Additional Telecom Merger Coverage/Reaction

* FCC Approves Verizon, SBC Mergers
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Arshad Mohammed]
By allowing the deals to go through, the commission is essentially closing the books on a decade-long regulatory experiment that tried to pit local and long-distance companies against each other. Instead, the commissioners are betting on a new world of competition from wireless, cable and Internet-based providers that analysts said may take years to emerge as real contenders. "The analysis here is much more about where the market is going than about where the market is," said Legg Mason Wood Walker Inc. telecom analyst Blair Levin. "If you look at markets in long-distance and local service, traditional antitrust analysis would be very troubled by this. If you look at what the opportunities are, what the potential is, there is greater justification for this," he said. While growing fast, VOIP and cable are not yet major players. "These conditions are not nearly enough," said Mark Cooper, the Consumer Federation of America's research director. "Chairman Martin's failure to agree to meaningful protections against pricing abuse means competitors can be squeezed out of the market and consumers face price increases."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/31/AR200510...
(requires registration)

* Telecom mergers get FCC's blessing
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/money/20051101/2b_telecoms01.art.htm

* Telecom megamergers get final federal OK
[SOURCE: C-Net|News.com, AUTHOR: Marguerite Reardon]
http://news.com.com/Telecom+megamergers+get+final+federal+OK/2100-1037_3...

* FCC Approves Verizon-MCI Pact And SBC's Purchase of AT&T
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Amy Schatz Amy.Schatz@wsj.com]
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB113078698450984422.html?mod=todays_us_pa...
(requires subscription)

* FCC Imposes Naked DSL on SBC, Verizon
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6279914.html?display=Breaking+News
(requires subscription)

* FCC Chairman Martin: "Let me say that I do not believe that all of the conditions imposed today are necessary. I believe that the affected markets would remain vibrantly competitive absent these conditions. Nevertheless, the parties involved have chosen to make these commitments now in order to obtain the certainty of immediate Commission approval for their mergers. I understand their desire to move forward, and agree that the public interest will be well served by providing certainty sooner rather than later."
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-261936A2.doc

* Commissioner Abernathy: "As approved...I fear that many of these potential gains will be delayed or compromised. In my judgment, the conditions included in the Orders before us require the merged companies to provide offerings that the market might not demand, to sacrifice synergies by needlessly treating their affiliates at arms' length, and to maintain business relationships based on current assumptions even if those assumptions cease to reflect economic reality. Moreover, the companies will have to abide by these conditions while their most aggressive competitors -- whether they use wireline, wireless, cable, or other, next-generation facilities -- remain exempt."
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-261936A3.doc

* Commissioner Copps: "If you seek the reason why we haven't arrived at that happy valley of competition rife with consumer benefits, you can start with the misdirected policies of the FCC over the last several years. On too many fronts, the Commission put the spear to the pro-competitive policies of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. It put intra-modal competition for the residential market pretty much beyond reach for new entrant carriers and then proceeded to inhibit enterprise competition, too. We turned our eyes away when enforcement was needed to keep bottleneck facilities open. And all the while we kept singing confidently "Don't Worry, Be Happy"-inter-modal competition is going to save us with all its new options. Maybe, but then again maybe not-we're still waiting. I think we ought to be concerned. Thanks in part to our actions, the wireline market became increasingly the province of the few. More than half of the wireless market came under the control of incumbent wireline providers. New services like VoIP have been held back by the high cost of broadband in this country. And now the Internet backbone seems headed in the same direction of control by a favored few. This state of affairs is not of my making or choosing. The record shows that I objected vociferously to many of these changes. I would have chosen a very different path than the one we travel today. But in the end, we are charged with considering these mergers in the context of the world that is, not the one that might have been."
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-261936A4.doc

* Commissioner Adelstein: "While I am deeply concerned about the concentration and loss of wireline competition that may occur as a result of these mergers, I concur in these Orders because they each include a minimum set of conditions that tip the balance, albeit narrowly, in favor of approval."
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-261936A5.doc

* Ohio’s utility consumer advocate reacts to federal approval of Telecom Mergers
[SOURCE: Office of the Ohio Consumers’ Counsel press release]
“It is disappointing that the mergers were approved without significant benefits for residential consumers. While some broadband-related conditions advocated by the OCC were included, the FCC missed the opportunity to ensure that consumers receive their fair share of the benefits. Now, it is important for states that have not yet approved the mergers to do everything possible to secure consumer benefits. Since Ohio law requires that the merger promote the public interest, the OCC has proposed conditions to ensure that enough is done on behalf of residential customers. The OCC has asked the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio to ensure price stability, consumer protections and better access to services. From capped local telephone prices to greater access to technology, we hope that additional conditions will be placed on the mergers to help customers.”
http://www.pickocc.org/news/2005/1031v22005.shtml

* Consumer Advocates to FCC: Approval of the Telecom Mergers a Mixed Bag
[SOURCE: Consumers Union press release]
“Given the failure of the Department of Justice to impose any meaningful conditions on the SBC-AT&T and Verizon-MCI mergers last week, and the desire of Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Kevin J. Martin to impose no conditions whatsoever, Commissioners Copps and Adelstein have been forced to carry a heavy burden to protect consumers and preserve the openness of the Internet,” said Mark Cooper, Director of Research at the Consumer Federation of America (CFA). “Approval of these mergers undermines more than 20 years of efforts to introduce competition into the residential local and long distance telecommunications market,” said Gene Kimmelman, senior director of public policy for Consumers Union. “The FCC promises cross-technology competition with Internet phone service on cable and telephone systems, but the Commission has failed to ensure that consumers will receive meaningful choices at fair prices,” Kimmelman added. “Chairman Martin’s failure to agree to meaningful protections against pricing abuse means competitors can be squeezed out of the market and consumers face price increases.” Cooper added. “The short term enforcement of network neutrality, and the absence of similar enforcement mechanisms for other telephone and cable companies, means that Internet service providers and applications developers can be undermined by anticompetitive practices of network owners.” “These conditions are not nearly enough. Even if the Commission were to follow-up vigorously ­ which is unlikely given the Chairman’s opposition to even these minimal conditions ­ Congress will have to step in to restore an open communications network that supports competition, promotes innovation and protects consumers,” Cooper said. “Above all, today’s action underscores how critical it is for Congress to jump in and prohibit any form of discrimination that prevents all consumers from receiving affordable, high-speed Internet from diverse commercial vendors,” Kimmelman said.
http://www.consumersunion.org/pub/core_telecom_and_utilities/002823.html...

* Public Knowledge Statement on FCC Approval of Telecom Mergers
[SOURCE: Public Knowledge press release]
We are pleased that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) was able to persuade SBC and Verizon to follow principles that will allow consumers unlimited accessibility to the Internet. Some consumers, at least in the short run, should benefit by this decision because the conditions of the merger will make the net neutrality principle, among others, enforceable. We are disappointed, however, that the companies are required to follow those principles only for two years, rather than as a permanent condition of the merger. Public Knowledge believes that the relatively short duration of the imposition of those conditions makes it imperative that Congress and other policymakers act to ensure that all consumers, not only the customers of SBC and Verizon, will always have the right to access information, to use applications and to attach equipment of their choice to the network. That policy is one of five that PK has proposed as part of our paper, “Principles for an Open Broadband Future.” The Public Knowledge policies are that the Internet should be: 1. open to competition from any entity, including municipalities; 2. open to the attachment of any equipment the user chooses, as long as it does not harm the technical operation of the broadband network; 3. open and accessible to consumers, application developers, and information service providers and to other networks, without restrictions or degradation, except for law enforcement or for network management purposes; 4. open, available and affordable to all consumers, regardless of income, race, geographic location, or disability; and 5. open to the maximally efficient number of licensed and unlicensed wireless providers.
http://www.publicknowledge.org/pressroom/releases/pressrelease.2005-10-3...

* FCC Commissioners Rubber Stamp Bell Mergers
The following quote can be attributed to Earl Comstock, President and CEO, COMPTEL: "In approving these two mergers the FCC has conflated the public interest with the self-interest of SBC and Verizon. These mergers are a big step toward recreating the old AT&T monopoly that the Reagan Administration courageously dismantled. The FCC's rubber stamp approval comes just days after the Department of Justice acted. The public has had no chance to analyze or comment on whether the Justice Department conditions have even minimal consumer protection value, yet the FCC felt compelled to rush their decision to meet SBC and Verizon's timetable. Taken together, the conditions imposed by the FCC and Justice will not come close to addressing the anti-competitive harms that will be caused by the mergers. The conditions 'won' by the Democratic commissioners are mere fig leafs designed to give the appearance of consumer protection. Today's decision is bad news for American consumers and businesses. The clear result will be higher prices, less innovation, diminished choices, and fewer jobs."
http://www.comptelascent.org/news/recent-news/103105.html