DOJ Intervention Makes for Strange Bedfellows
Betsy Woodruff ·
September 1, 2011 at 10:12pm
The DOJ's movement to block AT&T and T-Mobile's merger seems to have allied some unlikely groups: organized labor and conservative free-market advocates.
True, they support it on different grounds –– the Hill reports that the Comminucations Workers of America want the merger because T-Mobile's unorganized employees would be assimilated into AT&T's union –– but the simple fact that CWA and Crossroads GPS agree on anything at all should be the day's feel-good story; nothing like anti-market meddling to help us come together and forget our differences.
- Comment (10)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments:
Feb '10
Re: DOJ Intervention Makes for Strange Bedfellows
As a T-Mobile customer I'm very much against the merger. My plan was cheaper, more flexible and better than any AT&T or Verizon were offering. And the T-Mobile customer service beats that of the other major wireless carriers.
Competition is best for innovation and for the consumer. This is a very conservative principle.
I'm suspicious of astroturf organizations like Crossroads GPS. I'm suspicious of big government, but also of big business. Power corrupts whether it is in public or private hands.
And as much as anyone tries to counter that "at least in the private sector you can start a competitor to any of these big businesses," that is not realistic in many cases, particularly where the established businesses use their market dominance to engage in predatory and exclusionary tactics.
If T-Mobile is having trouble making money separately, let them raise their prices a bit. They'd still be competitive. But once they become part of the Death Star the prices are guaranteed to go up, and not just by a bit.
Edited on September 1, 2011 at 11:08pmRe: DOJ Intervention Makes for Strange Bedfellows
I agree -- still, there's something disquieting about organized labor and free-market conservatives agreeing on anything.
I mean, there are two ways to look at it: 1) if these guys agree, it's probably a good thing; and 2) if these guys agree, it's probably the worst thing ever.
I lean to #1. But part of me is nervous about the possibility of #2.
Aug '11
Re: DOJ Intervention Makes for Strange Bedfellows
Does the usage, by these businesses, of licensed public spectra and infrastructure, or their size, not take any of the bite out of the argument against government interference in the market?
I personally have great interest in T-mobile remaining a successful and independent company, and as open a 'shop' as possible in the mobile-carrier sector, but I also prefer as strong a push as possible against government involvement in the economy.
So, I guess I'm torn.
Edited on September 1, 2011 at 11:26pmMar '11
Re: DOJ Intervention Makes for Strange Bedfellows
I do believe this is the only action the administration's DOJ has engaged in which I can support. midnightgolfer's concerns are well merited however this is the one situation where government involvement is merited and thus of course where its' power is least exercised, preventing the formation of monopolies.
Re: DOJ Intervention Makes for Strange Bedfellows
Another important detail, though, is that T-Mobile isn't successful in the US; Slate says its owner, Deutsche Telekom, is exiting the US market because the company is doing so poorly. And it hasn't turned a profit in the last 11 years.
I'm all for free markets and competition, but that means that some businesses won't make it. And as Slate argues, that's good for consumers in the long run.
Edited on September 1, 2011 at 11:44pmSep '10
Re: DOJ Intervention Makes for Strange Bedfellows
"Free Market" conservatives don't really have a strong argument on this issue. This is one legitimate role for the federal government - FTC/DOJ review of huge mergers, especially in a such a limited market.
I'm also a T-Mobile customer and the prospect of AT&T owning my cell phone contract filled me with horror.
Dec '10
Re: DOJ Intervention Makes for Strange Bedfellows
Wow, am I ambivalent about this.
For example, why would the CWA think they are going to organize the T-Mobile emloyees? I'm with Verizon, where the wireless side is non-union, whereas the dinosaur side is CWA.
Separately, I find the article incoherent. It even states that Obama, "...has filled top positions within the White House with business-savvy advisers and has made great pains to highlight ways he wants to work with businesses, not against them."
What? This article did nothing, for me. I was once a T-Mobile customer and I chose to switch. Betsy says they were going away, apparently, anyway.
So, losing T-Mobile was apparently in the works, without the merger?
Oct '10
Re: DOJ Intervention Makes for Strange Bedfellows
I'm all for antitrust enforcement; the days of Microsoft hegemony were absolutely horrible. Why does Crossroads GPS claim that one of the companies is a "foreign competitor?" Aren't they both based in America?
Adam Smith made a fairly clear case for anti-monopoly policies, and I've never understood why some allegedly pro-free-market people are against them. All economic theories--from Keynes to Smith--agree that competitive markets are absolutely vital to a functional free marketplace.
Edited on September 2, 2011 at 12:46amNov '10
Re: DOJ Intervention Makes for Strange Bedfellows
What many of you who favor government intervention here are failing to take into account is that this is not a market where vicious monopolies (i.e. ones that result in price gouging) can survive for any considerable length of time. If a market only has one or two companies providing a product (and those companies aren't engaging in illegal anticompetitive practices), it's usually because nobody else thinks they can provide a similar product at a better price. That means consumers are already getting the best deal possible. Blocking this merger doesn't do anything good for the consumer; it just impedes the economies of scale that would allow the providers to offer lower prices.
Feb '11
Re: DOJ Intervention Makes for Strange Bedfellows
Busy System Admin: As a T-Mobile customer I'm very much against the merger. My plan was cheaper, more flexible and better than any AT&T or Verizon were offering. And the T-Mobile customer service beats that of the other major wireless carriers. · Sep 1 at 1:43pm
Edited on Sep 01 at 02:08 pm
Ditto. The only way I would support this is if T-Mobile buys AT&T.