SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the too-big-to-care-about-the-customer dept.
AT&T is expected to announce on Saturday evening that it will purchase Time Warner Inc. for over $80 billion:
AT&T Inc. has reached an agreement to buy Time Warner Inc. for $86 billion, according to a person familiar with the plans, in a deal that would transform the phone company into a media giant. The wireless carrier agreed to pay $107.50 a share, the person said. The deal is half cash and half stock, according to people familiar with the transaction.
[...] For Time Warner, the deal represents a victory for [Chief Executive Mr. Jeff Bewkes], 64, who took some heat from investors for rebuffing a takeover bid two years ago from 21st Century Fox at $85 a share. [...] A merger of the companies would be the most ambitious marriage of content and distribution in the media and telecom industries since Comcast Corp.'s purchase of NBCUniversal and would create a behemoth to rival that cable giant. A rigorous regulatory review is expected and the acquisition of Time Warner likely wouldn't close until late 2017, people close to the process said.
Donald Trump has said that he would block the proposed merger and other media company mergers.
Also at Washington Post, NYT, CNN, and Reuters.
Update: Confirmed by AT&T.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 23 2016, @01:27PM
Shit, nationalizing communications is about the smartest socialism there is! There's still room for business, just like how USPS hasn't put parcel services out of business, and there's a basic level of quality and access. It makes sense anyway, the government has paid for most of the infrastructure through subsidies.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday October 23 2016, @01:54PM
That's not what nationalizing means. Nationalizing means the government taking complete control of an industry not producing its own competitor.
It might surprise you to know I'm not against the government competing with private industry, as long as the entity doing the competition isn't able to get monopolistic legislation passed and isn't allowed to dip into effectively endless government coffers. In fact I very much like the idea. It could be an alternative to involuntary taxation.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 23 2016, @02:49PM
Taking control of the infrastructure, which is what I meant, although I didn't spell it out, would definitely be nationalizing.