“It is a good time to be an asset ‘in play.’”
October 22, 2016 12:38 PM   Subscribe

AT&T Agrees to Buy Time Warner for More Than $80 Billion [The Washington Post] “AT&T’s ambitious move to acquire Time Warner for more than $80 billion, which the Wall Street Journal first reported could be announced as soon as Saturday, would singlehandedly turn America’s second-largest wireless carrier into a content powerhouse and one of the most prominent TV, film and video-game producers in the world. AT&T and Time Warner did not immediately respond to requests for comment.”

AT&T’s Time Warner Deal Makes Strategic Sense But Price May Be Too High [Fortune]
“Can AT&T afford to spend $80 to $90 billion to buy out Time Warner’s stockholders and another $22 billion to assume Time Warner’s net outstanding debt? And will regulators allow it? AT&T has barely finished digesting its $49 billion DirecTV purchase from last year, but numerous reports say the carrier is on the verge of acquiring Time Warner, owner of the Warner Brother movie studio as well as popular cable channels like TNT, CNN and HBO. Although some analyses of the deal have found the strategic rationale lacking, the combination of AT&T’s wired and wireless network distribution platform and Time Warner’s entertainment asset are a good match.”
Donald Trump Says He Would Block An AT&T-Time Warner Merger If Elected [Los Angeles Times]
“Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump said Saturday that his administration would seek to block a massive media merger between AT&T and Time Warner Inc. if he is elected president. At a speech in Gettysburg, Pa., outlining his priorities for his first 100 days in office, Trump warned that buying Time Warner would give AT&T “too much concentration of power.” “We’ll look at breaking this deal up,” he said.”
This Is AT&T's Strategy To Conquer The Future of TV [Business Insider]
“Such a deal would link AT&T’s “pipes” — wireless, broadband, and satellite — to Time Warner’s media properties that range from HBO to CNN to Warner Brothers. Why? AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson wants to add more “content” and “original programming” to the company’s umbrella generally, according to Bloomberg. But even if the deal doesn’t happen, AT&T has already signaled, in a bunch of ways, that it wants a piece of the future of entertainment. One of the biggest moves AT&T has made toward this ambition so far is the announcement of its upcoming DirecTV Now service, which will launch before the end of 2016. Right now, DirecTV Now will target the 20 million people in the US who don't have pay TV, but the company plans for it to be the primary TV platform by 2020, according to Bloomberg.”
AT&T in Advanced Talks to Acquire Time Warner [The Guardian]
“Wieser said that while the marriage of a producer and a distributor might at first look similar to the successful Comcast, which owns NBCUniversal, an AT&T-Time Warner entity presented unique challenges. Other entities, he said, made more sense for the always-a-bridesmaid Time Warner. “DirecTV and Time Warner in a lot of ways is more similar than Time Warner and AT&T. It looks like a hedge against the commoditization of infrastructure.” Cash rich telecoms companies like AT&T are facing a crisis as their wireless businesses reach maturity and fixed line income continues to erode. “AT&T is an acquisition machine and interested in empire preservation if nothing else,” said Wieser. “Time Warner has always been for sale at the right price. It’s not a position that creates any synergies, and it does create some dis-synergies, like the problem of managing a global media company from Texas. It’s a standalone entity that gets lost when it’s part of a much bigger conglomerate.””
posted by Fizz (58 comments total) 15 users marked this as a favorite
 
This. This is why it's so very important to remember to hold the flaming torch against the bleeding neck stump for a full count of "five" after cleaving off one of the Hydra's heads.
posted by sexyrobot at 12:44 PM on October 22, 2016 [90 favorites]


professorfarnsworth.gif
posted by rhizome at 12:52 PM on October 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


I feel like I've heard thing song before, like we're on repeat. A big company is required to beak up and it complies with the government regulators who say that it has become too big and that it is crushing the market and competition. Said company waits a certain number of years slowly purchasing smaller companies and growing larger only to merge with another secondary company that is its main form of competition. This draws the attention and ire of the government. Lather, rinse, repeat.
posted by Fizz at 12:53 PM on October 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


Hail hydra!
posted by Behemoth at 12:57 PM on October 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


And please remember that Time Warner Cable and Time Warner Media had un-merged years ago without either changing names. TWC has already merged with Charter Cable and the AT&T deal is to acquire Time Warner, the "content producers" (HBO, Warner Bros. Studio, CNN), like Comcast acquired NBCUniversal. Which is obviously the 'model' for this 'vertical integration'.
posted by oneswellfoop at 1:09 PM on October 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


How fat can a cat actually get, anyway?
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 1:10 PM on October 22, 2016 [7 favorites]


Fat enough to crush us all.
posted by Greg_Ace at 1:13 PM on October 22, 2016 [7 favorites]


Should simply things, about like how all restaurants are Taco Bell.
posted by fifteen schnitzengruben is my limit at 1:13 PM on October 22, 2016 [9 favorites]


AT&T and Time Warner did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

To be fair, they were busy diving naked into their Scrooge McDuck money swimming pool vaults.
posted by Celsius1414 at 1:20 PM on October 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


AT&T is the communications company most closely aligned with the surveillance state.
posted by rhizome at 1:24 PM on October 22, 2016 [7 favorites]


We don't care, we don't have to.
posted by Splunge at 1:25 PM on October 22, 2016 [6 favorites]


This is terrible. So what's the most effective way I have to register my protest? Should I write my congressman? Senator? The FTC?
posted by crazy with stars at 1:27 PM on October 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


FML
posted by mikelieman at 1:38 PM on October 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


The bad news is that AT&T is one of the worst companies in the world, and everything that comes under their umbrella will go immediately to shit.

The good news is that DC Comics can't get any worse.
posted by Faint of Butt at 1:44 PM on October 22, 2016 [16 favorites]


This is terrible. So what's the most effective way I have to register my protest? Should I write my congressman? Senator? The FTC?
Don't communicate at all. That'll show 'em.
posted by adamrice at 1:45 PM on October 22, 2016 [6 favorites]


I don't see how this merger could possibly be approved. The two most evil *cough!* I mean the two biggest internet providers? Anti competitive.
posted by Bee'sWing at 1:47 PM on October 22, 2016


Think of the synergies! THE SYNERGIES!!!!!
posted by blue_beetle at 1:54 PM on October 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Think of the synergies! THE SYNERGIES!!!!!
Network Executive Lady: We at the network want a dog with attitude. He's edgy, he's "in your face." You've heard the expression, "let's get busy"? Well, this is a dog who gets "biz-zay!" Consistently and thoroughly.
Krusty: So he's proactive, huh?
Network Executive Lady: Oh, God, yes. We're talking about a totally outrageous paradigm.
Writer: Excuse me, but "proactive" and "paradigm"? Aren't these just buzzwords that dumb people use to sound important? Not that I'm accusing you of anything like that. [pause] I'm fired, aren't I?
Roger Myers Jr.: Oh, yes.
I absolutely believe that executives sit in big fancy leather chairs in a room with long tables talking like this.
posted by Fizz at 1:59 PM on October 22, 2016 [12 favorites]


The last internet company to buy a media company did so well..

*cough* AOL *cough*

(OK it wasn't the last, fine)
posted by GuyZero at 2:05 PM on October 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


I absolutely believe that executives sit in big fancy leather chairs in a room with long tables talking like this.

They absolutely did when I worked at Gannett.
posted by valkane at 2:07 PM on October 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


I don't see how this merger could possibly be approved. The two most evil *cough!* I mean the two biggest internet providers? Anti competitive.

This proposed merger is between the original Time Warner, not the cable division. Time Warner spun off their cable division (that provides internet service) in 2009. The cable division kept the name Time Warner Cable (TWC) just to confuse everyone.

Speaking of anti-competitive, TWC was purchased by Charter earlier this year. Customers are starting to feel the negative effects of the cable industry consolidation with price hikes, less customer support, and planned upgrades that are now put on hold.
posted by cynical pinnacle at 2:11 PM on October 22, 2016 [6 favorites]


Writer: Excuse me, but "proactive" and "paradigm"? Aren't these just buzzwords that dumb people use to sound important? Not that I'm accusing you of anything like that. [pause] I'm fired, aren't I?
Roger Myers Jr.: Oh, yes.
I absolutely believe that executives sit in big fancy leather chairs in a room with long tables talking like this.

They absolutely did when I worked at Gannett.


It's all street slang for different forms of theft, so anyone listening in doesn't catch on.
posted by ennui.bz at 2:11 PM on October 22, 2016 [8 favorites]


I don't see how this merger could possibly be approved. The two most evil *cough!* I mean the two biggest internet providers? Anti competitive.

Time Warner is not an internet provider. Time Warner Cable is, but it is a separate company that has since been bought out by Charter.
posted by indubitable at 2:14 PM on October 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


Think of the synergies! THE SYNERGIES!!!!!

C'mon people, sell this as TRONC 2.0

New media GOLD
posted by chavenet at 2:16 PM on October 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


So who's even left in the telecom space that hasn't purchased a media conglomerate yet? Is Verizon buying Viacom somewhere on the horizon? Will anyone ever invest anything in an actual telecom network again?
posted by indubitable at 2:17 PM on October 22, 2016


Why exactly did Trump decide to be against this?
posted by dilaudid at 2:24 PM on October 22, 2016


stopped clock effect, dilaudid
posted by infinitewindow at 2:34 PM on October 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


Trump's only against it if he wins, and that's not gonna happen, right?

Right?

Right?
posted by chavenet at 2:36 PM on October 22, 2016


Why exactly did Trump decide to be against this?

I don't want to derail this into an “Election2016” thread. But, I imagine he's making these comments to further position himself as someone who is anti-wallstreet and anti-big business, and anti-government. Despite the fact that he is ALL of these things and has benefited from them in numerous ways (federal tax avoidance laws, bailouts, etc.). It's a way to appeal to his voter base.

Also, if I recall my Civics 101, it would take an act of Congress in order for a merger like this to be broken up by the government. It's not something that a President could simply snap his/her fingers for and make happen. No matter that Trump seems to think that he can make things happen by snapping his fingers and making an angry upset face.
posted by Fizz at 2:45 PM on October 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


Fizz, anti-trust decisions are made by bureaucrats who report to agencies directly (DOJ) or indirectly (FCC, FTC) controlled by the White House, but aren't supposed to be politically influenced and can be taken to the courts. Trump making blocking the merger a campaign platform would actually make the merger more likely to go through because it calls into question the validity of any administrative objection to the merger.

Also, the Comcast - NBCU acquisition provides a clear template for how he deal will go through. It won't be blocked, but AT&T will have to promise not to discriminate against competitors to HBO, Warner Bros., and Turner on its satellite, wireless and wireline news and entertainment distribution systems.
posted by MattD at 3:11 PM on October 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


Thanks MattD, I appreciate that insight.
posted by Fizz at 3:13 PM on October 22, 2016


But... Spectrum just bought TWC? Everything TWC here has been rebranded Spectrum already, and certain services have already changed.

I'd cut the cord completely but TWC/Spectrum is literally the only ISP that serves my neighborhood and I don't get UVerse so this is all very confusing.
posted by Room 641-A at 3:30 PM on October 22, 2016


I meant to quote this, from above:

Time Warner is not an internet provider. Time Warner Cable is, but it is a separate company that has since been bought out by Charter.
posted by Room 641-A at 3:32 PM on October 22, 2016


:-/

Well, it's better than Comcast.

Not by much, mind, but I didn't leave Kabletown just to end up back in Kabletown.
posted by SansPoint at 3:32 PM on October 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


People, agar.io is not for LARPing.
posted by The otter lady at 4:02 PM on October 22, 2016


I look forward to seeing what TWATT has to offer!
posted by srboisvert at 4:19 PM on October 22, 2016 [25 favorites]


Is this what they mean by "October Surprise"?
posted by yoga at 4:19 PM on October 22, 2016


Donald Trump Says He Would Block An AT&T-Time Warner Merger If Elected [Los Angeles Times]

Proving even a stopped watch is right now and then.
posted by entropicamericana at 4:40 PM on October 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


But... Spectrum just bought TWC? Everything TWC here has been rebranded Spectrum already, and certain services have already changed.

I'd cut the cord completely but TWC/Spectrum is literally the only ISP that serves my neighborhood and I don't get UVerse so this is all very confusing.


Spectrum is the brand name Charter uses for its service offerings. Just like:

Company: AT&T. Service Brand Name: U-Verse
Company: Comcast. Service Brand Name: Xfinity

Why the companies feel a need to brand their services under a separate name, I don't know.
posted by cynical pinnacle at 4:45 PM on October 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


Why the companies feel a need to brand their services under a separate name, I don't know.

Because plenty of people dislike the AT&T and Comcast brand. Rebranding is a strategy that frequently works for large companies like this. It also gives the illusion of a more diverse and competitive market, when in fact, the money is all going to the same place.
posted by Fizz at 4:49 PM on October 22, 2016 [9 favorites]


We call this "The Blackwater XE Services Academi Maneuver."
posted by entropicamericana at 4:52 PM on October 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


I mean, say what you will about Pinkerton, but at least they've had the balls to own the whole "yeah, we're hired thugs for monied interests" thing since 1850.
posted by entropicamericana at 4:55 PM on October 22, 2016 [7 favorites]


the ARPU for Vodafone in Germany is about $16 per month, the ARPU for ATT in the US is $39 dollars.

that's what monopoly (oligopoly) economics looks like when you get down to the numbers...
posted by ennui.bz at 5:02 PM on October 22, 2016


Spectrum is the brand name Charter uses for its service offerings.

Oh, okay, so we're Charter now. That's hilarious, because I was talking to the cable guy about it (he was here due to problems with the switchover) and he told me that Spectrum was a little guy who was just trying to be a bigger guy by buying TWC. Adorable! I assume whoever it is will continue to provide me with internet service, or ATT will force me to use their service, and either way I will have no choice in the matter.
posted by Room 641-A at 5:14 PM on October 22, 2016


I feel like I've heard thing song before, like we're on repeat. A big company is required to beak up and it complies with the government regulators who say that it has become too big and that it is crushing the market and competition.

Microsoft's shares at at their all-time height, now that they're no longer a monopoly and are forced to offer goods and services that compete on merit and offer actual value to the customer.

I still wouldn't buy any of their greasy shit product, but having that choice is nice, and makes the company worth more.
posted by Slap*Happy at 5:15 PM on October 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


This is terrible. So what's the most effective way I have to register my protest? Should I write my congressman? Senator? The FTC?

Write a check to your Senator.
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 5:26 PM on October 22, 2016 [8 favorites]


Microsoft's shares at at their all-time height, now that they're no longer a monopoly and are forced to offer goods and services that compete on merit and offer actual value to the customer.

MS still has 90% market share. that's a monopoly and it's "cloud" offerings would be precisely nowhere without it's extensive sales relationship with big business driven by that monopoly, not to mention the ability to throw billions into building their cloud. but then your choices in the "cloud" are what, amazon, google, oracle, and ms? each with their own tidy monopolies...
posted by ennui.bz at 5:47 PM on October 22, 2016


( the failure of the Clinton administration to break up Microsoft meant that all of the business practices that MS pioneered became industry standard, the over capitalization of, say, Google is built on the assumption that Google will be able either buy its way into any market or destroy any threat it can't buy... because it has so much capital, much as Microsoft did in the first generation of PC software.)
posted by ennui.bz at 5:50 PM on October 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Here are a list of states in the union whose GDP is less than $80b:

Hawaii 79,595
New Hampshire 71,632
West Virginia 71,123
Delaware 66,150
Idaho 65,202
Rhode Island 56,323
Maine 55,137
Alaska 54,256
North Dakota 53,686
Montana 45,799
South Dakota 45,415
Wyoming 40,170
Vermont 29,750

posted by rebent at 5:54 PM on October 22, 2016 [4 favorites]




This proposed merger is between the original Time Warner, not the cable division.

"Cord-cutting" is the shift afoot. Competing with LeEco(LeTv) is the term of scale. Platform is everything.
posted by lazycomputerkids at 7:06 PM on October 22, 2016


This is terrible. So what's the most effective way I have to register my protest? Should I write my congressman? Senator? The FTC?

All of the above. Not like it will matter. Something like this puts us little people in our place. Our place is under the floating cities of the wealthy. In their shadow. Sifting through their shit. *

*Larry Niven reference, for those that care.
posted by Splunge at 7:07 PM on October 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


It is also worth noting that "Time Warner" also spun off "Time Inc." two years ago, so there won't be self-reporting in Time, Fortune, Entertainment Weekly or even People. But they kept the DC Comics publishing division, including MAD Magazine. I think they have a large archive of Phone Company parodies they'll need to shred.

The "un-mergers" are as confusing as the mergers. When Rupert Murdoch split News Corp. and Fox (with him still controlling owner of both), everybody was confused which way "Fox News" would go (it's safely in the "entertainment" company now, OBVIOUSLY).
posted by oneswellfoop at 7:18 PM on October 22, 2016 [1 favorite]




*I mean, say what you will about Pinkerton...*

After another week of waiting-to-be-flying, I'd like to say I'd happily have them back doing airport security, anyway.
posted by rokusan at 1:02 PM on October 23, 2016


Donald Trump Says He Would Block An AT&T-Time Warner Merger If Elected [Los Angeles Times]

“Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump said Saturday that his administration would seek to block a massive media merger between AT&T and Time Warner Inc. if he is elected president. At a speech in Gettysburg, Pa., outlining his priorities for his first 100 days in office, Trump warned that buying Time Warner would give AT&T “too much concentration of power.” “We’ll look at breaking this deal up,” he said.”


While also calling for a hiring freeze on the very people who'll be doing the work to evaluate this deal, who are already occupied with two giant health insurance merger suits.

This is terrible. So what's the most effective way I have to register my protest? Should I write my congressman? Senator? The FTC?


Write and call your representatives. Contact the DOJ Antitrust Division and FCC - they have hotlines and (I believe) ways to contact by mail. (Although if this goes to court, your letter may become public record.) I know it doesn't feel this way often (maybe ever) but the government is made of people and a lot of them care about consumers and about what you have to say. There are even still some regulators left in the agencies from the AT&T breakup days ("Reach out and touch crush someone.")
posted by sallybrown at 1:52 PM on October 23, 2016






« Older Delicious in any language   |   "an approach to the technique the Homeric singers... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments