& cplSiteName &

Execs Explain SBC, AT&T Pairing

Light Reading
News Analysis
Light Reading
1/31/2005
50%
50%

SBC Communications Inc. (NYSE: SBC) and AT&T Corp. (NYSE: T) today made it official: The two carriers will merge in a deal valued at around $16 billion. Senior executives from both companies say the merger will create a ”prototype for 21st century telecom companies.” (See SBC to Buy AT&T for $16B.) The deal represents a huge and much-needed consolidation for carriers, and analysts say it will lead to similar moves by competing carriers (see SBC/AT&T Could Ignite M&A Frenzy and SBC/AT&T: Possible Winners & Losers).

While the two companies have explored the possibility of pairing up over the years, AT&T chairman and CEO Dave Dorman says his company saw the merger as an opportunity to accelerate its growth and transformation by pairing with SBC. “With our step back from the consumer market to focus on enterprise services, AT&T is a very complementary partner for SBC,” he said in a morning conference call. “It’s a hand-in-glove partnership.”

But others have a different view. Given AT&T's troubles of late, many see the deal signaling that AT&T knew it doesn’t have the cards to compete and decided to fold before the pot got too big. Indeed, the terms of the deal do not give AT&T investors a premium price. “On its own, AT&T had a much more challenging future,” says Legg Mason Inc. telecom analyst Brad Wilson. “The benefit for AT&T investors from this deal is that they have a future.”

The deal will indeed have a major financial impact on both the companies, although investors will have to wait until 2008 to see the combined carrier turn a profit. The combined company predicts it will be free cashflow positive in 2007 and earnings per share (EPS) positive in 2008. SBC says the duo will have an annual revenue run rate of almost $2 billion in 2008, growing to more than $3 billion by 2011.

AT&T's shares fell $0.59 (2.99%) to $19.12 in late afternoon trading on Monday. SBC's shares went the other way; they rose $0.11 (0.47%) to $23.73.

The companies say that their complementary networks will provide a solid foundation for integrated services that includes a global IP backbone, local access, broadband access, and a nationwide wireless network (see SBC/AT&T Cheat Sheet).

But there will be some overlap as well. The companies plan to combine all aspects of their businesses, which will lead to some layoffs and facility combinations. The two carriers say their network centers, local switches, and field sales forces will be combined. There will also be consolidation around network planning and engineering functions. However, no immediate layoff estimates were given by the companies.

”The thing that jumps out at me about this deal is the amount of cost savings that will take place across the board,” says Stan Hubbard, senior analyst at Heavy Reading. “They’re predicting $15 billion in savings through cost reductions and revenue growth.” Hubbard notes that the companies expect 85 percent of the synergies to come from cost reductions by eliminating duplicate facilities and streamlining business processes and organizations.

The pairing will also give AT&T an opportunity to get some major traffic on its IP network. “They’re finally going to have an opportunity to put a lot of traffic on their intelligent network,” Hubbard says. Hubbard says that’s bad news for WilTel Communications Group Inc., the carrier currently providing SBC's IP services.

AT&T’s CallVantage VOIP offering is another ripe fruit that fits in well with SBC’s Project Lightspeed, which aims to offer video and voice services to 18 million customers by 2007 (see SBC Sheds Light on 'Lightspeed'). SBC chairman and CEO Edward Whitacre says that AT&T’s VOIP offering was an appealing part of the deal. “We hope we can roll our existing VOIP programs into what they have as quickly as possible,” he says. Such a move is a big win for SBC, whose VOIP offering is scheduled to roll out to consumers next month.

“What this does is accelerate our ability to migrate to IP in the local platform,” says SBC COO Randall Stephenson. “In terms of Lightspeed, this is probably one of the most exciting parts about this deal. Obviously when you start moving video and high-speed data by the volumes we’re talking about in deploying Lightspeed, the kind of backbone capacity that AT&T brings to bear is really exciting.”

An AT&T/SBC pairing is anything but a done deal, as the companies must get regulatory approval from the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and as many as 28 states. “I think there is a good chance this deal gets done,” says Heavy Reading’s Hubbard. “Part of it depends on who will be the new FCC chairman and how market-friendly he or she is." (See Chairman Powell to Step Down.)

Legg Mason’s Wilson also believes the merger will happen, but says it might take longer than the 17 months the companies estimate. “It’s probably more likely to take 18 months,” he says. “The key issue is how bad the states involved muck up the process.” He also thinks AT&T might have to divest some of its small business operations before the deal gets approval.

SBC’s Whitacre says the AT&T name will stick around in some capacity, possibly as the company’s business arm. “AT&T is an American icon,” he says, "and we plan on allowing it to continue as we move forward. Some may think it’s ironic that a Baby Bell is acquiring its parent, but it’s the right move. It’s good for shareholders, customers, and employees.”

One issue still to be resolved has to do with SBC’s investment in Cingular Wireless, which it holds in partnership with BellSouth Corp. (NYSE: BLS). Many observers see this as a major conflict brewing, but SBC downplayed those concerns with folksy reassurances in lieu of real proof. "This deal will be real good for Cingular,” Whitacre says. “This is the best deal at this time. I don't think that the relationship [with BellSouth] will be soured."

Looking ahead, the combined SBC/AT&T intends to focus on increasing revenues through higher-growth segments like VOIP, IP VPN, Ethernet, and network management. By acquiring AT&T, SBC will gain enterprise expertise and AT&T’s nationwide network, which will allow it to expand its enterprise base and eliminate costs. “Our local and global assets complement each other,” says AT&T’s Dorman. “Companies who invest in all local or long-haul access don’t take into consideration what consumers want.”

“In terms of size, this deal is not the largest I’ve been involved with,” Whitacre adds. “But it certainly is the most important for the future of the telecommunications industry.”

— Chris Somerville, Senior Editor, Next-Generation Services

(26)  | 
Comment  | 
Print  | 
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View        ADD A COMMENT
Page 1 / 3   >   >>
euler
50%
50%
euler,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 3:28:13 AM
re: Execs Explain SBC, AT&T Pairing
Anyone have insights into the potential impact to AT&T's continuously shrinking research organization? SBC Labs has the upper hand and I wonder if it'll be: "y'all are gonna have to relocate to Texas"
allidia
50%
50%
allidia,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 3:28:13 AM
re: Execs Explain SBC, AT&T Pairing
is projected between the two companies? Would the commbined CAPEX make them the largest spending RBOC? Since Sonus is the incumbent at AT+T for softswitches and gateways does SBC's plan to build off of AT+T imply a SONS win at SBC? It sure would be nice to know...
rjmcmahon
50%
50%
rjmcmahon,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 3:28:10 AM
re: Execs Explain SBC, AT&T Pairing
Since Sonus is the incumbent at AT+T for softswitches and gateways does SBC's plan to build off of AT+T imply a SONS win at SBC?

You may want to read the LR article discussing possible winners and losers. It mentions Sonus and VoIP.

http://www.lightreading.com/do...

I disagree with the opinions expressed in the article. I see it this way. The reason AT&T embraced VoIP is because they were shut out of the local loop. They really didn't have any other choice. SBC, on the the other hand, has never embraced VoIP (beyond rhetoric). A poster on this board suggested it was because SBC didn't have the required expertise. I find that very hard to believe. SBC could easily hire the expertise. It seems more likely SBC makes more money by protecting their millions of POTS lines than they do by opening them up to third party competition. It's highly likely SBC's policy of protectionism will prevail after the merger. That really isn't good news for VoIP equipment providers selling into AT&T.

Let's hope I'm wrong and LR is right.
allidia
50%
50%
allidia,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 3:28:09 AM
re: Execs Explain SBC, AT&T Pairing
I think I found the answer..from LR

AT&TGs CallVantage VOIP offering is another ripe fruit that fits in well with SBCGs Project Lightspeed, which aims to offer video and voice services to 18 million customers by 2007 (see SBC Sheds Light on 'Lightspeed' ). SBC chairman and CEO Edward Whitacre says that AT&TGs VOIP offering was an appealing part of the deal. GǣWe hope we can roll our existing VOIP programs into what they have as quickly as possible,Gǥ he says. Such a move is a big win for SBC, whose VOIP offering is scheduled to roll out to consumers next month.

GǣWhat this does is accelerate our ability to migrate to IP in the local platform,Gǥ says SBC COO Randall Stephenson. GǣIn terms of Lightspeed, this is probably one of the most exciting parts about this deal. Obviously when you start moving video and high-speed data by the volumes weGre talking about in deploying Lightspeed, the kind of backbone capacity that AT&T brings to bear is really exciting.Gǥ

marlin_brando
50%
50%
marlin_brando,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 3:28:09 AM
re: Execs Explain SBC, AT&T Pairing
How much bukcs AT&T employees made
rjmcmahon
50%
50%
rjmcmahon,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 3:28:08 AM
re: Execs Explain SBC, AT&T Pairing
I think I found the answer..from LR

Be careful about taking SBC's press releases for face value. Remember, there are regulatory hurdles ahead before this deal goes through. Their position is that VoIP provides for local loop competition hence they don't need regulatory controls because the market will take care of things. They have to make promises of adopting VoIP if regulators are to believe them.

Turn promises into actions is where the proof will be. I believe today SBC has approx 5.1M DSL subscribers. It would be easy for them to distribute/sell a linksys/netgear VoIP enable broadband router with SIP stacks to 10-20% of these customers (1M or so). To date, this hasn't happened? Why not? At the end of the day, implementing competitive VoIP probably isn't in their interest though it does provide for regulatory cover.
OldPOTS
50%
50%
OldPOTS,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 3:28:07 AM
re: Execs Explain SBC, AT&T Pairing
I have observed that the RBOCs do marketing like IBM originally did, except they will buy capacity and technology as needed to supplement their own in house resources (SBC-Austin). Their advantage of being the big fish in the pond is that their action can be to ignore, delay, build up and wait, nibble or strike as they must. Regulators and competitorGs customers make them take these calculated actions. While waiting they scale (acquire) the technology and capacity based on how soon they feel they must nibble or strike.

Now re-read rjmGs post (#6). They are preparing for appeasing/delaying the regulators, delaying their customerGs implementations, but making additional money from the enterprise business. Probably increasing lab activity preparing for a limited deployment nibble. And meanwhile learning from the newly acquired enterprise customers. (Yes, they have come to help me by asking about our experience) But this enables SBC to load up and prepare for a hard strike, probably later than 2007, but not necessarily. Just when they must, using the latest operational technology available in their lab(s). Meanwhile they squeeze the cash cow.

Any other guesses when they must nibble further or strike? (Later than sooner)

OldPOTS
rjmcmahon
50%
50%
rjmcmahon,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 3:28:06 AM
re: Execs Explain SBC, AT&T Pairing
Two dinosaurs mating will not a VoIP powerhouse make. Look for VoIP from the critters who stay outside the range of their mating dance -- and who are smart enough and swift enough not to get crushed under their stompting feet ;-)

Do you believe the future VoIP powerhouses will find a way to bypass the local loops or HFC plants?

Also, what's your opinion from the TIVO experience? They seemed to offer differentiating technology but are now getting crushed by the incumbents. How will VoIP providers fare any better, particullary when common carriage regulations are removed by the FCC?

In my opinion somebody has got to provide a common carriage access infrastructure, one that prioritizes voice traffic from the best effort data, if VoIP critters are going to go beyond the enterprise and become the next GTE. Am I missing something?
beowulf888
50%
50%
beowulf888,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 3:28:06 AM
re: Execs Explain SBC, AT&T Pairing
Two dinosaurs mating will not a VoIP powerhouse make. Look for VoIP from the critters who stay outside the range of their mating dance -- and who are smart enough and swift enough not to get crushed under their stompting feet ;-)

keelhaul42
50%
50%
keelhaul42,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 3:28:04 AM
re: Execs Explain SBC, AT&T Pairing
RJ:
Do you believe the future VoIP powerhouses will find a way to bypass the local loops or HFC plants?
>>>>>
No, unless they build their own. Maybe wireless.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Also, what's your opinion from the TIVO experience? They seemed to offer differentiating technology but are now getting crushed by the incumbents. How will VoIP providers fare any better, particullary when common carriage regulations are removed by the FCC?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
They won't. That means voip will be provided either by the [loop or cable] owner -- or someone partnered with them.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
In my opinion somebody has got to provide a common carriage access infrastructure, one that prioritizes voice traffic from the best effort data, if VoIP critters are going to go beyond the enterprise and become the next GTE. Am I missing something?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Giving the RBOCs a monopoly didn't work before. I don't expect it will work now -- insofar as "work" is defined as getting advanced broadband access built out.
But the cablecos are building out some pretty good access facilities and they DO have a monopoly. I expect if anyone builds out some kind of WiMAX facility they will also get a monopoly on its use.
So it's not clear to me that the monopoly status is necessarily the problem -- unless you're one of those "outside" voip operators who wants access.

Are we asking for too much? We have the cablecos building out the kind of access infrastructure we all say we want (sorry RJ, it's not all fiber). We have people taking a hard look at WiMAX.
If the RBOCs just want to stick with POTS, well, let them.

-kh
Page 1 / 3   >   >>
Featured Video
Flash Poll
Upcoming Live Events
May 6-8, 2019, Denver, Colorado
May 6, 2019, Denver, Colorado
September 17-19, 2019, Dallas, Texas
October 1, 2019, New Orleans, Louisiana
October 2-22, 2019, Los Angeles, CA
October 10, 2019, New York, New York
November 5, 2019, London, England
November 7, 2019, London, UK
December 3-5, 2019, Vienna, Austria
December 3, 2019, New York, New York
All Upcoming Live Events
Partner Perspectives - content from our sponsors
Building E2E IP Networks for the 5G & Cloud Era
By Gao Ji, President, Huawei Router & Carrier Ethernet Product Line
A Roadmap for Operators in the 5G & Cloud Era
By Kevin Hu, President, Huawei Network Product Line
Huawei Introduces Autonomous Driving Core Network
By David Fang, Chief NFV Marketing Expert & Solution Director, Huawei Cloud Core Network
Huawei Shows 5G in Action at MWC
By Ken Wieland, for Huawei
All Partner Perspectives