Time Warner Approves Comcast Merger

[Techhog]

Because the government won't let it happen. This happens all the time with cell phone companies.

If you're talking about the AT&T/T-Mobile merger, the only reason that was blocked was because it would have resulted in a GSM monopoly. Nothing like that would happen this time. Also, I think that was before Wheeler and Dealer was in charge.

 

If you're talking about the rumored Sprint/T-Mobile deal, SoftBank wouldn't have had the money needed for bribing Wheeler, so they gave up.

[Tocsin_786]

Im not from the US, but even I can see this causing major trouble for the US and possibly else where since others may follow suite. I really hope the FCC won't approve this monopoly. 

theres no such thing as the fcc. 

[mr moose]

Except helstra still own the entire network anyway, and it's then get luck and have nbn ftth, or be a sucker, I'm a sucker

 

But given what you have read recently about comcast and time warner and the net neutrality who would you rather be stuck with?  Also there are laws that prevent telstra from monopolizing the copper network. That is why they are more expensive than everyone else who just rents the copper.  

 

 

Not saying telstra is perfect, they have their share of issues, just saying they are better than what I've read about comcast and that our internet seems to be better than in the US when all things are considered.

[Pugs501]

*comcast throws money at the FCC*

 

*FCC says some bullsh*t and approves of the merge*

ARE YOU KIDDING ME!

[WelshDdraig]

theres no such thing as the fcc. 

there is - 

 

 

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Communications_Commission)

[Jvagle875]

the only reason I can think of that would cause the government to stop this and to act on net neutrality in general would be because the internet is the backbone of future trade, the whole economy of the US (and most countries for that matter) rely on good access to the net,  If they allow a company to monopolize that, they risk hamstringing their economy to the point where it could implode.

 

 

But what about Tom wheeler and the recent events.

 

 

If you're talking about the AT&T/T-Mobile merger, the only reason that was blocked was because it would have resulted in a GSM monopoly. Nothing like that would happen this time. Also, I think that was before Wheeler and Dealer was in charge.

 

If you're talking about the rumored Sprint/T-Mobile deal, SoftBank wouldn't have had the money needed for bribing Wheeler, so they gave up.

The FCC and the government as a whole isn't malicious, it's not out to harm customers, they're just ignorant.

[Tocsin_786]

there is - 

not in terms of that. its a figure of speech for not doing anything they are supposed to do. 

[mr moose]

The FCC and the government as a whole isn't malicious, it's not out to harm customers, they're just ignorant.

 

But it isn't beyond reason to assume (as has been evidenced recently) that that ignorance can be tipped to favor one side with enough cash.

[Cooleb09]

[removed]

[mr moose]

The issue is that it is still helstras network, they are the ones who fix it, and if it breaks and you are not with them/doesn't affect their customers it takes ages to fix. Also, in regards to net neutrality, asio has done that for years, the only thing is is that it was passed in the asio act so it is actualy perfectly legal down here and therefore there is little reason for it to be a big thing.

It doesn't matter who you're with, sometimes it takes ages other times they have guys out there the next day. All jobs are logged and timed, if telstra are prioritizing their customers where is the evidence?

 

Also I think you have net neutrality confused with something else, ASIO isn't interested in internet fast lanes or traffic shaping.  perhaps your thinking of NSA spying? which is a completely different story

.

[TroubleKlef]

US Government really needs to fund new competitors into the ISP market. Imagine if Google's efforts were tripled. Fiber EVERYWHERE.

[Redliub]

That makes a lot of sense. However, the government never does anything that makes sense......now does it.

I've seen a lot of your posts here (long time lurker) and you always seem to take a relatively conservative side without realizing that most conservatives aren't supporting net neutrality at the moment.

 

Just sayin'.

 

But it isn't beyond reason to assume (as has been evidenced recently) that that ignorance can be tipped to favor one side with enough cash.

That's the definition of crony capitalism.

 

US Government really needs to fund new competitors into the ISP market. Imagine if Google's efforts were tripled. Fiber EVERYWHERE.

Yes, because clearly the only reason Google isn't expanding is because of cash. They're practically broke over there!

 

The government doesn't need to fund shit. Just stop these two from merging, put your foot down on net neutrality, and the market will resolve everything.

[TroubleKlef]

I've seen a lot of your posts here (long time lurker) and you always seem to take a relatively conservative side without realizing that most conservatives aren't supporting net neutrality at the moment.

 

Just sayin'.

 

That's the definition of crony capitalism.

 

Yes, because clearly the only reason Google isn't expanding is because of cash. They're practically broke over there!

 

The government doesn't need to fund shit. Just stop these two from merging, put your foot down on net neutrality, and the market will resolve everything.

 

Networks probably costs hundreds of millions if not billions to create. Google has money but not enough to recklessly spend it on infrastructure like that.

[Redliub]

Networks probably costs hundreds of millions if not billions to create. Google has money but not enough to recklessly spend it on infrastructure like that.

Google has hundreds of billions, right? They definitely have the money. They just have to decide how much more ad revenue giving the entire country gigabit fiber would get them...

[TroubleKlef]

Google has hundreds of billions, right? They definitely have the money. They just have to decide how much more ad revenue giving the entire country gigabit fiber would get them...

Again I see your point but again its a business that isn't in their best interests to spend that all that money on.

 

The reason why Google has all that money is because they don't recklessly spend it.

 

EDIT: I guess Goldman Sachs estimated that Google would need to spend $140 Billion to cover the US and Google only has $45billion cash, meaning they would actually have to take out a loan to build a nationwide network.

[Redliub]

Again I see your point but again its a business that isn't in their best interests to spend that all that money on.

 

The reason why Google has all that money is because they don't recklessly spend it.

 

EDIT: I guess Goldman Sachs estimated that Google would need to spend $140 Billion to cover the US and Google only has $45billion cash, meaning they would actually have to take out a loan to build a nationwide network.

Apple could do it then...they have what, like $180 billion cash?

[mr moose]

Apple could do it then...they have what, like $180 billion cash?

$160B for apple

$85B for MS

$50B for Google

 

$49B US treasury

 

edit:as of april this year

[Redliub]

$160B for apple

$85B for MS

$50B for Google

 

$49B US treasury

 

edit:as of april this year

So yeah, Apple could do it, but they won't, because then they'd be left with ONLY $15B. B)

[TroubleKlef]

So yeah, Apple could do it, but they won't, because then they'd be left with ONLY $15B. B)

Exxon should build a gigabit network

[Redliub]

Exxon should build a gigabit network

Oh god no...an oil company running an ISP?

 

Don't those wankers have too much responsibility already?

 

That's like asking Rupert Murdoch to go write for Re/Code. It's a recipe for disaster.

[Techhog]

The FCC and the government as a whole isn't malicious, it's not out to harm customers, they're just ignorant.

Wheeler was planted, and everyone knows it. He used to lobby for the companies he's meant to keep in check now.

[Techhog]

So yeah, Apple could do it, but they won't, because then they'd be left with ONLY $15B. B)

No, the won't because they don't care about running such a business...

[Redliub]

No, the won't because they don't care about running such a business...

Yeah I realize. This is all kind of sarcastic. Like, 4chan level sarcastic.

[Cooleb09]

[removed]

[LAwLz]

Networks probably costs hundreds of millions if not billions to create. Google has money but not enough to recklessly spend it on infrastructure like that.

That's why I prefer the approach we have here in Sweden.

The municipality builds and maintains the fiber lanes. You as a house owner (or apartment building owner) pays a one time fee to connect your building to it. Any ISP can negotiate fair agreements with the municipality and use the fiber connections.

Right now I can pick between 9 different ISPs that offers Internet through fiber to me. T3, AllTele, Bahnhof, Bredband2, Universal Telecom, Tele2, Telia, Viasat or Tyfon. It creates a fair playing field for all companies so there is a ton of competitiveness, which is great for us customers.

 

I am not quite sure how it works on the mobile side, but there is one carrier that is partially owned by the government and it seems like other carriers are allowed to use their network. I have seen like 4-5 different carriers say they use Telia's network (and thus you get the same coverage) but I also know ~4 carriers that all have their own networks so I don't think the terms for using their network are that great.

 

But then again... Our government seems far more trustworthy than the US one so maybe it wouldn't work over there.