WEBVTT - Rie on AT&T and Time Warner (Audio)

0:00:03.560 --> 0:00:07.240
<v Speaker 1>Here listening to Bloomberg Law. I'm June Grosso. H T

0:00:07.400 --> 0:00:09.400
<v Speaker 1>and T is trying to become one of the world's

0:00:09.400 --> 0:00:14.400
<v Speaker 1>biggest media companies by buying Time Warner, which owns CNN, HBO,

0:00:14.600 --> 0:00:19.079
<v Speaker 1>and Warner Brothers. Billion dollar wager by A, T and T,

0:00:19.360 --> 0:00:23.400
<v Speaker 1>the largest deal announced globally this year, is controversial and political.

0:00:24.160 --> 0:00:28.320
<v Speaker 1>President elect Trump vowed to block the transaction, calling it

0:00:28.480 --> 0:00:32.960
<v Speaker 1>poison to democracy in October. Our guest is Jennifer Ree,

0:00:32.960 --> 0:00:40.360
<v Speaker 1>senior litigation analyst for Bloomberg Intelligence. Jen this deal is huge,

0:00:40.760 --> 0:00:44.080
<v Speaker 1>and there's been criticism that it puts too much power

0:00:44.240 --> 0:00:48.479
<v Speaker 1>into the hands of one company. Is that something that

0:00:48.840 --> 0:00:51.519
<v Speaker 1>the regulators are going to be looking at, you know,

0:00:51.600 --> 0:00:54.720
<v Speaker 1>not precisely. No, And that's certainly the atmospherics and the

0:00:54.760 --> 0:00:57.200
<v Speaker 1>reaction that we've seen. There's been quite a need jerk

0:00:57.200 --> 0:00:59.040
<v Speaker 1>reaction to this deal. But at the end of the day,

0:00:59.280 --> 0:01:03.040
<v Speaker 1>with the interest regulators do is ask whether the combination

0:01:03.160 --> 0:01:06.280
<v Speaker 1>of two companies could have the effect harmon market down

0:01:06.280 --> 0:01:10.119
<v Speaker 1>the road once they're merged by raising prices, reducing innovation,

0:01:10.240 --> 0:01:13.240
<v Speaker 1>reducing choice, And they do that by asking do they

0:01:13.319 --> 0:01:17.120
<v Speaker 1>directly compete a horizontal deal combining you know, the products

0:01:17.120 --> 0:01:21.080
<v Speaker 1>and services that they both provide um and in that

0:01:21.120 --> 0:01:23.280
<v Speaker 1>way raise the prices because they're the only provider of

0:01:23.280 --> 0:01:26.720
<v Speaker 1>that product or service or are they in the same

0:01:26.959 --> 0:01:30.320
<v Speaker 1>chain of distribution at different levels vertically related and could

0:01:30.400 --> 0:01:32.679
<v Speaker 1>that cause harm in this deal is a deal where

0:01:32.720 --> 0:01:35.680
<v Speaker 1>the two companies do not compete, they are vertically related,

0:01:37.400 --> 0:01:42.000
<v Speaker 1>but it will get carefully scrutinized, I assume because it

0:01:42.120 --> 0:01:46.120
<v Speaker 1>is just so big. What are some of the possible

0:01:46.160 --> 0:01:50.160
<v Speaker 1>antitrust concerns, Well, it will definitely get carefully scrutinized because

0:01:50.280 --> 0:01:54.560
<v Speaker 1>vertical deals, although they're not considered as problematic as horizontal deals,

0:01:54.840 --> 0:01:57.520
<v Speaker 1>can causing any trust issues. And so, for instance, a

0:01:57.600 --> 0:02:00.600
<v Speaker 1>very similar deal, which is when Comcast enter the joint

0:02:00.680 --> 0:02:04.920
<v Speaker 1>venture with NBC Universal, was carefully scrutinized and the antitrust

0:02:05.040 --> 0:02:08.840
<v Speaker 1>regulators both from the Justice Department and the FCC determined

0:02:08.880 --> 0:02:11.520
<v Speaker 1>that there could be harms that needed to be remedied.

0:02:11.520 --> 0:02:15.000
<v Speaker 1>So they forced the emerged company to sign onto a

0:02:15.040 --> 0:02:17.880
<v Speaker 1>consent order to agree to all sorts of provisions. And

0:02:17.919 --> 0:02:20.200
<v Speaker 1>they'll do the same thing here because the relationships are

0:02:20.200 --> 0:02:23.440
<v Speaker 1>complicated when you get into this vertical relationship and there

0:02:23.480 --> 0:02:28.320
<v Speaker 1>can be a foreclosure effect. I mentioned a few moments

0:02:28.360 --> 0:02:33.680
<v Speaker 1>ago that Trump, during his election bid, in fact, I

0:02:33.680 --> 0:02:36.440
<v Speaker 1>think it was October twenty two, just about the time

0:02:36.480 --> 0:02:40.600
<v Speaker 1>the deal was announced, said he's vehemently opposed to the

0:02:40.639 --> 0:02:44.720
<v Speaker 1>deal and basically said he's going to stop it. Can

0:02:44.760 --> 0:02:49.600
<v Speaker 1>the president stop the deal? He cannot. Now it's created

0:02:49.639 --> 0:02:52.600
<v Speaker 1>an interesting dynamic dynamic for sure, to have a Republican

0:02:52.639 --> 0:02:55.840
<v Speaker 1>president make a comment like that. Um, the president does

0:02:55.880 --> 0:02:58.959
<v Speaker 1>not have the authority to stop to merging companies from closing.

0:02:59.040 --> 0:03:01.960
<v Speaker 1>They only a court order can do that. So even

0:03:02.000 --> 0:03:04.720
<v Speaker 1>the Justice Department and Federal Trade Commission don't have the

0:03:04.760 --> 0:03:06.760
<v Speaker 1>authority to do that. They have to ask a court

0:03:07.040 --> 0:03:08.960
<v Speaker 1>to block the deal, and that would be the same

0:03:09.000 --> 0:03:11.959
<v Speaker 1>for a T and T. Now where he has authority

0:03:12.080 --> 0:03:14.359
<v Speaker 1>is that he will be able to appoint when he's president,

0:03:14.760 --> 0:03:17.600
<v Speaker 1>new officials in charge of anti trust at the Department

0:03:17.600 --> 0:03:19.760
<v Speaker 1>of Justice as well as at the FTC. This is

0:03:19.760 --> 0:03:22.600
<v Speaker 1>a d o J matter, and those officials, you know,

0:03:22.639 --> 0:03:24.760
<v Speaker 1>are going to be expected to carry out his agenda.

0:03:25.160 --> 0:03:27.640
<v Speaker 1>But the way it's looking is pretty good for the

0:03:27.680 --> 0:03:30.040
<v Speaker 1>deal because what's been bandied about in the news is

0:03:30.160 --> 0:03:33.200
<v Speaker 1>Josh Wright as the person who's helping him with transition,

0:03:33.200 --> 0:03:36.160
<v Speaker 1>who might even be appointed the Assistant Attorney General in

0:03:36.240 --> 0:03:38.080
<v Speaker 1>charge of anti trust here. And he is well known

0:03:38.120 --> 0:03:40.960
<v Speaker 1>to be very conservative, to be business friendly, and to

0:03:41.000 --> 0:03:44.160
<v Speaker 1>take a very pragmatic and economics based approach to deals.

0:03:44.360 --> 0:03:47.720
<v Speaker 1>I would be enormously surprised if he was behind seeking

0:03:47.720 --> 0:03:50.560
<v Speaker 1>a court order to block this deal. To talk in

0:03:51.080 --> 0:03:58.280
<v Speaker 1>very broad generalities here, describe what the Republican approach normally

0:03:58.360 --> 0:04:02.200
<v Speaker 1>is to anti trust as opposed to the Democratic approach. Well,

0:04:02.200 --> 0:04:06.280
<v Speaker 1>the Republican approach has traditionally been much just a lighter hand,

0:04:06.680 --> 0:04:09.840
<v Speaker 1>more business friendly. So in other words, UM, thinking about

0:04:09.880 --> 0:04:12.520
<v Speaker 1>the efficiencies that are created in the deal and asking

0:04:12.960 --> 0:04:15.920
<v Speaker 1>if we have concerns, how can we remedy those concerns.

0:04:16.360 --> 0:04:19.800
<v Speaker 1>Enter a consent order where where you know that alleviator concerns,

0:04:19.880 --> 0:04:22.320
<v Speaker 1>rather than going to court and trying to stop a

0:04:22.360 --> 0:04:25.920
<v Speaker 1>deal it could have some good effects. Um. And then

0:04:25.960 --> 0:04:28.400
<v Speaker 1>Democrat the Democrats, the direction it's been going in the

0:04:28.480 --> 0:04:32.160
<v Speaker 1>last few years has been really interesting because more and

0:04:32.200 --> 0:04:35.680
<v Speaker 1>more they seem to be going the direction of well,

0:04:35.720 --> 0:04:38.560
<v Speaker 1>big is bad. We we don't like the deal and

0:04:38.600 --> 0:04:40.760
<v Speaker 1>we think it could have a bad effect. So so

0:04:40.839 --> 0:04:44.840
<v Speaker 1>let's sort of work backward and you know, define markets

0:04:44.880 --> 0:04:46.720
<v Speaker 1>and say they have a problem these markets that that

0:04:46.760 --> 0:04:50.039
<v Speaker 1>will ultimately have a bad effect. And and you know,

0:04:50.080 --> 0:04:53.480
<v Speaker 1>again Josh Wright is very pragmatic and believes that economics

0:04:53.480 --> 0:04:55.720
<v Speaker 1>should be applied. And when you apply economics to a

0:04:55.760 --> 0:05:00.120
<v Speaker 1>vertical deal usually you see that it's pro competitive. What

0:05:00.279 --> 0:05:04.480
<v Speaker 1>deals are pending right now that are being considered by

0:05:04.480 --> 0:05:09.760
<v Speaker 1>the Justice Department and may have will there be a

0:05:09.880 --> 0:05:13.039
<v Speaker 1>change if if someone else comes in in the way

0:05:13.080 --> 0:05:16.200
<v Speaker 1>they're being viewed, Well, there there could be. It depends

0:05:16.200 --> 0:05:18.640
<v Speaker 1>on timing because it will take some time to get

0:05:18.680 --> 0:05:20.920
<v Speaker 1>the new officials in. But you have pending right now,

0:05:20.960 --> 0:05:26.040
<v Speaker 1>of course Alaska Air and Virgin America UM, that's still

0:05:26.080 --> 0:05:28.440
<v Speaker 1>as I understand, I believe you know, working on negotiating

0:05:28.440 --> 0:05:32.320
<v Speaker 1>remedies for their deal. You have two deals that are

0:05:32.400 --> 0:05:35.680
<v Speaker 1>in court right now, an attempting to acquire Humanita and

0:05:35.760 --> 0:05:39.160
<v Speaker 1>Anthem attempting to acquire Signal. Now that's an interesting situation

0:05:39.160 --> 0:05:42.680
<v Speaker 1>because it's in front of judges, so not necessarily affected

0:05:42.720 --> 0:05:45.360
<v Speaker 1>by this change in the d o J. But you

0:05:45.400 --> 0:05:47.560
<v Speaker 1>may have We know that ETNA has been trying to

0:05:47.560 --> 0:05:50.120
<v Speaker 1>settle and if you have somebody knew who steps in

0:05:50.120 --> 0:05:52.640
<v Speaker 1>and this isn't resolved yet in court. There may be

0:05:53.240 --> 0:05:55.280
<v Speaker 1>a willingness by the d o J to to come

0:05:55.279 --> 0:05:57.400
<v Speaker 1>in and try to settle that matter rather than going

0:05:57.440 --> 0:06:01.680
<v Speaker 1>through with the court hearing. Going back to this merger

0:06:02.040 --> 0:06:07.160
<v Speaker 1>between Time Warner and A T and T, it's unclear,

0:06:07.200 --> 0:06:09.640
<v Speaker 1>it seems whether the deal will be subject to f

0:06:09.800 --> 0:06:13.640
<v Speaker 1>c C review. Tell us a little bit about that. Well,

0:06:13.680 --> 0:06:16.200
<v Speaker 1>on the f c C side, they the FCC would

0:06:16.240 --> 0:06:20.000
<v Speaker 1>only have the authority if if FCC controlled licenses are transferred,

0:06:20.240 --> 0:06:22.640
<v Speaker 1>and that's what gives them authority, And it's just unclear.

0:06:23.080 --> 0:06:25.640
<v Speaker 1>You know, they do have some FCC licenses, but it's

0:06:25.680 --> 0:06:28.039
<v Speaker 1>unclear whether they're trying to get rid of those licenses

0:06:28.320 --> 0:06:30.560
<v Speaker 1>so that they don't they aren't in front of the FCC,

0:06:30.720 --> 0:06:33.800
<v Speaker 1>which has a broader standard than the Justice Department does

0:06:33.839 --> 0:06:35.880
<v Speaker 1>in terms of trying to stop or oppose a deal.

0:06:37.600 --> 0:06:40.120
<v Speaker 1>You've been on many times because we love to have you,

0:06:40.160 --> 0:06:43.240
<v Speaker 1>because it's it's like having a professor tell us in

0:06:43.320 --> 0:06:47.680
<v Speaker 1>simple terms about anti trust. So let's just sort of

0:06:47.960 --> 0:06:51.440
<v Speaker 1>sum up in a way what's been happening with antitrust

0:06:51.839 --> 0:06:57.080
<v Speaker 1>under President Obama. Well, certainly it's become much more aggressive.

0:06:57.279 --> 0:07:00.760
<v Speaker 1>And the interesting thing is that we overall you're more

0:07:00.760 --> 0:07:03.000
<v Speaker 1>aggressive and a lot more enforcement. But if you dig

0:07:03.000 --> 0:07:05.279
<v Speaker 1>in and you look at the statistics in terms of

0:07:05.279 --> 0:07:07.600
<v Speaker 1>the deals that get filed before the agency and then

0:07:07.640 --> 0:07:11.360
<v Speaker 1>get investigated, you know, they collect documents, they take depositions.

0:07:11.400 --> 0:07:14.400
<v Speaker 1>That percentage hasn't really changed over the last ten or

0:07:14.440 --> 0:07:17.880
<v Speaker 1>fifteen years. It's it's between you three point five three

0:07:17.880 --> 0:07:19.960
<v Speaker 1>and about four and a half percent. Kind of goes

0:07:20.000 --> 0:07:22.840
<v Speaker 1>back and forth. What we've seen though, the differences a

0:07:22.920 --> 0:07:26.360
<v Speaker 1>greater willingness in the last few years to actually litigate,

0:07:26.400 --> 0:07:28.880
<v Speaker 1>to actually go to trial. You know, back when I

0:07:28.960 --> 0:07:32.160
<v Speaker 1>was practicing, sometimes the attorneys would in a way you

0:07:32.200 --> 0:07:34.679
<v Speaker 1>want to play chicken with the regulators, because they'd offer,

0:07:35.240 --> 0:07:38.280
<v Speaker 1>we'll sell these assets and that should resolve your concerns.

0:07:38.600 --> 0:07:40.680
<v Speaker 1>And the regulator would say, well, hey, that's not quite

0:07:40.680 --> 0:07:42.880
<v Speaker 1>good enough, and the lawyers would say, you know, that's

0:07:42.880 --> 0:07:45.400
<v Speaker 1>what we're offering. We think this fixes the concerns. If

0:07:45.440 --> 0:07:47.400
<v Speaker 1>you don't like it to us, take us to court,

0:07:47.840 --> 0:07:50.480
<v Speaker 1>and the regulators would back off. And that's the way

0:07:50.640 --> 0:07:53.760
<v Speaker 1>once upon a time it was. Doesn't happen anymore. Now

0:07:53.800 --> 0:07:56.840
<v Speaker 1>They don't back off. And how long will a deal

0:07:56.920 --> 0:07:59.960
<v Speaker 1>like this take to go through all the various hurdle

0:08:00.880 --> 0:08:03.440
<v Speaker 1>might might to a T and T and time order

0:08:03.520 --> 0:08:06.040
<v Speaker 1>have to give up a few things. Well, I do

0:08:06.120 --> 0:08:08.920
<v Speaker 1>think they'll absolutely have to sign a consent order. I

0:08:08.960 --> 0:08:11.680
<v Speaker 1>don't believe they'll actually have to divest anything, but I

0:08:11.720 --> 0:08:13.200
<v Speaker 1>do think they'll have to sign on to what we

0:08:13.280 --> 0:08:17.240
<v Speaker 1>call behavioral conditions, where they promise not to discriminate, let's say,

0:08:17.240 --> 0:08:21.000
<v Speaker 1>against other distributors of programming content, or they promise not

0:08:21.040 --> 0:08:25.400
<v Speaker 1>to discriminate against competitor content content companies such as NBC

0:08:25.560 --> 0:08:27.800
<v Speaker 1>U and Comcast UM. I think it will take a

0:08:27.800 --> 0:08:30.960
<v Speaker 1>long time, and I actually think it's probably, you know,

0:08:31.000 --> 0:08:32.800
<v Speaker 1>in their benefit to drag it a little bit here

0:08:32.840 --> 0:08:35.400
<v Speaker 1>and wait until the new administration officials are in there

0:08:35.720 --> 0:08:37.800
<v Speaker 1>and they're the ones that dig into this deal. I

0:08:38.000 --> 0:08:40.160
<v Speaker 1>I do, these things, you know, take a long time.