Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

AT&T Stops T-Mobile Merger Bid With the FCC

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the never-meant-to-be dept.

AT&T 169

An anonymous reader writes Relationships are tough and it looks like AT&T and T-Mobile's has stopped before it even started. From the article: 'AT&T and T-Mobile have announced that they will remove their pending applications to the FCC for their merger bid. This comes after statements from the FCC chairman 'strongly opposing the merger'. In doing so, AT&T has agreed to pay T-Mobile 4 Billion US dollars to cover accounting and other costs that this may have caused. While AT&T would still like to merge, it is unlikely that they will gain antitrust clearance from the Department of Justice. It's the antitrust aspect that this is mostly about, in that AT&T has said that they want this move to free up the FCC to consider all options, and focus both AT&T and T-Mobile on the pending antitrust.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Perfect! (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38162660)

Yay!

That means the T-Mobile commercials with that hot girl in pink will continue!

Re:Perfect! (1)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 2 years ago | (#38162702)

That means the T-Mobile commercials with that hot girl in pink will continue!

I'm pretty sure AT&T would have bought her as well. She's way hotter than anyone who ever sold Verizon...

Re:Perfect! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38162782)

You're just saying that because you haven't seen the "Can you hear me now?" guy in a magenta miniskirt.

Re:Perfect! (2)

garyebickford (222422) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163156)

Great. Now can you please send my the sandpaper to get that image off my eyes... :P

Re:Perfect! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38163202)

You're just saying that because you haven't seen the "Can you hear me now?" guy in a magenta miniskirt.

You're a filthy AIDS-infested faggot. All you need now is the herp.

Re:Perfect! (1)

ksd1337 (1029386) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163014)

James Earl Jones is gonna have a problem with you.

Re:Perfect! (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38163614)

Now I have an image of James Earl Jones in a magenta miniskirt stuck in my head. Thanks a lot.

Re:Perfect! (2)

reub2000 (705806) | more than 2 years ago | (#38162820)

I just wanted AT&T to have commercials where people randomly starting dancing in a train station.

Re:Perfect! (1)

sconeu (64226) | more than 2 years ago | (#38162860)

Dude, they rescheduled that for 12:30

Re:Perfect! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38163254)

They do have one. It's not a very good one, though.

Holy Shit! The Solution to Global Warming! (5, Funny)

erroneus (253617) | more than 2 years ago | (#38162664)

Hell just froze over. I am not sure I can sleep tonight.

Re:Holy Shit! The Solution to Global Warming! (0)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163384)

Hell just froze over. I am not sure I can sleep tonight.

Oh, that's just Global Warming. Had nothing to do with AT&T.

Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (4, Insightful)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 2 years ago | (#38162674)

T-Mobile is now officially my #1 entry. Deutsche Telekom was looking to get rid of them, and I don't see them being likely to hold in there very long without them.

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38162686)

or you could just buy before this news reaches the day traders...

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (2)

DarwinSurvivor (1752106) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163896)

Knowing slashdot, the day traders had this story a month ago!

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (5, Insightful)

Burdell (228580) | more than 2 years ago | (#38162736)

I expect T-Mobile will still be sold, just not to another major mobile phone provider. I wouldn't be surprised if CenturyLink ends up buying them; they are the largest telecom company without a mobile presence.

There's too many customers and too much spectrum for them to just be shut down. They're even still showing growth, just not as much as AT&T and Verizon (and not as much as Deutsche Telekom would like).

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (2, Insightful)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 2 years ago | (#38162788)

I expect T-Mobile will still be sold, just not to another major mobile phone provider.

I disagree. I think T-Mobile has reached a state of corporate radioactivity. Their coverage is mediocre, their pricing is nothing extraordinary. and they have the worst phones of any major US carrier.

T-Mobile is the only major carrier in the US who does not carry the iPhone (as just one example). T-Mobile hasn't had a new BlackBerry phone in a very, very, long time (as another example). If they can't get phone manufacturers to believe in them, how will they get a potential investor to? They have one foot in the grave already and there is nobody looking to throw them a line.

There's too many customers and too much spectrum for them to just be shut down.

Too many customers is not a valid reason for a company to stick around. T-Mobile customers will just become prey for the remaining carriers. They'll be in liquidation before 3Q 2012 and AT&T will be buying up their towers in cities where they want to increase their coverage. The rest of their towers will become roosts for birds.

They're even still showing growth

Any idiot can grow a cell phone company right now. Teenagers are viewing phones as a right-of-passage in this country today, and kids younger than them are getting them at an alarming rate as well. That is new customers coming in off the street without having to do anything at all, and as long as text messages stay expensive the providers have a gold mine by way of all those kids.

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38162854)

they have the worst phones of any major US carrier.

T-Mobile has the mytouch 4g slide, which is currently the only qwerty phone with a dual core cpu ... i certainly would prefer that over my single core Epic...

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38162942)

yep dual core phones, totally a priority for people who don't live in their moms' basements.

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (1)

guruevi (827432) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163178)

I thought the iPhone 4S had 2 cores as well as the Motorola Atrix and a few other newer Androids.

Either way, nobody cares in consumer-space whether or not you have more than 1 core. Can it call and download Angry Birds is all they're interested in.

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38163310)

Are you so caught up in thanksgiving that when you read QWERTY you heard TURKEY instead?

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38163314)

the droid 3 is a full qwerty dual core phone, and it has been out for 4 months

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (0)

kilodelta (843627) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163062)

Thing is, T-Mobile is a GSM carrier. That's why at&t wanted them in the first place because at&t is going in that direction too.

But I'm glad this deal is off. We don't need MORE consolidation of the market.

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (1)

rickb928 (945187) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163266)

AT&T is *IN* that direction, been GSM since Cingular, actually before.

This was always about spectrum for AT&T. For DT, it's more about ditching a non-core distraction. For cash.

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38163110)

Which is why Apple will shockingly buy them and then make them the only domestic iPhone carrier once their deals with other companies are over.

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (2)

rickb928 (945187) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163272)

Jobs always wanted to be a carrier. It could work, but they would need to grow coverage bigtime.

Google is not interested in that. Trust Me.

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (1)

swalve (1980968) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163148)

T-Mobil had the new Blackberry Bold before AT&T did.

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (2, Insightful)

garyebickford (222422) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163204)

Those customers are worth between $250 (the costs cell companies are now paying to acquire each new customer) and $500 (a reasonable one-year follow-on profit per customer) each to another provider - but none of the Big Three can now touch T-Mobile. So it's going to be a new entrant. T-Mobile is an excellent way to buy into the US market for someone with the balls and the resources to do it.

If they had another few $billion they could build out their network as the best nationwide 4G, and expand their customer base with ridiculous incentives. (Just for instance, imagine a network so good that they could support their entire customer base with full-time streaming, 24 hours, no limits. Overkill? I don't know. It's just an example.) If they can manage to do all that, and grow fast but not so fast that they lose the great customer service that they used to have (and I hope they still have - I had to leave T-Mobile several years ago for work reasons), they could be a major player.

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (1)

Weezul (52464) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163552)

You realize that T-mobile just obtained $4B from AT&T, right?

China should buy them, lower the prices, expand the coverage, and use them for spying on American businesses. lol

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (1)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163538)

T-Mobile hasn't had a new BlackBerry phone in a very, very, long time (as another example).

Actually, a month or so back I was in a T-Mobile store (checking out inexpensive pay-as-you-go service for my jailbroken and unlocked iPhone) and they had the latest Blackberry with the touch screen. I don't know the model (don't care about Blackberry phones) but they are certainly getting the latest phones.

Part of the reason for not having the iPhone is that Apple doesn't want to devote the time or effort to supporting T-Mobile's 3G spectrum. My iPhone 3GS works fine with T-Mobile, except that I can't get 3G.

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (1)

Y-Crate (540566) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163678)

Part of the reason for not having the iPhone is that Apple doesn't want to devote the time or effort to supporting T-Mobile's 3G spectrum.

I have a feeling that the other part is "weakening T-Mobile for their friend AT&T".

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (4, Interesting)

Voyager529 (1363959) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163546)

Their coverage might not be all that great in the middle of the desert like Verizon is, but I've got Verizon in one pocket (courtesy of work), and T-Mo in the other. In the New York suburb where I live, coverage is mostly comparable; places where T-Mo drops the call, my Verizon phone is showing less than -100dbm coverage itself. Also, while I've found Verizon to have a bit better latency numbers, my download speed on T-Mo 3G is sometimes double Verizon's numbers, likely due to the fact that there are relatively fewer people saturating the backhaul.

As for phones, fine, they don't have the iPhone officially. They do, however, unofficially support unlocked iPhone models on their network. T-Mobile has the Blackberry Torch now, though using a Blackberry as an example did cause a slight lol. They have more Android phones than anyone else, in more form factors, and if memory serves more WP7 phones as well.

While I unfortunately agree that T-Mo's future is questionable, I think that making it well known that they're officially not becoming AT&T will likely help spur sales. I knew a lot of people who were considering going to T-Mo, but didn't want to become AT&T customers. This may restore enough confidence to make the growth start happening for them.

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (1)

aztracker1 (702135) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163666)

I'll top that last statement... my contract was up 2 weeks after the merger announcement and I jumped ship.

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (1)

Cyberllama (113628) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163700)

They're pricing is amazing if you go with the prepaid Walmart-only plan. Even though you have to get the starter kit from Walmart, you can bring your own phone. For 30 bucks a month, you can get Unlimited data (throttled after 5 gigs, but still much better than AT&T's best data plan on a post-paid account), Unlimited texts and 100 minutes voice (who needs voice minutes when you have data anyways).

Buy your Android smartphone of choice, pop in the sim and you're saving ~70 bucks *a month* compared to AT&T's cheapest plan with similar features (more voice minutes, less data).

The only reason I don't dump my iPhone and do exactly that is that, because its prepaid, you can't expect to be grandfather into this plan. So if I make the switch, I not only pay an ETF on my AT&T account (which selling my iPhone 4s would cover and still leave enough for half the cost of a new phone or more) but then I can never get my unlimited data plan back. Even though I haven't jumped on it, its a pretty compelling offer.

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (0)

E IS mC(Square) (721736) | more than 2 years ago | (#38164354)

Making free internationals calls to the US from amsterdam over wifi calling over my dual core querty keyboard 4g phone is definitely not a good price or a good phone.

Let me know when you are done trolling and we will then talk facts.

And not everybody gives shit about itoys. Some of us like phones that can do more than just looking shiny.

+5 interesting my ass.

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (2)

jonbryce (703250) | more than 2 years ago | (#38164564)

They are a GSM carrier, the vast majority of the phones sold in the world, though not in the USA, work with T-Mobile. They have a spectrum licence in the largest economy in the world. The other stuff can be sorted out. Someone will buy them.

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38162810)

http://www.yehforgames.com/

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (2)

sdnoob (917382) | more than 2 years ago | (#38162818)

centurylink won't happen.. they just took on over 10 billion in debt (overall debt now is 20+ billion) from the quest buyout... .... and you wouldn't want it to, either. they suck.

besides, they were in the wireless game.. but the clueless morons that run the company sold that part off back in 2002 (to what was then, alltel).. idiots.. friggin idiots

_____

about time the government puts their foot down on these mega mergers... everybody wins.. especially tmobile. 4 billion in cash and spectrum is a pretty sweet haul.

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163104)

That might be so, but they're a hell of a lot better than Comcrap and Qwest. I see their trucks all over the place these days and it's way more frequently than can reasonably be explained by maintenance. I never saw this many Qwest or Comcast vehicles doing maintenance.

Plus, they've actually upgraded the service that they're willing to provide over what Qwest was providing.

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (1)

faedle (114018) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163452)

You "see their trucks all over the place" mostly because CenturyLink has painted all of the trucks.

I know for a fact that many of the vehicles Qwest operated here in Portland were not painted at all. At the CO up the street it wasn't unusual to see about a third of the vans as plain-white. Add to that the fact that Qwest's (like most utilities) vehicles kind-of blend into the landscape after a while. It's likely that you didn't notice them because.. well, there's nothing to notice. You're noticing the CenturyLink vans because.. well, it's new.

Given that CenturyLink hasn't gone on a massive hiring spree after the merger (in fact, I know that more than one business unit has been under a hiring freeze since the merger) it's more likely that it is in your head.

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (1)

faedle (114018) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163466)

"not painted at all" should have been more accurately "branded". Of course they were painted.

And that makes sense now that I think about it: Qwest had been looking for somebody to buy them out for at least a couple of years before CenturyLink counted their pennies to see if they had enough.

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (1)

BenJCarter (902199) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163308)

Very interesting. Centurylink is Huge. I think the 4B AT&T is coughing up might prolong T-Mobile's independence a bit though.

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (4, Interesting)

SpaceLifeForm (228190) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163406)

Google should buy them.

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (1)

garyebickford (222422) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163180)

I'm guessing Carlos Slim, or that guy that owns most of the cell providers in Africa. Or the one in Brazil... Someone with both cash AND an entrepreneurial spirit that can recognize and take advantage of the potential. 4G does provide an opening as everyone has to build out. Realize that T-Mobile started out as a mundane customer-owned power utility in Idaho, had a short and unfortunate stint as a national fiber optics long-haul provider, then morphed again into the cell business. It has come a long way through many perils to get where it is. And AFAIK they still have the nicest customer service folks of any US provider.

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (2)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 2 years ago | (#38164050)

I was thinking about getting a T-Mo phone, but then AT&T announced their intent to consume it and turn it into another tentacle of their operation. Now that's not happening, I can take another look. I suspect a lot of people will consider going to T-Mobile just because it's not AT&T and won't become AT&T soon.

Re:Corporate Dead Pool 2012 (4, Informative)

Sipper (462582) | more than 2 years ago | (#38164426)

Just FYI: Deutsche Telekom has outright told workers at T-Mobile that if the deal with AT&T fell through that they would seek another buyer to sell T-Mobile to. The impression is that they want to get out of the US market, but remain in the European market.

who cares (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38162678)

see subject

Slashdot: The Missing Interview (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38162680)

Rob "CmdrTaco" Malda is a 29-year old white male with a stocky build and a goatee. He responded to my ad to be interviewed for this article wearing only leather pants, leather boots and a leather vest. I could see that both of his nipples were pierced with large-gauge silver rings.

Questioner: I hope you won't be offended if I ask you to prove to me that you're a nullo. Just so that my readers will know that this isn't a fake.

CmdrTaco: Sure, no problem. (stands and unbuckles pants and drops them to his ankles, revealing a smooth, shaven crotch with only a thin scar to show where his genitals once were).

Q: Thank you. That's a remarkable sight.

(laughs and pulls pants back up). Most people think so.

Q: What made you decide to become a nullo?

(pauses). Well, it really wasn't entirely my decision.

Q: Excuse me?

The idea wasn't mine. It was my lover's idea.

Q: Please explain what you mean.

Okay, it's a long story. You have to understand my relationship with Hemos before you'll know what happened.

Q: We have plenty of time. Please go on.

Both of us were into the leather lifestyle when we met through a personal ad. Hemos's ad was very specific: he was looking for someone to completely dominate and modify to his pleasure. In other word, a slave.

The ad intrigued me. I had been in a number of B&D scenes and also some S&M, but I found them unsatisfying because they were all temporary. After the fun was over, everybody went on with life as usual.

I was looking for a complete life change. I wanted to meet someone who would be part of my life forever. Someone who would control me and change me at his whim.

Q: In other words, you're a true masochist.

Oh yes, no doubt about that. I've always been totally passive in my sexual relationships.

Anyway, we met and there was instant chemistry. Hemos is about my age and is a complete loser. Our personalities meshed totally. He's very dominant.

I went back to his place after drinks and had the best sex of my life. That's when I knew I was going to be with Hemos for a long, long time.

Q: What sort of things did you two do?

It was very heavy right away. He restrained me and whipped me for quite awhile. He put clamps on my nipples and a ball gag in my mouth. And he hung a ball bag on my sack with some very heavy weights. That bag really bounced around when Hemos fucked me from behind.

Q: Ouch.

(laughs) Yeah, no kidding. At first I didn't think I could take the pain, but Hemos worked me through it and after awhile I was flying. I was sorry when it was over.

Hemos enjoyed it as much as I did. Afterwards he talked about what kind of a commitment I'd have to make if I wanted to stay with him.

Q: What did he say exactly?

Well, besides agreeing to be his slave in every way, I'd have to be ready to be modified. To have my body modified.

Q: Did he explain what he meant by that?

Not specifically, but I got the general idea. I guessed that something like castration might be part of it.

Q: How did that make you feel?

(laughs) I think it would make any guy a little hesitant.

Q: But it didn't stop you from agreeing to Hemos's terms?

No it didn't. I was totally hooked on this man. I knew that I was willing to pay any price to be with him.

Anyway, a few days later I moved in with Hemos. He gave me the rules right away: I'd have to be naked at all times while we were indoors, except for a leather dog collar that I could never take off. I had to keep my balls shaved. And I had to wear a butt plug except when I needed to take a shit or when we were having sex.

I had to sleep on the floor next to his bed. I ate all my food on the floor, too.

The next day he took me to a piercing parlor where he had my nipples done, and a Prince Albert put into the head of my cock.

Q: Heavy stuff.

Yeah, and it got heavier. He used me as a toilet, pissing in my mouth. I had to lick his asshole clean after he took a shit, too. It was all part of a process to break down any sense of individuality I had. After awhile, I wouldn't hesitate to do anything he asked.

Q: Did the sex get rougher?

Oh God, yeah. He started fisting me every time we had sex. But he really started concentrating on my cock and balls, working them over for hours at a time.

He put pins into the head of my cock and into my sack. He attached clothespins up and down my cock and around my sack. The pain was pretty bad. He had to gag me to keep me from screaming.

Q: When did the idea of nullification come up?

Well, it wasn't nullification at first. He started talking about how I needed to make a greater commitment to him, to do something to show that I was dedicated to him for life.

When I asked him what he meant, he said that he wanted to take my balls.

Q: How did you respond?

Not very well at first. I told him that I liked being a man and didn't want to become a eunuch. But he kept at me, and wore me down. He reminded me that I agreed to be modified according to his wishes, and this is what he wanted for me. Anything less would show that I wasn't really committed to the relationship. And besides, I was a total bottom and didn't really need my balls.

It took about a week before I agreed to be castrated. But I wasn't happy about it, believe me.

Q: How did he castrate you?

Hemos had a friend, Zonk, who was into the eunuch scene. One night he came over with his bag of toys, and Hemos told me that this was it. I was gonna lose my nuts then and there.

Q: Did you think of resisting?

I did for a minute, but deep down I knew there was no way. I just didn't want to lose Hemos. I'd rather lose my balls.

Zonk restrained me on the living room floor while Hemos videotaped us. He used an elastrator to put a band around my sack.

Q: That must have really hurt.

Hell yeah. It's liked getting kicked in the balls over and over again. I screamed for him to cut the band off, but he just kept on going, putting more bands on me. I had four bands around my sack when he finished.

I was rolling around on the floor screaming, while Hemos just videotaped me. Eventually, my sack got numb and the pain subsided. I looked between my legs and could see my sack was a dark purple. I knew my balls were dying inside.

Hemos and his friend left the room and turned out the light. I lay there for hours, crying because I was turning into a eunuch and there wasn't anything I could do about it.

Q: What happened then?

Eventually I fell asleep from exhaustion. Then the light switched on and I could see Hemos's friend kneeling between my legs, touching my sack. I heard him tell Hemos that my balls were dead.

Q: How did Hemos react?

Very pleased. He bent down and felt around my sack. He said that it felt cold.

Zonk told me that I needed to keep the bands on. He said that eventually my balls and sack would dry up and fall off. I just nodded. What else could I do at that point?

Q: Did it happen just like Zonk said?

Yeah, a week or so later my package just fell off. Hemos put it in a jar of alcohol to preserve it. It's on the table next to his bed.

Q: How did things go after that?

Hemos was really loving to me. He kept saying how proud he was of me, how grateful that I had made the commitment to him. He even let me sleep in his bed.

Q: What about the sex?

We waited awhile after my castration, and then took it easy until I was completely healed. At first I was able to get hard, but as the weeks went by my erections began to disappear.

That pleased Hemos. He liked fucking me and feeling my limp cock. It made his dominance over me even greater.

Q: When did he start talking about making you a nullo?

A couple of months after he took my nuts. Our sex had gotten to be just as rough as before the castration. He really got off on torturing my cock. Then he started saying stuff like, "Why do you even need this anymore?"

That freaked me out. I always thought that he might someday take my balls, but I never imagined that he'd go all the way. I told him that I wanted to keep my dick.

Q: How did he react to that?

At first he didn't say much. But he kept pushing. Hemos said I would look so nice being smooth between my legs. He said my dick was small and never got hard anymore, so what was the point of having it.

But I still resisted. I wanted to keep my cock. I felt like I wouldn't be a man anymore without it.

Q: So how did he get you to agree?

He didn't. He took it against my will.

Q: How did that happen?

We were having sex in the basement, and I was tied up and bent over this wooden bench as he fucked me. Then I heard the doorbell ring. Hemos answered it, and he brought this guy into the room.

At first I couldn't see anything because of the way I was tied. But then I felt these hands lift me up and put me on my back. And I could see it was Zonk, the guy who took my nuts.

Q: How did you react?

I started screaming and crying, but the guy just gagged me. The two of them dragged me to the other side of the room where they tied me spread eagled on the floor.

Zonk snaked a catheter up my dick, and gave me a shot to numb my crotch. I was grateful for that, at least. I remember how bad it hurt to lose my balls.

Q: What was Hemos doing at this time?

He was kneeling next to me talking quietly. He said I'd be happy that they were doing this. That it would make our relationship better. That kind of calmed me down. I thought, "Well, maybe it won't be so bad."

Q: How long did the penectomy take?

It took awhile. Some of the penis is inside the body, so he had to dig inside to get all of it. There was a lot of stitching up and stuff. He put my cock in the same jar with my balls. You can even see the Prince Albert sticking out of the head.

Then they made me a new pisshole. It's between my asshole and where my sack used to be. So now I have to squat to piss.

Q: What has life been like since you were nullified?

After I got over the surgery and my anger, things got better. When I healed up, I began to like my smooth look. Hemos brought friends over and they all admired it, saying how pretty I looked. It made me feel good that Hemos was proud of me.

Q: Do you have any sexual feeling anymore?

Yes, my prostate still responds when Hemos fucks me or uses the buttplug. And my nipples are quite sensitive. If Hemos plays with them while fucking me, I have a kind of orgasm. It's hard to describe, but it's definitely an orgasm.

Sometimes Hemos says he's gonna have my prostate and nipples removed, but he's just kidding around. He's happy with what he's done to me.

Q: So are you glad Hemos had you nullified?

Well, I wouldn't say I'm glad. If I could, I'd like to have my cock and balls back. But I know that I'm a nullo forever. So I'm making the best of it.

Hemos and I are very happy. I know that he'll take care of me and we'll be together always. I guess losing my manhood was worth it to make that happen for us.

Re:Slashdot: The Missing Interview (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38163186)

oh geez, is that why cmdrtaco quit? I thought he had a wife. I hope he's happy now, but damn....

Hell has Frozen Over 2x (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38162688)

Wow, for once something that was clearly a bad idea with AT&T didn't happen.

Can we now go back and break up the babybells again? :P Nah, actually with the decline in landline use it's probably not necessary since cable co's also offer phone VOIP service.

What this hopefully means is that T-Mobile gets the next iPhone with LTE and that should save their sinking ship.

Re:Hell has Frozen Over 2x (1)

kilodelta (843627) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163074)

Give it time. Justice is just starting to stir regarding anti-trust again, so too the FCC.

Re:Hell has Frozen Over 2x (4, Insightful)

swalve (1980968) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163170)

The bell breakup was stupid. Decouple Bell Long Distance from Bell Local Service, yes. But break up Bell into SBC and Illinois Bell and Mid Atlantic Bell and all of that was asinine. It makes no goddamned difference to the consumer how big the company is when they have no other choice for their dialtone service.

Re:Hell has Frozen Over 2x (-1, Troll)

modmans2ndcoming (929661) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163298)

Blow me Bork-ite

So.. (3, Insightful)

Lifyre (960576) | more than 2 years ago | (#38162748)

Does this mean the merger is officially dead or is it just the first step in ending the merger? The article gave me the impression that the merger was still happening, kinda, but not with the FCC.

-Sean

Re:So.. (4, Insightful)

Demonantis (1340557) | more than 2 years ago | (#38162814)

At&t is still pursuing through the DOJ. They are probably dropping the FCC application since it won't go through and they can wait until the DOJ review goes through. I think they are dropping FCC application so if the DOJ passes it they can argue that the FCC should follow suit and any of FCC's arguments would become weaker as the DOJ didn't have a problem. Wall Street Journal has a more informative article. According to it T-mobile is not doing so hot and the parent company is interested in exiting the US market. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204452104577057482069627186.html [wsj.com]

Re:So.. (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38162994)

The New York Times had an even more informative article on this with the most likely reason -- if they continue with the FCC application, most of the records they filed for it become public, which the DOJ can then turn around and use against them in the antitrust suit. Quite likely, the horrific reality of all of AT&T's patently-false claims that were debunked months ago are spelled out in those filings and they don't want it getting out.

The attempt to withdraw the FCC application is essentially an admission that they know the deal has less than zero chance. Another interesting point in the NYT is that the FCC is under no obligation to honor their request. They can deny it and force it to judicial review, or grant the withdrawal with prejudice (meaning AT&T cannot refile the application later, which would absolutely kill the deal).

Re:So.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38163496)

No it just means they are waiting for a Republican administration, which they won't expect to challenge any mergers.

Money will go back... (0)

rotide (1015173) | more than 2 years ago | (#38162756)

tinfoilhat

There is enough money here to buy some politicians or at least make them want to look the other way.

I have a feeling AT&T doesn't mind "paying" T-Mobile as in the future (near?) they will simply get that money back once they do finally merge.

/tinfoilhat>/p>

Re:Money will go back... (2)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163124)

Not really, if they managed to merge the money would be long gone as the money would go to T-Mobile's parent company.

And really as long as the GOP doesn't retake the White House in 2012, the likelihood of this merger going through is precisely nihil. If the DoJ or the FCC was interested in letting it go through it wouldn't be challenged to this extent. Under the Bush administration the DoJ was essentially sitting on its hands whenever these things came through apart from the rubber stamp.

$4 Billion? (4, Funny)

Walking The Walk (1003312) | more than 2 years ago | (#38162758)

"4 Billion US dollars to cover accounting and other costs"

Just what kind of other costs could they have? $4B is an awful lot of hookers...

Re:$4 Billion? (4, Insightful)

Bill Dimm (463823) | more than 2 years ago | (#38162806)

T-mobile may have lost a bunch of potential customers while the merger was pending, i.e. anyone that hates AT&T would be very reluctant to to sign a phone contract with T-mobile knowing they would be stuck with AT&T if the deal went through.

Re:$4 Billion? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38162930)

True.

My phone is on its last leg, but hell if I'm going to buy a GSM phone when in a few months the US might be stuck with ATT as the only GSM carrier. If I were on a T-Mo contract plan, I would not renew in light of how bought and paid for those in power in this country are-- it will be a miracle if they do the right thing, and this ATT takeover truly dies.

There is no way I will ever be an ATT customer (again). My experience as a former ATT/SBC customer is that billing "mistakes" (always in ATT's favor) is their business model. Sleezzzzzzzyyyyyy company.

Hopefully T-mobile survives. They have some of the best prepaid plans available. $30 (since pre-paid $30 means $30, no extra fees) for 1500 minutes or texts per month with a small amount of data included that is sufficient for occasional driving directions, online banking and such, and the ability to pay $1.40 for unlimited data for 24 hours only when you need it. The only thing that would make the plan better is if you didn't need to exhaust your monthly data before being able to buy the unlimited 24hr access.

Re:$4 Billion? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38163740)

I'm pretty sure that T-Mobile being bought out by AT&T would allow you to exit your contract without penalty.

Re:$4 Billion? (1)

Cyberllama (113628) | more than 2 years ago | (#38164166)

And more importantly, they might have lost potential *buyers*. They want to be bought up by someone else, and that can't happen while there's a tentative deal on the table with another company. So wasting all this time and not having the merger go through was a potential risk for T-Mobile, and they can't afford to take that kind of risk so the big player has to pick up the tab on it.

Also, it's not $4b cash, its compensation valued at $4 billion, I think like half of it is spectrum--which if you'll recall the 700mhz auction is super pricey these days.

Re:$4 Billion? (1)

reub2000 (705806) | more than 2 years ago | (#38162864)

I think that was put into the deal to make sure that AT&T was fully committed to seeing the deal through.

Re:$4 Billion? (1, Interesting)

wisnoskij (1206448) | more than 2 years ago | (#38162868)

I don't think the issue is how big were their costs but why they paid $4B. The article makes it sound like they just felt bad for the company and decided to give them the $4B. But obviously it is some under the table payment for something rather substantial as $4B is like the yearly revenue of a giant multinational company.
It is not something that a company can just afford to give away or even write into a contract as a "if things don't work out" clause.

Re:$4 Billion? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38162926)

$4B is what AT&T owed T-Mo should the deal fail to meet regulatory approval. This was well-covered in articles months ago about the start of the merger.

So yeah, apparently it is something a company can write into a contract as a "if things don't work out" clause.

Re:$4 Billion? (1)

todrules (882424) | more than 2 years ago | (#38162972)

Are you serious? It's exactly what they put in a "if things don't work out" clause.

Re:$4 Billion? (3, Insightful)

FooAtWFU (699187) | more than 2 years ago | (#38162996)

On the contrary. It's exactly the sort of thing which would be written into a contract. For something similar, look at the recent war between HP and Dell over 3Par; Dell ended up being paid $72 million when they took the HP bid. This is a little more extreme, but then again, ATT is a $163 billion company.

Re:$4 Billion? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38163060)

So AT&T just "lost" 3% of their NAV and nobody blinks? This is an insane amount of money for them to calmly walk away from.

We've become desensitized to the unit of measure known as billion (in $)

Re:$4 Billion? (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163136)

It is, but I bet when they were doing the numbers the expected value of proceeding made the $4bn risk worthwhile. It would be a bit like you paying me a quarter where I pay you a dollar if it comes up heads. The expected value would be more than a quarter so you'd likely go for it.

In this case the calculations are more involved and the sums greater, but it's the same basic idea.

Re:$4 Billion? (4, Informative)

rabtech (223758) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163056)

I don't think the issue is how big were their costs but why they paid $4B. The article makes it sound like they just felt bad for the company and decided to give them the $4B. But obviously it is some under the table payment for something rather substantial as $4B is like the yearly revenue of a giant multinational company.
It is not something that a company can just afford to give away or even write into a contract as a "if things don't work out" clause.

Merger deals almost always include a play-or-pay clause because all the discovery, legal work, etc has real costs to the target company... it prevents non-serious bidders or those who would bid to shake confidence in the company then back out. It also covers stuff like customer/employee impact (people leaving in anticipation of the merger) and any proprietary information the acquirer might have picked up during the due diligence process.

Re:$4 Billion? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38163058)

All major mergers have an "if things don't work out" clause. The payments are often in the billions, sometimes substantially more than this pay out. This is absolutely normal and standard part of a potential merger agreement. Clearly you have absolutely no knowledge of this topic yet you speak as if you are an authority. Perhaps this will teach you to gain a greater understanding of a topic before speaking about it. I doubt it but it could happen. Just to make sure you understand; you are utterly wrong. Completely, empirically outrageously wrong.

Re:$4 Billion? (1)

garyebickford (222422) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163224)

It's fairly common in big mergers that take a long time for the preliminary contract to include an opt-out fee, so if either one backs out they pay the other some fee. It does take a lot of money, concentration and time to execute big mergers, and as noted above it also affects customers and employees - oftentimes the best employees bail out.

Coming up with a plan B (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38162934)

"4 Billion US dollars to cover accounting and other costs"

Just what kind of other costs could they have? $4B is an awful lot of hookers...

How about the costs of salvaging their PR, building out infrastructure, and implementing whatever strategy they come up with after their whole "sell out, take the ATT stock, and run away" plans fell through?

Re:$4 Billion? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38163078)

You need hookers.
High priced hookers.

Re:$4 Billion? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38163098)

Mergers that fall through kill companies. This is how many good tech companies (and many bad ones) have died.

Didn't even know (5, Funny)

Fnord666 (889225) | more than 2 years ago | (#38162764)

AT&T Stops T-Mobile Merger Bid With the FCC

I didn't even know T-Mobile was trying to merge with the FCC. How did AT&T stop it?

Re:Didn't even know (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38162850)

Since the merger was between the FCC and T-Mobile, AT&T was temporarily charged with taking the roll of the FCC in this transaction. Allowing the FCC to decide if it can merge would be a conflict of interest. I think AT&T makes for a good FCC and perhaps we should make it their permanent job from now on.

Re:Didn't even know (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38163086)

Since the merger was between the FCC and T-Mobile, AT&T was temporarily charged with taking the roll of the FCC in this transaction. Allowing the FCC to decide if it can merge would be a conflict of interest. I think AT&T makes for a good FCC and perhaps we should make it their permanent job from now on.

I don't know what's worse, the idea that a government agency and a corporation were planning to merge, or the idea that another corporation was all that stood in the way of it going forward.

Re:Didn't even know (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38163326)

Well, AT&T wouldn't want T-Mobile merging with the government because that would give T-Mobile an unfair competitive advantage over AT&T. So of course AT&T stopped the merger. So I guess it can be argued that AT&T had a conflict of interest with their decision.

Re:Didn't even know (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38163474)

Perhaps if AT&T merged with the DOJ and T-Mobile merged with the FCC, that would balance things out.

Can you say? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38162780)

"Under the table"

All the same....
We didn't merge....
We love each other.....

Peace in corps.....

Finally some conclusion (1)

DanTheManMS (1039636) | more than 2 years ago | (#38162802)

As someone who's been following this merger bid for the past ~6 months, I must say, woot! Even if you disagree with the outcome here, the fact that there's finally been some sort of conclusion to this case is reassuring.

Re:Finally some conclusion (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38163008)

This isn't a conclusion. The DOJ is still reviewing the proposal. AT&T only retracted their application to the FCC. They can re-apply if they feel it is appropriate, i.e. if the DOJ gives their nod.

Re:Finally some conclusion (1)

jmac_the_man (1612215) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163024)

As someone who's been following this merger bid for the past ~6 months, I must say, woot! Even if you disagree with the outcome here, the fact that there's finally been some sort of conclusion to this case is reassuring.

Why would somebody who supports the merger (or rather, somebody who doesn't think that the merger would result in a monopoly, and thus that the government should not stop it) be "reassured to have some sort of conclusion?"

Good news (5, Insightful)

macwhizkid (864124) | more than 2 years ago | (#38162804)

Gee, it's almost enough to make you believe that regulators can do their job once in a while. Maybe the FCC can run training seminars for the SEC...

Regardless, it's the right decision. Mergers of this scale are bad for everyone except one of the two CEOs. One guy gets a promotion. Meanwhile customers lose choice, the market loses competition, employees lose jobs (when they become redundant), and shareholders lose their investment (when half get bought out).

And that's before you factor in the (rightly) indignant T-Mobile customers, most of whom have sworn a solemn oath to do business with anyone but AT&T.

Re:Good news (2)

geoffrobinson (109879) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163210)

As the ancient Greeks said, don't call a man happy until he is dead.

If AT&T can't get the bandwidth they need to expand and T-Mobile implodes is that better for competition? (I'm not saying I have an answer here, I'm just saying I'm not sure it is as clear-cut as more competitors always equals good.)

Re:Good news (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38163250)

That, and T-Mobile is the only competition to AT&T in the GSM/SIM enabled arena in the United States, and also the single least screw-the-customer-over-prone provider in terms of billing, plans, customer service, etc. in the country. Merging with AT&T will eliminate that competition, with the incentive for T-Mobile to be "better than AT&T" I can guarantee you the customer service would instantly become AT&T style and not T-Mobile style.

T-Mobile has been the provider of choice in my area for a long time ever since Cingular was absorbed by AT&T and the service Cingular users were used to instantly went down the tubes... People around here buy loads of basic GSM/SIM phones on eBay, from Asia/Europe/Wherever for cheap to replace their lost, abused, worn our, flaky, stolen, or otherwise incapacitated contract phones and just swap the SIM card over. Under Verizon, Sprint, and all the other carriers with a legacy of CDMA you can't do that. You're lucky if you can convince Verizon to sell you a new phone without restarting another 2 year hitch on your contract, let alone activate another compatible phone that someone didn't buy (and pay off) from them at some point.

That's not at all what is happening (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38162838)

AT&T is withdrawing their FCC applications because they will not be able to be acted upon under the current fiscal year docket.

AT&T and T-Mobile are still going to attempt to merge, going to trial in Federal Court in February 2012.

THE MERGER IS STILL GOING FORWARD, albeit over rough ground and with significant challenges. AT&T has decided to take the 4 billion dollar charge in FY2011 for the tax advantages.

Re:That's not at all what is happening (2)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163164)

It's impossible for the merger to go forward ultimately. If by the grace of God the DoJ and the FCC sign off on it all that means is that it goes to court when Verizon or Sprint files their own antitrust lawsuit against AT&T. Which ultimately they would almost certainly win because this is about as blatant a violation of Clayton as has ever been committed. You cannot buy up a competitor when it substantially lessens competition, and in a case like this where there are only a total of 4 to begin with, yeah, that's going to substantially lessen competition.

Not giving up, just concentrating on DoJ for now. (2, Insightful)

Sarusa (104047) | more than 2 years ago | (#38162940)

AT&T figures it should bring the full weight of bribes and lobbying to bear on one agency at a time... so they're starting with the DoJ. After they knock that off, then they can concentrate on the FCC.

They're still in a bad position here that they didn't expect to be in, so I guess Verizon and Sprint had some pretty good counter-bribes under the table. The merger's in serious trouble at this point. To the bribe-mobile!

Just a distraction (0)

Curunir_wolf (588405) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163100)

AT&T knew this merger would never happen. It was all a big distraction. What happens next is AT&T blusters a bit, then the FCC, which already has localities scrambling because of the deadlines for next generation emergency services radio [fcc.gov] . Well, why not just quietly pass them some lucrative monopoly contracts for supplying lots of new network services and devices for localities all over the country? Just a consolation, right? Or, just the thing they really wanted in the first place, only now everyone will think AT&T lost, instead of complaining about giving them such a huge amount of business on the taxpayer dime.

Call me paranoid if you want, but you might want to wait a few weeks and see what happens.

YES! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38163212)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3ALwKeSEYs

History Repeats (2)

AnotherAnonymousUser (972204) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163278)

Asking as someone wanting to get a more educated answer from the good denizens of Slashdot:

It's been stated on here before that there's been the trend of the phone industry to keep going through these mergers. I remember somebody posted a great flow chart of the monopoly breakup of old Bell and the subsequent acquisitions that followed.

Is there any reason why this industry in particular keeps splitting and then gradually getting re-merged - is it any different than any other industry and just more publicized, or is this industry prone to more consolidation over all? Seeing as it all seems to be the derivatives of the old regime AT&T that were gradually reacquired, why is all the power gradually flowing back to AT&T over time? Is it patent control? Aggressive marketing driving out competitors? The company mentality? What makes AT&T survive getting split up, to being back to its current state and trying to acquire T-mobile now? I'd love any insight you have to share!

re-upping my contract with T-Mo (4, Interesting)

xeno (2667) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163288)

I've been with T-Mo for almost 15 years, and this is good news. Not great news -- I'm sure there will be more trouble for T-mo in some form or another -- but at least not this year, and probably not next. But you know what this does mean? I'm re-upping my contract with T-Mo. When T-Mo came calling last year (one of several "PLEEZ don't jump ship" themed customer retention campaigns) I told them desire to have a GSM phone was only trumped by a desire never to be an AT&T customer again. As long as the death star doesn't gobble them up, T-Mo can keep having my money.

Oh, and btw -- T-Mo coverage is more than adequate across the US & Canada, (Iirc I still don't have coverage in rural Neb and WY, but no trouble anywhere else), data services are cheap, and they actually have decent humans in the corp stores. T-Mo isn't making money hand over fist, but they're doing _ok_, and that's good. In these times, in this economy, I want to give my money to an org that's doing _ok_: neither going out of business, nor robbing me. You hear that, T-Mo? "Ok" and "staying in business without f__king your customers" is the new black. So keep on keeping on.

Re:re-upping my contract with T-Mo (2)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163832)

I did a 6 week road trip last summer, and across the 16 states I passed through, Wyoming and the National Parks were the only places I didn't get good service. Locally here in Northern California, my service is better than Verizon. The claim that T-Mobile has bad coverage is a myth.

What about Chinese invesements into T-Mobile? (1)

JakFrost (139885) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163514)

Wasn't there are story about the Chinese telecom companies trying to get into the US telecom business last week? Wouldn't a T-Mobile buyout by a Chinese company be the next step now that AT&T lost their chance? Wouldn't the current administration which is beholden to foreign investment funds be willing to sell T-Mobile to the Chinese? Is this too far fetched to image this happening?

NHL jersey (0)

jersey123456 (2485408) | more than 2 years ago | (#38163554)

What I begin out from annual several hockey bulletin boards is that what bodies were NBA jerseys [jerseymall.biz] cogent me on cheep appeared to be true. But, according to the NHL Shop, MLB jerseys [jerseymall.biz] there are altered levels of customization depending on what jersey NHL jerseys [jerseymall.biz] is purchased. If you don’t feel like beat Wholesale NFL jerseys [jerseymall.biz] the aloft link, it basically indicates if you don’t acquirement the best big-ticket jersey, you get awning printed numbers aback you adjustment customization.

Why is T-Mobile trying to merge with the FCC? (1)

rcasha2 (1157863) | more than 2 years ago | (#38164368)

Why is T-Mobile trying to merge with the FCC?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?