your phone bill was less than $50 per month.

Now, people are addicted to their phones and families pay $150 per month for their addiction.

TV and Internet bills are $150 - $200 per month, and people only watch about 25% of the channels they pay their TV provider for.

And every year the companies raise their rates even higher. Every year we continue to pay the ever higher prices.
Click to expand...

Ala carte baby. I even wrote PT about it. Win win for everyone. Why do we have to pay for ish that we never watch?

I used to have car payments less than this, and our parents had house payments less.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#13
#13
PKT_VOL said:
The technological difference between the two.
Click to expand...

and inflation and paying for long distance.

and the fact that TV is still free

1980 to now inflation puts a $50 phone bill at $150 today and that $150 includes high speed internet, unlimited long distance and hundreds of TV channels.

Those bastards!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#14
#14
It's still amazing that we have laws on the books to limit monopolistic power and encourage competition, and then we allow government to ignore them. With the quality of protection we get from government, who needs enemies. Apparently with the right lobbying (code for bribery of elected officials) and judge shopping, anything can be justified.
 
#15
#15
Rumor is that Verizon will make a bid for CBS in a few days.

Watch Amazon but Netflix for a big premium
 
#16
#16
Biopsyman said:
Rumor is that Verizon will make a bid for CBS in a few days.

Watch Amazon but Netflix for a big premium
Click to expand...

I'd be surprised if Amazon were to bid really high for Netflix. They could outbid them for individual titles if they wanted to and AWS can likely match them with any content delivery technology. The only reason to bid high is to instantly buy subs and I don't know if Amazon needs to do that.
 
#18
#18
AM64 said:
It's still amazing that we have laws on the books to limit monopolistic power and encourage competition, and then we allow government to ignore them. With the quality of protection we get from government, who needs enemies. Apparently with the right lobbying (code for bribery of elected officials) and judge shopping, anything can be justified.
Click to expand...

That's not entirely true. I often wonder why the right has so much disdain for Bill Clinton. During his presidency, he signed John Kasich's Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997, which ended up causing the .com bubble crash. But more to this point, he also signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which was designed to de-regulate aspects of the telecommunications business to create more competition in the industry. It backfired even more spectacularly. It quite literally opened the door for the most powerful companies to completely take over via mergers, takeovers and acquisitions...i.e. the monopolies we're currently experiencing.

EDIT: I don't mean for this to read as the right is always wrong, just that he signed several legislations that the right would most certainly be cheering about...tax relief, deregulation, etc.
 
Last edited:
#19
#19
PeterNincompoop said:
That's not entirely true. I often wonder why the right has so much disdain for Bill Clinton. During his presidency, he signed John Kasich's Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997, which ended up causing the .com bubble crash. But more to this point, he also signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which was designed to de-regulate aspects of the telecommunications business to create more competition in the industry. It backfired even more spectacularly. It quite literally opened the door for the most powerful companies to completely take over via mergers, takeovers and acquisitions...i.e. the monopolies we're currently experiencing.

EDIT: I don't mean for this to read as the right is always wrong, just that he signed several legislations that the right would most certainly be cheering about...tax relief, deregulation, etc.
Click to expand...

Actually we pretty much agree; both parties are absolutely complicit. The right is no better than the left when it comes to this kind of thing. Historically it seems like both parties work together to put in place legislation designed to correct a problem, and then a few years down the road when the lesson isn't so fresh lobbyists con them into undoing the protective measure. The banking fiasco was a great example. I simply have little use for congress - that goes for both parties.

However when it comes to mergers, it's usually the courts that allow the dirty deed. Whether congress is incapable of writing law explicitly enough or the judge is feeling important, we need better from government.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top