By Sanjay Sanghoee
FORTUNE -- As the Supreme Court this week looks into the legality of Internet-television service Aereo, it's a good time to delve into another development that could forever reshape the future of television: the possible merger between two of the nation's biggest cable companies, Comcast (CMCSA) and Time Warner Cable (TWC).
In February, Comcast agreed to buy Time Warner Cable for $45 billion. If federal regulators approve the deal, the combined group will be the country's dominant provider of television channels and Internet connections, reaching roughly one in three American homes. Understandably, the prospects of such a deal conjure up images of powerful media conglomerates controlling everything we see on TV and the Internet, but disturbing as this possibility may be, there are bigger reasons to block the deal.
A merger between these giants would threaten an open and fair market for cable television as well as Internet access. To understand this, consider that Comcast could gain 11 million subscribers if it buys Time Warner Cable. Even if it winds up divesting 3 million subscribers to Charter Communications (CHTR) to gain approval from the Federal Trade Commission, the combined company will still have 30 million subscribers nationwide.
Some would say the companies don't directly compete -- Comcast has its own markets, such as in Philadelphia and Washington, D.C., and Time Warner Cable has its own, such as in New York and North Carolina. The lack of overlap may temper antitrust concerns, but even geographically divergent markets can create an anticompetitive environment.
Consumers may not see prices rise in the near term, since the markets don't overlap. However, consumers are also unlikely to see prices fall, which is what could happen if the two biggest cable companies did indeed compete with each other in the same arena.
Another factor to consider is how the scarcity of a necessary resource like broadband will inevitably increase the power of monopolistic distributors while hurting content providers and consumers. On Monday, the same day Netflix (NFLX), announced it would raise prices for new customers to help pay for investments in original programs, CEO Reed Hastings said he opposed the Comcast-Time Warner Cable deal.
"I don't know that we want anybody to control half of the U.S. Internet," Reed told analysts on a video conference call.
Consumers ultimately lose as content providers are increasingly forced to pay for a share of limited broadband "shelf space" by cable, telephone, and satellite companies. In addition, by simply acquiring Time Warner Cable's subscribers, Comcast is sidestepping the need to build new infrastructure of its own. That's a great deal for Comcast but not for the U.S., which ranks 35th in the world in broadband capacity according to the World Economic Forum, and whose future needs will demand considerable investments from the private sector in more infrastructure.
Insufficient broadband capacity impacts the ability of Americans to access both television as well as the Internet in an increasingly media-driven age, which can slow down communications, access to information, commercial activity, and blunt our competitiveness in global markets. And while a study from the Pew Center shows that 70% of Americans have high-speed broadband, some experts question whether the Federal Communications Commission's definition of broadband itself is flawed and paints a rosy picture of a grim reality.
So while the merger may not be anti-competitive in terms of eliminating existing competition, it does obviate the need for both Comcast and Time Warner Cable to expand their services and aggressively compete with each other on price, quality of service, and capacity, which amounts to the same thing. The Federal Trade Commission should consider all this before approving a deal and recognize the long-term ramifications of allowing cable juggernauts to expand their footprint artificially instead of through investment and competition.
Sanjay Sanghoee is a political and business commentator. He has worked at investment banks Lazard Freres and Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein, as well as at hedge fund Ramius. Sanghoee sits on the board of Davidson Media Group, a mid-market radio station operator. He has an MBA from Columbia Business School and is also the author of two thriller novels. Follow him @sanghoee.
While the Senate discusses the rising cost of cable TV, the real debate should be over how to provide fast, reliable, and affordable access to the Internet.
FORTUNE -- Most Americans can commiserate with Senator John McCain -- our cable bills are rising fast and we're fed up with it. We don't want to pay for channels we don't watch, and we certainly don't want to pay ever-increasing prices for poor customer service and Internet speeds that MOREChristopher Matthews - Apr 10, 2014 11:23 AM ET
Despite media reports, the deal has nothing to do with net neutrality or speed.
By Dan Rayburn
FORTUNE – On Sunday, Comcast and Netflix announced a commercial interconnect relationship between the two companies, which is in the very early stages of implementation, and as a result, many who clearly don't understand how the Internet works are writing about the news. Those who don't cover network infrastructure for a living should not MOREFeb 24, 2014 11:55 AM ET
The FCC will be hard-pressed to approve any further consolidation among broadband Internet providers without a guarantee to honor net neutrality rules. Comcast has its work cut out for itself.Feb 14, 2014 3:15 PM ET
As competition deepens, the online video streaming company could look extra attractive to investors.
By Sanjay Sanghoee
FORTUNE – The future of Netflix (NFLX) could soon change dramatically, now that Comcast (CMSCA) has agreed to buy rival Time Warner Cable (TWC) in a $45 billion deal that would combine America's two biggest cable companies.
With 44 million subscribers, Netflix has established itself as a leading player in the market for online on-demand video programming, MOREFeb 14, 2014 8:47 AM ET
Comcast's deal for Time Warner Cable would be the 10th-largest merger in U.S. history.
FORTUNE -- Comcast's agreement to purchase Time Warner Cable not only would be the largest U.S. merger of 2014, but would be the tenth-largest U.S. merger of all-time.
That's the word from Thomson Reuters, which uses a $70.2 billion price that includes assumed debt. The deal's equity value is around $45.2 billion.
Since the financial crisis, Comcast-TWC would rank MOREDan Primack - Feb 13, 2014 2:16 PM ET
There already is almost no competition in the broadband Internet market, and the Feds can't come in and create competition where there isn't any to begin with.Christopher Matthews - Feb 13, 2014 12:36 PM ET
Brian Roberts' bid to combine the nation's two largest cable providers delivers a blow to King Content.
FORTUNE -- Here's a good question to ask about the Comcast-Time Warner Cable deal that was announced Thursday morning: Why isn't Comcast (CMCSA) CEO Brian Roberts buying Viacom (VIA)? Or Fox (FOXA)? Or Time Warner (TWX) (the owner of Fortune, for now)?
Instead, Comcast is spending $45 billion to combine the nation's No. 1 and MOREStephen Gandel, senior editor - Feb 13, 2014 11:25 AM ET
The two cable companies will need to strike a deal. But who will be the first to squeal?Jan 16, 2014 11:40 AM ET
Will Time Inc. shareholders be as pleased as those of Time Warner Cable and AOL?
FORTUNE -- Time Warner announced Wednesday that it plans to cut its Time Inc. magazine unit loose, spinning it off into an independent public company. There are all sorts of details yet to be worked out, but the largest question is whether this deal will actually work. And, by that, I mean create additional value.
Time Inc. MOREDan Primack - Mar 7, 2013 12:58 PM ET
|Standard & Poor's cuts Russia's credit rating|
|Internet giant Sina caught in China porn crackdown|
|Will 7 Apples a day keep the bears away? - The Buzz|
|Don't assume you're safe from Heartbleed|
|Tesla finds friends in the FTC|