The AT&T–T-Mobile Merger: Good, bad, and why it must happen…

I have a confession to make:  I am fascinated with wireless networks.  A lot of it has to do with my job.  But the evolution of wireless networks has been an amazing advance to witness, starting with the first analog cell phone networks in the 1980s, moving on to digital cellular networks in the 1990s, the addition of WiFi networks around the turn of the century, and now the convergence of cellular and broadband wireless data in mobile internet devices.  Initially, wireless networks (both cellular and wireless data) were considered a luxury by only the rich and businessman.  However, beginning in the late 1990s, cell phones became affordable, and as more people saw the benefit of laptop computers, WiFi networks became a necessity itself.  Over the last 4 years, with the advent of the iPhone, the cell phone has morphed into a smartphone, and with the iPad, the computer has become smaller and even more portable.

Long ago, the number of wireless phones blew past the number of landline phones, and just recently, the number of wireless broadband data devices surpassed fixed broadband devices.  This is good and bad for users of smartphones and tablets.  It’s good because it is clear wireless broadband and phone is not just the future, it’s now.  The bad is that with wireless, you need one or a combination of three things to prevent rapidly increasing demand from causing a smartphone meltdown:  increased data speeds, more frequency spectrum, and more cell towers/backhaul towers.  In some ways, AT&T’s proposed merger with T-Mobile addresses two of those needs so AT&T can implement the third need and build its LTE network.  T-Mobile has built up their capacity in urban areas (both cell and backhaul towers).  T-Mobile also has the AWS Spectrum which maybe the key reason AT&T has shown interest in buying T-Mobile.

But there are good and bad reasons for the merger to proceed, and it is what Congress is grappling with as they seek to approve the merger:

Good reasons for the merger:  T-Mobile’s parent company is leaving the US Market.  Deutsche Telekom, the German telecom giant who owns T-Mobile, has wanted to leave the US Market to focus on other investments around the globe.  So, the #4 provider, needed a company to buy it.  Also, the merger enables AT&T to develop their LTE network in a much quicker timetable and challenge Verizon for the fastest LTE speeds.  And, as I stated earlier, AT&T needs frequency spectrum.  In cities, such as New York and San Francisco, the capacity has been exceeded by users.  Without additional spectrum, AT&T would be forced to build tens of thousands of cell towers to meet the capacity, which would set AT&T back financially in a down economy.

Bad reasons for the merger:  An AT&T-T Mobile merger means there would be only one telecom company in the US that uses the World’s largest cellular standard, 3GPP.  3GPP encompasses GSM, WCDMA, HSPA/HSPA+, and LTE.  And in the US, AT&T and T-Mobile are the only companies that use this technology.  Sprint, Verizon, MetroPCS, and other regional networks use the 3GPP2 standard, which include CDMA, EV-DO, and LTE/WiMAX.  So, the merger of AT&T and T-Mobile means that most worldwide customers would be forced to AT&T when roaming in the US, meaning AT&T would have a sort of monopoly.  AT&T and Verizon would hold 80% of all US cellular customers, which might mean Sprint and other companies would be at a severe disadvantage.

Why the merger must go through:  No other cellular company could buy T-Mobile and survive the eventually merging of technologies other than AT&T.  There was talk of Sprint and T-Mobile merging, but the integration of all the technologies would be a disaster and would effectively destroy Sprint.  And considering Deutsche Telekom is leaving the US, T-Mobile needed a buyer who could make the transition smoothly.  In the end, if the merger is not approved, you still need a buyer for T-Mobile or else T-Mobile will fail and AT&T will struggle along and still need spectrum.

In the end, the merger of AT&T and T-Mobile has advantages and disadvantages, but ultimately, I believe it will have to go through.  The question is will Congress and the FCC see it the same way.

Steve Williams: Big mouth caddie

As golf approaches its final major of the year (The PGA Championship) near my childhood home in Atlanta, the biggest story in golf is not about the golfers, but about a caddie.  Steve Williams, who until this summer was Tiger Woods’ caddie for the last 12 years, was on the bag for Adam Scott this past weekend at the WGC-Firestone Invitational in Ohio.  Scott won the tournament, but Williams stole the spotlight in his initial Post-Round interview with the entertaining David Feherty and subsequent interviews.  I heard Williams’ initial comments live, and couldn’t believe them.  Williams said this was the biggest win of his career.  OK, you were on the bag for 13 of 14 majors that Tiger has won, including some of the game’s most impressive individual showings and you say this victory was the greatest of your career? 

Caddies are largely silently.  Most people couldn’t name 3 caddies on the PGA Tour.  And for those who can, I’ll bet 2 of those names are “Fluff” Cowan and Steve Williams, both of whom caddied for Tiger.  Quick, somebody name Jack Nickalus’ caddie for most of his life.  Can’t?  For that matter, name Jack’s golf coach.  Can’t do that either?  But I bet you could name Tiger’s golf instructors.  The point is we are in a time where anyone associated with Tiger achieves instant star status.  Steve is not special and, as Tiger proved over the weekend, he can find another bag guy.

Steve was a caddie long before he worked with Tiger, without the successes he enjoyed under Tiger.  And he may enjoy some success with Adam Scott.  But, at the end of the day, Steve doesn’t swing the club or putt.  He can offer advice, but the golfer’s have final say and ultimately provide success or failure.  The caddie at best gets 10% of the winnings, but not much else.  Yet, Steve thinks he helped Tiger win all those years, and now is guiding Adam to becoming a great golfer.

Memo to Steve:  know your role.  You’re a caddie.  At best, give advice when asked and shut your mouth the rest of the time.  Sooner or later, Tiger will probably go back to his old ways and be one of the best again in golf.  And then what, Steve, if Tiger proves he can win without you, or when Adam begins to struggle, which all golfers do?  Oh, and whatever happened to Fluff, Steve?  This may be your future one day, too.

A critique on the ESPN Book

Well, I finally finished the ESPN Book that my wife and son got me for Father’s Day.  It’s a long book (about 745 pages of material), and there was still stuff left on the cutting room floor.  Anyone who has been in the “inner circle” since my college days knows I love to talk Sports, so reading this book was a natural.  With the book now finished, I wanted to share a few thoughts…

Best part of the book:  The fact that the narration did not interfere with the first-person accounts.  The first person accounts were fantastic.  It allowed the reader to hear from the figures involved in ESPN (past and present), as well as a few outside sources.  And those accounts showed a lot about ESPN.

Most unaware part:  The early years of ESPN.  It was fantastic to see behind the curtain in those early days and understand that at any point, ESPN could have fallen apart between 1978 and 1986.  Once ESPN got to cover NFL games in 1987, from that point forward, ESPN never had to worry about going belly up.  It was also interesting to see the turmoil between the Rasmussen family (Bill and Scott came up with the ESPN idea), and Stu Evey, who used the Getty family fortune to prop up ESPN in those first days.  Eventually Stu won out, forcing the Rasmussen family to exit ESPN, and Stu would eventually be forced out as other financial powers took interest and eventually help make ESPN the monster it is today.

One sports story the book missed:  The Mike Leach firing at Texas Tech in 2009.  It is clear ESPN analyst Craig James was instrumental in the firing on Leach and ESPN personalities at the time were more than willing to support James and his son’s accusations against the coach.  Colin Cowherd basically was one of the on-air personalities who led the charge.  True or not, ESPN was probably making up for the Big Ben debacle from earlier that year.  And yet, nothing was said of it in the book.

Two Biggest jerks (based on their accounts and the accounts of others):  Chris Berman comes off as an ass.  He’s first-person account shows him for what he is.  He’ll praise you if you pay homage to him, but he’ll stab you in the back if you get on his bad side and dance on your grave.  And because he’s been with ESPN since the beginning, it’s hard to upend Mount Berman.  Not even fellow-lifer Bob Ley could do it (and Ley doesn’t).  But an even bigger jerk is NBA Commissioner David Stern.  You can tell even in Stern’s comments that he’s a two-faced liar.  The incident at the Palace of Auburn Hills and his accounts are disingenuous and the Stephen A. Smith dismissal also shows how that he doesn’t like criticism.  He tries to smooth everything over, but anyone who can read between the lines sees the truth.

Most entertaining portion of the book:  Any stories involving Keith Olbermann.  No one can take away from the fact that Olbermann is brilliant (no matter if you despise his political perspective), and the stories prove how much of a genius he is.  One question I would ask Keith, though… When are the Yankees going to call you about being their play-by-play guy?

Most sympathetic figure:  Dan Patrick.  I think the stories show Dan could have been a life-long ESPN employee, but his willingness to be the company guy eventually forced him to leave ESPN.  I think ESPN misses Dan more than they care to admit.

Overall, I liked the book, but I understand why there has been criticism about the book.  I’m a Sports fan, so I knew I would naturally like it.   But I wonder… Imagine if we could tell the story of the 54 years of South Gwinnett High School in a similar format.  Or the Class of 1992 at South.  Or the Band of Stars.  Can you imagine what accounts we could get out of that book from various people?  It would be interesting.