Why Comcast-TWC Is Good for Consumers: Sonenshine

REPLAY VIDEO
Your next video will start in
Pause
  • Info

  • Comments

  • VIDEO TEXT

Feb. 14 (Bloomberg) -- Marshall Sonensine, chairman at Sonenshine Partners, examines the impact of cheap money on M&A activity and explains why the Comcast-Time Warner Cable deal will be good for consumers on Bloomberg Television’s “Bloomberg Surveillance.”

Levered company.

Not overly.

Time warner cable has a little bit more in terms of debt to ebitda that they can afford this, money is cheap and these deals are able to come together fairly quickly because the debt side of transaction is absolutely manageable.

New regulators look at that angle?

I think what they are concerned with, is it good or bad for the consumer or fair or not fair to the consumer?

With all the pushback at politico with all the major papers pushing back, everybody complaining, fine, what is the mages that's major complaint?

Is it bad for consumers.

I did not think it is, by the way.

Time warner stock is trading well off of the deal price but that is also partly -- is brian roberts'trump card -- this is for the global audience -- you have to live in new york to be so unhappy with time warner cable.

Two of the most reviled companies on the planet.

Is brian roberts trump card is everyone can't stand time warner cable?

Nor does it hurt that brian roberts himself is a very likable man.

He is not a larger-than-life egomaniac.

He is actually one of the nicest guys you could talk to.

My morning must-read deals with the idea that it is bad for consumers -- not just to they can choose for the cable writer but infrastructure.

One article in "bloomberg view" at high speed connections are like infrastructure -- she says that comcast will be making less investment in its network because it is not subject to competition.

I am not sure that is true at all because i think it ignores the reality of competition from satellite and web.

Comcast has made huge investments.

This is a 150 billion dollar market cap company that can afford to.

The question is what is fair and unfair and what deals can they cut with the fcc to get approval.

You understand how these things get done.

Help me understand the difference between the department of justice effectively saying to sprint and t-mobile if you guys combine and you have 30% marketshare in no way are we going to make it happen.

A squad of the deal before it got going.

Yet here in the cable industry -- bringing together comcast and charter, same market share, 30%, they have not raised any flags.

In fairness, there is a healthy debate that is going to be had here and a "wall street journal" op-ed said is fine and "new york times" skepticism -- that is a -- that wall street journal and new york times did not agree.

[laughter] there is not a bar at a specific percentage point.

We know in the 30's some of that is where it feel saturated and that is what you run into problems.

And these are two different industries.

And the phone industry, you don't have the multiple lines of competition you have an cable.

That is what is different here.

In other words, there is a directv and dish tv.

Even though they are smaller players and less and less significant.

There are more modes of distribution, number one, and as i said earlier, cable companies are not competing with the markets.

They always it had monopolies in markets.

The question is whether 30% on a national level is a difference that makes a difference.

We need a chart with comcast and time warner cable.

An attractive chart will help us on this valentine's day.

I am sorry.

To the moon.

There is the gross at time warner cable out there.

We have not talked about -- enough about management of time warner cable that actually has done the right thing for shareholders.

They should be taking a massive victory lap.

I think they are.

They got to $160 a share.

I think it is their victory lap.

I think they are doing the right thing.

I think this is a valid vat.

I do not think it is like at&t or t-mobile -- i said on bloomberg, i think it was an over-the-top that and the fact that at&t was able that's willing to pay a 3 billion dollar break fee was silly.

I think this is a more realistic bet.

This text has been automatically generated. It may not be 100% accurate.

Advertisement

BTV Channel Finder

Channel_finder_loader

ZIP is required for U.S. locations

Bloomberg Television in   change