AT&T Responds to Sprint Lawsuit

Or just let the government control everything.


Is everyone here to blind to see that government control over the last 50 years has completely destroyed our economy????

GO AT&T!

"If at first you don't succeed, sue the competition!"

Sad, just sad. Sprint is pathetic. All they care about is their own agenda and are no better than AT&T, Verizon or any other telecommunications company. By this reckoning should HP sue Google because they compete with Android? Should BMW sue Honda? Sue sue sue! Sounds like a bunch of greedy jews. Oh wait a minute!

Anyway Sprint is being anti-competitive. If they want more of the pie they need to improve their services. They can start by making better business decisions and stop abandoning technologies. They need to learn how to operate a business.

There's a reason why Verizon and AT&T have 100 million subs and Sprint has far less. That's because Sprint more or less sucks. Bitt...
(continues)

Either Sprint is lying about the effect that the AT&T and T-Mobile merger will have on the public, or Dan Hess is a complete lunatic who has no idea how the markets work. Either way, it doesn't look good on sprint.

If the acquisition would lead to increased prices and lower quality products as the justice department has claimed, Sprint would be better off after the acquisition.

Sprint would be able to add subscribers, not lose them, because of AT&T's higher prices and lower quality.

If you think about it, Sprint should only oppose the acquisition-as it has- if it thought that the merger would put it in a worse position by increasing the competitive pressures that it already face.

some people dont mind paying a little more for better coverage (able to access att + tmobile towers!) just like buying a Mercedes, some people only want the best! 🙂
if you cant afford a Mercedes, get a cheaper car!
just like wireless, if you dont want better coverage, get sprint! they will need to lower their prices to compete!

"We of course will vigorously contest this matter in court as AT&T’s merger with T-Mobile USA will: help solve our nation's spectrum exhaust situation and improve wireless service for millions;"

-How do they see "the nation" gaining more spectrum by them buying up an existing competitor along with said competitor's existing spectrum??

Assuming of course, that by "spectrum exhaust situation" they mean that the nation is running out of useable spectrum, buying TMO will import spectrum from DT/Europe, or another planet, or... what?? I think my logic is sound, but I would love for someone to clarify this if im just being stupid.

I'm anti merger for the record.
Is this a Win Win situation for ATT? I look at this way, Merger goes through they get what they want. The Merger doesn't go through (minus the already decrease in business) With all the negative attention toward the merger the increase of customer loss (I would assume doubled and if/When the merger fails it will triple) Tmobile drops out all together. ATT still knocks another competitor out the door. Just a thought. If the merger fails, How will Tmobile ever recover Even w/ a 6 Billion dollar Cancellation fee.

---' AT&T said, "This simply demonstrates what we’ve said all along – Sprint is more interested in protecting itself than it is in promoting competition that benefits consumers."---

So in other words AT&T, by saying Sprint is interested in protecting itself, you are actually admitting that there is reason to believe an anti-competitive process is being planned on your part? Contrary to your further statement, this would also elevate Sprint's argument to preserve itself as a competitor for consumers to choose and benefit from. Exactly what you claim they should be doing.

John B.

In At&t's argument for the merger, they are claiming that this will be good for competition and create jobs. LMFAO the opposite of both those are probably true. wow.