I need to get some clarification.
I think we are at a very important point in ATT history. AOL has been settled, the feds are lowering rates and deals are going to be made. I need to get some clarification on the rules. As I understood it:
1) The FCC gave T the choice, in the last merger, of selling Liberty or getting rid of their 30% ownership in RR and TWX. T was given a Dec deadline to state which way they wanted to go.
2) ATT wants to control the pipes for cable internet traffic. Therefore, Armstrong wants to try and retain control of RR.
3) At the Dec meeting, ATT said that they would sell Liberty provided a tax deal could be worked out with the Fed.
4) The FCC has decided they do not want T sitting on the board of directors of both RR and ATHM. Therefore, the FCC said that "provided a tax deal.." was not good enough and so they, the FCC, was deciding that T had to sell their ownership in RR.
5) T has disagreed with the FCC and says that they will sell Liberty by the due date in 2001. So this is still a unresolved issue.
6) It seems, with the AOL deal, that the FCC is trying to mandate that ATT sells its interest in RR. It seems crazy to me that they would stick that in the agreement since AOL/TWX does not have any legal control over ATT. The ownership issue is a problem between the FCC and ATT. It seems to me AOL/TWX can just ignore that stipulation saying that it is not under their legal authority to tell another company what to sell.
Can someone straighten me out on this? |
