AT&T: A solid story

I read with appreciation your article on AT&T in The Press. It was refreshing when compared to the recent coverage on Avista. It leads me to believe you have a higher degree of appreciation for the market than recent contributors.

It appears the major concern for the FTC action against AT&T in the Northern District Court of California against AT&T Mobility LLC in 2014 applied to those customers enrolled in the Unlimited Data Plan.

I experienced a similar problem with Verizon, in a Limited Data Plan. It simply involved switching to another plan providing for a larger DATA commitment, without any indication of slowdown.

In Chairman Stephenson’s presentations to investors, 2017 Annual Report, it was clear, he indicated it was the responsibility of Congress to clarify the laws governing the internet and protecting consumers.

Until that is accomplished, AT&T is committed to an open internet. The company doesn’t block websites, censor content, throttle, discriminate or degrade network performance based on content. This policy has been in effect for at least 10 years.

In view of Congress’s avoidance of this responsibility, it would appear that the recent appeal of the merger with Time Warner is more revengeful in nature, than salutary.

The Justice Department’s appeal of District Judge Richard Leon’s ruling appears to me to be nothing but a nonsense of hurt feelings: “We lost, so we will appeal.”

I enjoyed your article. It was couched in a professional manner as opposed to recent articles in The Press on Avista. If either of the companies backs out of the merger, on their own, there is a $130 million penalty.

I am in the phone book. I don’t answer calls and I am not on the internet.

BOB COSTIGAN

Spirit Lake