Recently Cox Communications announced its departure from the wireless telecommunications. Similarly some speculate whether T-Mobile can survive if its merger with AT&T does not happen. What does it mean when an incumbent carrier exits a market, with doubts about the ongoing viability of one of the Big Four national carriers? There are too many carriers and a market shake out must reduce competition? The Big Two carriers (AT&T and Verizon) have engaged in lawful and questionable tactics to “corner the market.”? Something else?
If a hyper-competitive market migrates to a less competitive balance of two carriers, two things appear clear: 1) a duopoly has evolved making ludicrous to claim self-regulation will foreclose anticompetitive conduct; and 2) market failure has occurred, unless consumers somehow do not suffer from haivng a choice of two facilities-based carriers and a few resellers.
If the Big Two have captured the market, then it becomes necessary to identify what lawful, questionable and unlawful tactics they have pursued. In the lawful department, the Big Two have invested the money to build superior networks. They have captured the competitive benefits of positive network externalities: offering not to debit minutes of use for intranetwork use. Additionally they have exploited economies of scale.
In the questionable department the Big Two have exploited exclusive handset deals and the first mover advantage of having received free spectrum from the FCC while other carriers had to compete in a comparative hearing, or hope for success in a ping pong ball selection. While they appear not to have colluded in a “smoke-filled room,” these carriers offer nearly identical rate plans, what antitrust law considers conscious parallelism.
At the very least the FCC should aggressively work to promote market entry so that the facilities-based wireless market does not end up being more concentrated than commercial aviation.
No comments:
Post a Comment