*Pages 1--1 from  Microsoft Word - 43333.doc*
 SEPARATE  STATEMENT  OF  CHAIRMAN  MICHAEL  K.  POWELL 
 Re:  Applications  of  AT&  T  Wireless  Services,  Inc.  and  Cingular  Wireless  Corporation,  For  Consent  to  Transfer  of  Control  of  Licenses  and  Authorizations,  WT  Docket  No.  04-  70,  et  al. 
 (Adopted  October  22,  2004). 
 Today  the  Commission  concludes  --  with  significant  conditions  --  that  Cingular’s  request  to  combine  with  AT&  T  Wireless  serves  the  public  interest.  Cingular  will  emerge  a  stronger 
 competitor  with  better  coverage,  improved  customer  service  and  a  renewed  commitment  to  innovation.  This  will  not  only  be  true  in  the  voice  market  but  also  increasingly  for  data.  The 
 diverse  cross  section  of  support  the  transaction  garnered  from  groups  with  disabilities,  rural  carriers,  as  well  as  labor  and  public  safety  organizations  aptly  demonstrates  its  benefits. 


 Even  in  light  of  these  attributes,  the  Commission  concluded  that  the  deal  could  not  go  forward  absent  several  conditions,  including:  business  unit  divestitures  in  16  markets,  limits  on 
 Cingular's  acquisition  of  spectrum  in  an  upcoming  auction,  and  additional  spectrum  divestitures.  The  Commission  has  assessed,  on  a  market-  by-  market  basis,  whether  Cingular's  acquisition  of 
 AT&  T's  customers  and  spectrum  holdings  pose  a  threat  to  competition.  Only  after  we  looked  seriously  at  the  proposed  transactions  effect  upon  intermodal  competition  did  we  conclude  that 
 the  transaction  was  in  the  public  interest.  We  believe  our  conditions,  combined  with  the  benefits  to  the  consumer  experience  brought  by  Cingular's  new  scale  and  scope,  will  ensure  the  public 
 interest  is  served  by  this  transaction.  Indeed,  both  before  and  after,  this  transaction  the  wireless  market  is  the  most  competitive  and  innovative  within  the  Commission's  jurisdiction. 


 In  their  partial  dissent,  my  colleagues  incorrectly  assert  that  we  confined  our  merger  evaluation  to  wireless  intramodal  issues.  To  the  contrary,  I  took  very  seriously  the  complex 
 issues  that  arise  from  the  combination  of  wireless  and  wireline  companies.  This  was  and  will  remain  a  matter  of  focus  and  concern.  However,  at  the  end  of  the  day,  we  did  not  believe  that  the 
 evidence  in  the  record  was  sufficient  to  justify  and  substantiate  additional  conditions  beyond  those  already  imposed  by  the  Order. 


 Finally,  this  Order  is  the  culmination  of  an  enormous  amount  of  work  by  a  talented  and  dedicated  FCC  staff.  The  researchers  and  drafters  of  this  Order  did  an  extraordinary  job  of  identifying 
 specific  harms  and  crafting  appropriate  detailed  conditions.  It  is  primarily  because  of  their  dedicated  efforts  that  we  are  able  to  bring  this  decision  to  a  close  today. 
1