Rupert Murdoch's Quest To Buy Time Warner: Not Done Yet 63
Presto Vivace (882157) writes It seems that Murdoch's desire to acquire Time Warner predates his acquisition of Fox, and continues in spite of Time Warner's recent refusal. The possible deal is important in and of itself, but it also affects the future leadership of Fox. From the article: "Murdoch's skill is not just hiring the right people; he has been able to maintain control over them. They have his support as long as they produce results. His executives are the hired help. There is never any threat to his control. When a Murdoch favourite begins to get more headlines than the chairman, the clock begins ticking for their departure. But with the Time Warner bid, that balance may change. Chase Carey has put together a deal that, because of Murdoch's history, is almost irresistible to him. But it's a deal only Carey can put together. If he succeeds, the $US160 billion company that will emerge will be an ungainly beast that will depend on Carey making the merger work. He's indispensable." Clearly we have not heard the last of this.
so one billionaire (Score:3, Insightful)
but the money they both make comes from us -the 99.9%
I hope they have more fun with my money than I did....
When Elephants fight its the grass that gets hurt
-I'm just sayin'
The good news is that he's mortal (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:The good news is that he's mortal (Score:2, Insightful)
Not before the old cunt does more damage to democracy and the political system unfortuantly. Murdoch is truly disgustingly evil.
Just an unfortunate truth.... (Score:2, Insightful)
We need competition, not mergers (Score:2, Insightful)
Screw big-media mergers. We need more competition as the current oligopolies have some of the worse customer service records there are, and high prices compared to the rest of world, even in denser population areas where the "rural long wire" argument doesn't hold up.
Oligopolies & monopolies almost always result in crappy service/products/prices.
The "economies of scale" argument for defending them is weak. That claim was used to protect the Detroit Big 3, but the Medium 7 from Japan came along and kicked the Big 3 in the ass.
I'll take the downsides of (alleged) lack of "economies of scale" over the sloth of oligopolies.
I have only 2 realistic ISP choices in my area, and it's not rural by any stretch. It's a hefty suburb right next to a major city. And both suck. The pushy sales persons on the phone eventually admit their service sucks when presented with undeniable evidence, but will blatantly make the argument, "Okay, we suck, but we can get you crappy service at a better price than the other crappy guy". Even they know they suck; they just claim they suck for less $ (at least until the "special offer" period runs out).
It's like two satan's arguing, "Okay, yes, we are hot here and your ass will indeed get burned off. BUT, we have better elevator music to listen to while you fry."
Re:We need competition, not mergers (Score:2, Insightful)
Umm, I'm confused. What does your choice of ISPs have to do with this article about Fox bidding for Time Warner?