Four weeks ago, we got the bad news: AT&T will acquire T-Mobile USA for $39B. An already bad carrier will get worse by gobbling a competitor, thus gaining more pricing power and reducing competitive pressure. Higher prices, lower service levels. The transaction leads us into a de facto oligopoly: AT&T and Verizon. (From the Wikipedia article just linked to: “Oligopolies are price setters rather than price takers.”)
Am I forgetting Sprint and other carriers such as Metro PCS and Leap?
Not at all. They’re merely too small to matter. They don’t have enough money for spectrum purchases and infrastructure build-up. Today, they don’t prosper, they merely survive. Tomorrow, with higher prices dictated by the two Big Guys, they’ll be thrilled to get a little bit of breathing room in exchange for their presence as token competitors on PowerPoint presentations to the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division.
Speaking of slides, feast your eyes on AT&T’s merger pitch at a special site, MobilizeEverything. You’ll see the “fiercely competitive landscape” and the gigantic increase in data volume: 8,000% since 2007.
No mention of the iPhone. Surely an innocent omission.
Coincidentally, “Mobilize Everything” is the title of an interview with AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson in the Brunswick Review, a PR mouthpiece. The interview, focused on “Strategy, Technology And Trust”, treats us to a collection of corpospeak platitudes such as:
“Leaders are people who get things done, and that takes courage…And above all, leaders never miss in terms of integrity.”
Very reassuring for this AT&T customer whose calls in the middle of the Palo Alto desert get disconnected several times a day.
Unsurprisingly, reactions to the projected acquisition have been negative. The overall sentiment is “everybody loses”. Well, not everybody: Wall Street sees the opportunity for more pricing power and cheerfully granted “T” (a single-letter stock symbol signals that you’re genuine Blue Blood) a 10% bump since the announcement.
Politicians, various government agencies, and the competition are jumping on the posturing opportunity. Sprint, with their expression of concern, is probably angling for concessions that will facilitate “regulatory approval.”
This is a farce. Compared to developed–and not-so-developed–nations, we have a terrible wireless infrastructure. Go to Europe, Japan, Korea, parts of China, and weep. With less competition, what incentive will AT&T have to improve coverage and service? Instead, AT&T will continue to milk its customers, parade its record $100 monthly ARPU for the iPhone…and continue to be the butt of jokes for its legendary bad service.
The regulatory review will unfold as an elaborate Kabuki script that will culminate in a pre-ordained approval. There will be congressional hearings, protests, and much handwringing but, in the end, we’ll hear sonorous but toothless concessions. AT&T is a company with deep knowledge of legislative and regulatory processes. In plain English: They know how to buy votes. Surely, they didn’t propose the acquisition without assurances it would go through, albeit at a (small) price, such as shedding assets or assuming new compliance obligations.
End of story? Not quite.
Let’s consider the 8,000% data volume increase and the unmentionable smartphone (which AT&T prudishly calls an “emerging device”, a moniker that reminds us of IBM’s cautious use of the Entry Systems label before lifting the fig-leaf and calling a PC a PC).
What has happened with the Jesus Phone and its ilk is disintermediation. For AT&T, the nightmare epiphany is this: Steve Jobs inaugurated the era of carriers as dumb pipes or, if you prefer, of OTT (Over The Top) services. An OTT example is a VOIP data link connection that “robs” billable minutes from the calling plan, or iTunes sales and delivery through the wireless data pipe (as opposed to Verizon’s own carrier-grade–a euphemism for ugly–V Cast content platform).
AT&T has seen its future as a disintermediated ISP that will have no dog in the services and content game…and it decided it had to act accordingly.
But how?
By becoming a regulated utility, like the old Ma Bell. The “obscene” acquisition proposal forces the issue: reduced competition triggers regulatory intervention, leading to a large utility with enough critical mass to provide everyone the now indispensable wireless Internet access. The political window dressers will use other phrases, but the result will be the same: back to the days of AT&T as a regulated public utility.
Am I going too far? Perhaps.
But consider Vodafone, the world’s largest wireless conglomerate. As you’ll see in this Seeking Alpha piece, Vodafone just announced the $11.4B sale of its 44% stake in SFR, a French cellular carrier. This follows its $5B divestiture of Softbank holdings in Japan, and a similar $7B sale of its China Mobile stake. Vodafone currently owns 45% of Verizon. It’s unhappy with that situation but, apparently, it’s unable to find a way out.
With the smartphone revolution just beginning, why would Vodafone run away from its stakes in promising markets in Asia and Western Europe? You know the answer: disintermediation, dumb pipes.
In the US, AT&T is its own majority owner. It can increase its footprint by acquiring T-Mobile and then negotiate its transformation back into a public utility by another name. Vodafone’s minority participation in multiple carriers around the world offers no such position of strength.
Same future, different levers.
Related columns:
- Mobile Payments TweetLast week’s note on Apple licensing generated a good flow of comments, all appreciated. I’ll respond, but not before we get Apple earnings and the putative Jesus Tablet out of the way. I’ll approach today’s topic, mobile payments, using an Apple Store moment. Some cables keep disappearing. In particular, the ones that connect MacBooks of [...]...
- Mobile World Clusterf#^k TweetIt happens all the time: when CEOs don’t know what to do, they create a strategic alliance. Alone, they’re exposed. As a group, they must be doing something right because everyone else in the herd does it too. In the early nineties, my friend Denise Caruso, a NYT columnist and editor of the Digital Media [...]...
- Mobile + Cloud + Social TweetThese are the three interdependent forces that power the biggest wave of growth, change, and destruction I’ve seen since I have been allowed to take part in the high-tech industry. In the beginning (or mine, anyway), back in 1968 when I was, miraculously, offered a salary to be part of HP France there was the [...]...
- Mobile Advertising:
The $20B Opportunity Mirage TweetThere are a lot of questions left to be answered about Facebook’s IPO fiasco, but one thing we know is this: As consumers shift their use of Facebook from PCs to smartphones, investors worry about lower mobile advertising revenues. Is this a temporary situation that will be remedied when usage patterns settle, or do investors [...]...
6 Comments
“Compared to developed–and not-so-developed–nations, we have a terrible wireless infrastructure. Go to Europe, Japan, Korea, parts of China, and weep.”
Yes, note the qualifier “parts of China”. Some parts of the US are damn good too, namely cities. The other nations? Well, they are a lot smaller and a lot more dense. Surely the reason why US has a terrible wireless infrastructure has something to do with its size and lack of density.
How do you propose getting cellphone access to rural Americans? Unless there’s a satisfying answer, AT&T’s got a good bargaining chip for getting federal approval.
accurate assessment. at&t is one of the worst companies in america. doj and fcc need to prevent this merger for the sake of the american consumer.
2 comments.
First, to @Jonas, my experience (most recently 2+ years ago) was that I got at least 3 honest-to-God bars every time I powered up my GSM phone in China. Most of that trip was to rural and even desert areas (e.g., Xinjiang Province, which borders Mongolia & Tibet). Admittedly, I stopped largely at tourist areas but much of our trip was truly remote (a mountain village where small solar panels were the only electricity) and I mostly looked just to pinch myself. As an investment type, I acknowledge this coverage might represent over-investment, but don’t kid yourself about decent coverage requiring high, European-style density. (Otherwise, PA would have fine coverage for @JLG.)
Second, @JLG: Commissioner Genachowski, I believe, clearly delineated how the FCC spectrum auction can be gamed by incumbents to protect their positions, and others have claimed that is exactly what they have done. I personally believe that the format of the auction helps lock in the high-cost / low-quality situation you rightly bemoan. Does your creativity extend to a way that we can get out of this trap?
Happened in Canada in 2005, when Rogers bought the company operating under the Fido brand. Fido was the T-Mobile of Canada. Together they were the only GSM operators in the country. They were required to keep the brand and a distinct service, but not much more. Offerings got blended. And the two other, Bell and Telus, where more than happy of that.
The new guys are appearing on the market, but their coverage is limited. A bit like Metro PCS & Co.
So T-Mobile being bought by AT&T, US of America are gonna suffer the same hell.
thanks for sharing.I enjoy it.
I just stumbled upon your web blog and found it awesome. Thanks for this useful stuff.
One Trackback
[...] -Monday Note, April 17, 2011 Share this:EmailFacebookStumbleUpon Filed under: link Leave a comment Comments (0) Trackbacks (0) ( subscribe to comments on this post ) [...]