Comcast, AT&T Broadband Merger Official
from the now,-explain-to-me-how-this-is-different-from-EchoStar,-DirecTV dept
Okay, maybe I'm a little bit slow on this one, but now that the AT&T Broadband, Comcast merger has been approved by the FCC, I'm curious as to how that deal is any different than EchoStar's attempt to buy DirecTV? The FCC says that the "harm" will be negligible, and the increased scale will let them roll out services faster. Wouldn't the same be true of a combined EchoStar/DirecTV? The reasoning on killing the EchoStar/DirecTV deal was that it would create a monopoly in satellite TV. Well, now there's a monopoly in cable access. Of course, I think that the two sides (cable and satellite) clearly compete against each other, so there really isn't a monopoly issue. I'm just wondering why the FCC is being inconsistent?
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
Different the the Satellite Merger by Jeff on Nov 13th, 2002 @ 9:01pm
This is much different the the Satellite DirectTV/EchoStar deal, there are VERY few markets Comcast and ATT even competed, and there are much more cable companies out there. THe EchoStar/DirectTV deal pretty much sealed a monopoly on the Satellite Market, as there were so few other companies that it was pointless, so this is much different. As it actually doesn't change alot since they didn't really compete in the first place.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment