Source: Tom's Guide US | Keywords: AT&T, Antitrust, Exclusive, Carrier, doj | Themes: Smartphones, Business, 3GSM
AT&T has hit back against the recently reported antitrust investigation into exclusive deals between wireless carriers and mobile phone manufacturers.
Reuters today reports that AT&T called claims that there is a lack of competition in the wireless industry unfounded, with senior executive vice president James Cicconi quoted as saying, "U.S. wireless prices are much lower than in any other major industrialized country."
Cicconi went on to say that texting prices had fallen because of package deals, "dropping almost 70 percent since January 2007," and argued that exclusive agreements between cell phone makes and wireless networks allow for both companies involved to split the marketing costs of “inventive but unproven” devices.
The comments follow news reports that the Department of Justice is looking into exclusive deals between carriers and manufacturers. First brought to light by several United States Senators who sent a letter to Michael Copps, acting chairman of the FCC requesting a probe, the FCC has since said it will investigate the industry’s practices. Sources told the Wall Street Journal earlier this week that the DOJ’s review is in its very early stages and is not yet a formal probe of any specific company.
-
Previous News Article
Tivo and Best Buy Join Forces -
Next News Article
More Cyber Attacks Hit Today
AT&T defending this is like the KKK defending white America.
@ dman3k Awefully crass statement but not an entirely unfounded analogy.
I won't argue that att's statement is false or not, but there is damaged done conversly by lack of choice. How many iphone users are stuck with att despite their complete hatred for the carrier and how many others are waiting for exclusive phones to come to their area/carrier. I think its usually best to err on the side of consumer choice.
att - "we do not wish to risk any amount of money in the process of extorting our customer base to it's fullest!"
while i don't quite believe there exist an antitrust in this situation, it most certainly is the case that neither of these 'businesses' wants to risk anything. sure, it's legal for them to do it but it doesn't work out well for the consumer.
I think this just started because people that don't want AT&T want to use the iPhone already. The iPhone is just too popular. Hopefully other phones like the Palm Pre can stand up against the iPhone to fix that problem.
AT&T defending this is like the KKK defending white America.
That's really classy there...
Bottom line is we do have much more affordable cell service than other areas of the world including Europe. Try taking my 450 minute plan at $39.99 /month and get it for that in Europe, hint, it's not gonna happen. Assuming I spend half of my minutes calling cell lines and the other half calling land lines I'd rack of a bill in exces of $54 each month... and honestly, who actually calls landlines.
I'm not a big AT&T fan, but I'm tired of people bashing something they don't understand just so because they want the shiney new iPhone on Verizon (which wouldn't even apply with this case.) At most Apple would have to sell their phone with T-Mobile as well.
Maybe verison and spirt should have thought of the iphone popularity before at&t and apple cut a deal =p how is exclusive rights to things like this anti trust it happens all the time in a multiple of businesses esp in tech industries.
That is the exact same plan I have, but I get a vendor discount working for a company that manages their cell site technology. But, comparing to Europe, of course it's more expensive over there. Also, they are always on the bleeding edge of the latest cellular (G) technology. But why so expensive in Europe? Look at the spectrum license fees in some countries over there and how those licenses are allocated out (they're auctioned).
Maybe they have a problem with price fixing between companies, not individual phone-carrier deals. For example- every cellular company charges outrageous amounts for text messages - I saw a figure once where downloading an MP3 at text message rates would cost you $5600. Doesn't it seem fishy that none of the carriers offers texting at a reasonable rate in order to gain a competitive edge?
there should be a probe alright... the kind we customers get in the rear end every time we get screwed by the corp.
"...and argued that exclusive agreements between cell phone makes and wireless networks allow for both companies involved to split the marketing costs of “inventive but unproven” devices."
Yeah...inventive and unproven devices...that have already sold millions of units in asia and europe months BEFORE THEY EVER see the light of day in the US due to the stifling effect of these very same carrier locking and exclusivity agreements p
This idiot outright lies, then contradicts himself with his own lie. Stunning.
In our country we can get unlimited call and text plans for only $7. And then we get unlimited 3G access at $0.20 per hour. Considering that, I don't think US carrier plans are cheap.
isat
LOL!!! They are bringing up texting costs? texting actually cost less BEFORE it got popular. Why? Cause the cell towers handle texts (SMS not MMS) as tower to tower communications packets and it costs nothing extra to implement (aside from tracking amounts to bill). The reason for the 'drop' in price was because there wasn't an unlimited texting bundle, which is I guess what they are comparing it to.
In other countries such as Japan and some in Europe charging extra for texting is unheard of.
In our country we can get unlimited call and text plans for only $7. And then we get unlimited 3G access at $0.20 per hour. Considering that, I don't think US carrier plans are cheap.
What country is that?
And AT&T is out of their minds. SMS should be FREE because it costs the providers absolutely nothing to provide it. Our economy is going to consume itself...
Yet another reason why ATT is not my carrier of choice.
It is like me wanting to play God od War 3, but not wanting to buy a PS3 to do it and then charging Sony with and anti-trust suit. Sure the Iphone is not an AT&T product, but they do have a contract with Apple. As long as AT&T and Apple have a contract they should be allowed to honor it.
As bad as I despise AT&T, these charges are ludacrous. this all started when some senator decided he wanted an iphone but would have to change carriers to obtain it. Last I checked North Korea was getting nukes, Irag is still a shit hole, and the taliban is stil in Afghanistan, not to mention the economy. I don't see how this helps any of those issues. I'm sad to admit that one of the senators from my state is on that committee.
AT&T in a trust, oh my god, so surprising...
AT&T defending this is like the KKK defending white America.
LOL!!! YES, Exactly!
Why don't they just open phones with similar technology to ALL Networks...
Seriously. Right now, companies have to make a new phone for practically every network. If they opened it up, they could allocate more funds towards fewer, better phones. AND, we wouldn't have a little dilemma about losing our cool new phone because AT&T sucks @$$.
I feel sorry for people who are so childish as to waste their lives "hating" a cell phone service provider. I prefer AT&T where I live, but I don't "hate" the others. I'm glad AT&T got the iphone - I love mine - but I could live without it and so can you. There is plenty of competition. No one has a God given right to have the particular phone they want on the particular system they want. The iphone is only compatible with AT&T and Tmobile anyway, and AT&T probably has the better system in more areas. I wonder how many people are basing their negative opinions of AT&T on the old AT&T before SWB acquired them and shut them down. Most of you are giving examples of how AT&T service sucked years ago. Your opinion is no longer relevant. Things change. Wake up. I've carried an AT&T phone all over the country and, for the most part, it has worked very well. I've had more limited experience with a Verizon phone, but, for the most part, it has worked pretty well. None of them are perfect anywhere. If you expect perfection from a cell phone, well, you are going to be sorely disappointed. And your unrealistic opinion is not really helpful.