Print 22 comment(s) - last by GotThumbs.. on Mar 24 at 1:12 PM

So far, Florida is the only confirmed state that is helping the DOJ

Comcast already has the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) judging its Time Warner Cable (TWC) acquisition, but it looks like some U.S. states will put the deal under a microscope as well. 
According to Reuters, an unknown number of U.S. states have created an attorneys general group that will help the DOJ assess whether the Comcast-TWC merger complies with antitrust law. 
So far, Florida is the only confirmed state that is helping the DOJ. 
"We are part of a multistate group reviewing the proposed transaction along with the U.S. DOJ (Justice Department) Antitrust Division," said the Florida state attorney general's office.
The states are reportedly more interested in the broadband aspect of the deal rather than cable.

[SOURCE: Fortune]

Comcast agreed to acquire TWC in mid-February of this year for $45.2 billion USD. It's set to be an all-stock transaction, and is expected to be completed by the end of 2014 (after approval by stockholders and regulators, of course).

But the acquisition has been met with strong criticism. Some worry that the merger will result in reduced competition, poor customer service, less innovation and higher prices for customers. These worries stem from analyst predictions that Comcast and TWC's combined company would control about one-third of the U.S. broadband market.  

But TWC CEO Rob Marcus recently said that Comcast and TWC don't directly compete in any markets -- hence, competition would remain unchanged. He also defended the merger from accusations that customers would pay more in the end.

“I find that whole line to be totally ironic given the experience we’ve all had over the last dozen years, where (programming) costs have risen faster than the cost customers will bear," said Marcus.

He added that Comcast and TWC is a "dream combination."

Source: Reuters

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

I cut the cord a while ago...
By MrBlastman on 3/19/2014 12:57:42 PM , Rating: 5
The only thing I'm worried about is if my internet costs go up. With this merger, they are sure to figure out a way to squeeze more money out of me. It isn't good for anyone.

Oh, and I don't miss cable television at all.

RE: I cut the cord a while ago...
By JediJeb on 3/19/2014 1:57:49 PM , Rating: 2
I haven't had cable for several years, and if I could get the few shows I watch on SyFy, History and Discovery channel I would be getting rid of my DirecTV also. What really stinks is that you have to take at least the second tier programming to get that combination of channels. If only some company could broadcast those over the air it would be wonderful :), just hook up an antenna and go like for the local channels. Or maybe they should work deals with the local stations to carry programming on their extra channels (like 3.x 3.Y ect).

RE: I cut the cord a while ago...
By FITCamaro on 3/19/2014 2:55:33 PM , Rating: 2
You could always buy the episodes on Amazon or some other store.

RE: I cut the cord a while ago...
By MrBlastman on 3/19/2014 8:28:05 PM , Rating: 2
I have Netflix. They are adequate enough considering how little television I watch, which amounts to about a half hour a day or less. The last few weeks the only thing I have watched much of is Cosmos. Basically if it isn't science programming (or good science fiction), I don't really care. :)

RE: I cut the cord a while ago...
By mmatis on 3/20/2014 8:59:56 AM , Rating: 2
What's "television"? Is that the silly monitor that some folks have in their living rooms, with raunchy clowns gyrating to music? And "journalists" telling us how great the economy is doing?

Got rid of mine when they went digital. I didn't see anything on there worth $40, even if SOMEBODY ELSE was gonna pay for the box to convert.

RE: I cut the cord a while ago...
By GotThumbs on 3/24/2014 1:08:51 PM , Rating: 2
Simply Google


By marvdmartian on 3/19/2014 2:12:29 PM , Rating: 4
I can honestly see it going back to the "pay for the bandwidth you want" type of plans. Never mind speed, that's not such a big deal. But if you use more bandwidth, you'll pay more money.

Some people might applaud this sort of plan, as there's some out there who won't use much. But I can see this negatively affecting businesses like Netflix, which depend on high speed internet without bandwidth limits to exist.

My personal hope is that this will encourage AT&T and Verizon, as well as Google, to expand their fiberoptic networks outside of the major metropolis areas they're currently servicing. I'd love to tell the cable company to shove their $70/month for 20 megabit per second cable internet, and replace it with much faster fiberoptic.

"We can't expect users to use common sense. That would eliminate the need for all sorts of legislation, committees, oversight and lawyers." -- Christopher Jennings

Most Popular ArticlesTop 5 Smart Watches
July 21, 2016, 11:48 PM
Free Windows 10 offer ends July 29th, 2016: 10 Reasons to Upgrade Immediately
July 22, 2016, 9:19 PM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki