Seeking Alpha

WSJ: AT&T eyes DirecTV in possible $40B+ deal

  • AT&T (T) has approached DirecTV (DTV) about buying the satellite-TV provider in a deal that could be worth at least $40B, the WSJ reports. DirecTV, whose market cap is $39.5B, is open to a deal.
  • The combined company would have almost 26M pay TV subscribers vs the 30M that Comcast would have if it acquires Time Warner Cable.
  • As with the Comcast-TWC deal, a major question is whether regulators would authorize a tie-up between AT&T and DirecTV, with broadband competition likely to be the main issue in any review.
From other sites
Comments (10)
  • Patent News
    , contributor
    Comments (1422) | Send Message
     
    too many of these mergers will create less competition not more
    1 May 2014, 06:07 AM Reply Like
  • Rose_Colored_Glasses
    , contributor
    Comments (1004) | Send Message
     
    @ Patent News -
    I am with you and I think that is the entire point on this one. I have been analyzing T vs. Direct TV as a consumer, and the T Uverse plan blows DTV out of the water. So I think this whole play is threaten DTV with Uverse, then eliminate the competition. I do think the Feds may get involved on this one.
    1 May 2014, 08:44 AM Reply Like
  • investingInvestor
    , contributor
    Comments (1777) | Send Message
     
    P N, what is going on in the US communications markets? Is it time to try another generation of telecommunications execs?

     

    All the traditional telcos are trying to abandon plain old telephone service (POTS). ALL the traditional telcos are attempting to just walk away from tens of billions of CAPEX, sunk costs, national infrastructure. NO traditional telco is properly maintaining the US telephone system, so that system is falling apart.

     

    Both traditional telcos and cable networks are Balkanizing the Internet. BOTH the traditional telcos and cable networks are attempting to annex the US Internet, treating the US Internet like Crimea, ripe for the taking. The deals publicly discussed (like Netflix) more than undermine network neutrality, they prevent future Internet stability and growth and traffic. US citizens and businesses already pay vastly more than the rest of the developed world for mediocre service (Comcast is the most disliked company in the US per polls.) (Canada with monopolies and government protection and caps is the only worse example than the US.)

     

    Now, I know what Roman citizens saw as Nero fiddled. With decaying national infrastructure, how can the US count on technology to keep the US afloat in the 21st Century? The US cannot...

     

    If you did not live through the breakup of the original AT&T (it's baaack!), you might not understand the coming Internet wars that are more and more defining and destroying the US economy. The platoons of AT&T lawyers are ALWAYS overkill for any situation, to make AT&T's strategy abundantly clear.

     

    Imagine if telcos and cable companies owned all US roads, including your driveway. Your cannot leave your house without permission and a hefty fee.
    1 May 2014, 10:25 AM Reply Like
  • InmanRoshi
    , contributor
    Comments (216) | Send Message
     
    DTV gives T an entry way into many new homes. UVerse is only available in certain segments of the US (and not available in many of the most population dense northeast areas of the country). DTV is available all over the US and growing in Latin America.

     

    As a long DTV stock owner, I don't want the merger until T makes an outrageous offer. DTV is a splendidly run company with an amazing balance sheet that makes cash hand over fist. I'd hate to mess up a good thing.
    7 May 2014, 04:26 PM Reply Like
  • U2A Ventures
    , contributor
    Comments (257) | Send Message
     
    this seems to make more sense to me then Comcast and TWC
    1 May 2014, 08:14 AM Reply Like
  • swlu1o9s
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message
     
    I agree. Comcast-TWC deal is purely a monopoly of TV broadcasting.
    1 May 2014, 08:37 AM Reply Like
  • Matt-Man
    , contributor
    Comments (681) | Send Message
     
    That is >2000$ per subscriber. TV is crazy priced in US in general. Normal package >1000$ per year. But trend is still away from all this 200+ channel packages and paying for content that is actually being watched.

     

    With 1000$ one could rent >600 blurays from Redbox per year for example
    1 May 2014, 10:11 AM Reply Like
  • guyholman
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    A lot of people I know have hit the wall with the cost of Comcast "Triple Play" and I think the price ceiling is here for consumers. So what's next? Tricky packaging of channels may work, but consumers are now forced to evaluate what they actually watch. And pay for more ads in the content. People are voting with their feet.
    1 May 2014, 04:02 PM Reply Like
  • NY2LA 1
    , contributor
    Comments (624) | Send Message
     
    Net neutrality demise will change the ground the game is played on with T being able to charge content providers more and theoretically consumers a little bit less. At least the netflix and hulus of the world will have to pull their own weight, it's about time for net neutralitys charity to end and for upstream corporates to pay their share.
    3 May 2014, 12:56 AM Reply Like
  • rroo
    , contributor
    Comments (200) | Send Message
     
    Greed. The public is being sold and resold, at a higher price each time. But, in this age, the public will escape to another medium, just as it did when it jumped to the Internet, when it was free.
    8 May 2014, 12:27 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Hub
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs