University of Utah Student Newspapers--The Chronicle | 2014-01-14 | Page 4

4 Tuesday January 14, 2014 OPINION www.dailyutahchronicle.corn Sprint shouldn't purchase T-Mobile Azerbaijan, Merge will result in fewer choices and higher prices of TuT Lig E. MOO 0 P C LY.. Armenia could cause a world war ROSE JONES Columnist T ARASH TADJIKI/The Daily Utah Chronicle Columnist T he penny-pinchers of wireless have been laughing for years at foolhardy spendthrifts who allow themselves to be gouged by self-proclaimed "premium" cellular carriers such as Verizon and AT&T. Sitting high on their thrones of pennies both saved and earned, these frugal subscribers of discount carriers such as Sprint and T-Mobile thumb their noses at the thought of paying exorbitant rates for slightly better service that is more than they need. But times are changing, and if the recent trend of consolidation in the wireless industry continues, those bargain-hunting customers of discount carriers will be forced to join the very people they mock. Over the last several weeks, rumors have run rampant that Sprint is planning to submit a $19 billion bid to buy T-Mobile in the first half of 2014. Sprint, recently bought by the Japanese conglomerate Softbank, is looking to gain a stronger foothold in its efforts to compete with Verizon and AT&T and views the purchase of T-Mobile as the best way to do that. While the idea of buying out the competition is appealing to investors, who have seen the stock price of Sprint and T-Mobile skyrocket because of the merger rumors, it does not bode well for consumers. In the face of stiff competition from Verizon and AT&T, who combined have nearly double the customers and better coverage than that of Sprint and T-Mobile, according to TechHive, the idea of a merger between the latter might seem like logical way for them to compete while at the same time creating a stronger third carrier. But the fact of the matter is that while it may look good in theory, this merge would actually decrease competition by limiting consumer choice and raising prices on wireless plans. In 2011 the Federal Communications Commission, led by Julius Genachowski (who has since left the FCC), blocked a proposed merger between AT&T and T-Mobile, citing concerns that wireless industry was on the cusp of becoming a duopoly. Genachowski was quoted by Bloomberg L.P. as saying, "Look at the market now If you look at TMobile and Sprint, instead of moving down, they're moving up." This statement has proven to be prophetic, as in the two years since, particularly T-Mobile has increased both profits and its customer base, according to GeekWire. If AT&T had been allowed to merge with T-Mobile, the most likely scenario would have been Verizon making a move to buy out Sprint. The result would have been a cellular industry with two wireless titans that have a history of colluding on pricing. In 2009 Verizon and AT&T were accused of conspiring with each other to raise the price of sending texts to 20 cents per message, which represented a ioo percent increase from 2005. When Verizon ditched its un- limited data in favor of a tiered data system that effectively raised prices yet again on its customers, AT&T almost immediately followed suit. In comparison, Sprint and TMobile have kept their prices relatively low and have offered unlimited data as a counterbalance to their two larger competitors. While Sprint would argue that their proposed merger with T-Mobile would create a stronger third player in the wireless industry the truth of the matter is that Sprint has been slowly but surely raising their prices and hasn't given any firm guarantees they will continue to offer unlimited data in the future. Meanwhile T-Mobile has been flourishing under John Legere, their dynamic new CEO, who has aggressively led a charge to revolutionize the wireless industry by ditching contracts, offering yearly upgrades and recently offering to pay termination fees for customers wanting to leave their current carrier for T-Mobile. It's these types of innovations on both pricing and offerings that make any industry competitive. The most likely reason Sprint wants to buy out T-Mobile is so they won't have to compete with their pricing and unlimited data offerings. If Sprint is allowed to merge with T-Mobile the result will be higher prices and less choice. The wireless industry could become as stagnant as the satellite television and home internet industries, where prices are high and customer satisfaction is low. Here's hoping the FCC will do all consumers a favor and hang up on a Sprint/T-Mobile merger before the wireless industry gets the last laugh. [e-mail] Toy stores should 'disrupt the pink aisle' NAFISA MASUD Columnist While reminiscing on my Winter Break, I think back to the frenzy of holiday shopping. As I wandered the aisles of a Target that felt more like 1-15 during rush hour, my claustrophobia-induced frustration quickly burst into anger when I walked past the toy aisle. On one side, I found several rows of various colors and shapes, words screaming at me from their place on cardboard boxes: "Fast!" "Rugged!" "Strong!" I turned my head, hoping to find more of the same items, and found myself instead facing a shiny, sickening wall of pink. As far as I could see were pristine plastic women with waists the size of a baby's wrist and outfits skimpier than those in most PG-13 movies. I was just as disturbed to find "cleaning kits" and "cooking sets," the equivalents of which couldn't be located in the boys' section directly across the aisle. These toys, though innocent enough, provide children with misguided messages on what is expected from them. While boys are encouraged to play with toys that value strength and precision, the market for girls' toys centers around helping them become "pretty" above all else. Internet games based on these products perpetuate the same stereotypes with games such as "Dream Date Dress Up" and "Selena's Date Rush," in which one helps Selena in her frenzy to apply makeup before her boyfriend comes over and sees her without it. An effortless Google search finds kitchen sets, washing machines and a pink play vacuum distributed under the brand "Just For SALLY YOO/The Daily Utah Chronicle Home." These products serve to teach young girls that their value is first established by dressing up to impress boys, and increases exponentially if they're able to complete domestic chores. It's important to note that pursuing physical health and being able to cook and clean are inherently worthy traits. In a practical real-life application, a man or woman's choice to leave the workplace and become a stay-at-home spouse/parent is completely respectable, as long as they are given the choice to do so. Here, young malleable minds are offered no option but to base their value in appearances and their ability to clean a house. Similarly the toys marketed to young boys encourage them to be strong and rational to the point of stoicism, offering items rooted in "masculine" occupations, such as construction and racecar driving. They should also be prompted to explore socially viewed "femi- nine" careers, such as nursing and cooking. Recently, however, changes are being made. The Lottie Fashion Doll, created in Britain, is the recipient of 12 toy awards and is designed to be a positive role model that doesn't shy away from modest clothing. A company established in 2012, aptly named GoldieBlox, cites its mission to inspire "the next generation of female engineers" and to "disrupt the pink aisle." Their products focus not on appearance but functionality, teaching their users to be inventive and creative. And meetings between Toys R Us and a campaign group called "Let Toys Be Toys" has resulted in the former promising to be more gender inclusive with regards to its advertising and the placement of toys within its store. Each of these represents a remarkable step forward, empowering young girls to explore and expand their interests. [e-mail] he current battle stage between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the small enclave Nagorno-Karabakh was set after the collapse of the Soviet Union. They both declared independence in 1991, keeping the geographical structure of their previous Socialist Republics. Currently the two war-ready countries, which have diverse religions, cultures and languages, also have the potential to trigger another world war. Empires have bounced Armenia around for centuries. As an ethnic culture, Armenians date themselves back tens of thousands of years and still use their time-honored language. Azerbaijan, historically ancient Albanian, was populated in the 11th century by ethnic Turks who, unlike their Sunni brothers in Turkey, are majority Shi'a Muslims. Azerbaijan, Nakhchivan and Armenia were seized from the Ottoman Empire by the Russians in the 1828 and 1877 Russo-Turkish wars. Nakhchivan is geographically separate from Azerbaijan but shares Azeri culture and language. Following the Bolshevik revolution, Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia fell under control of the Soviet Union as the Transcaucasian Soviet Socialist Republic. In 1922, they became separate socialist republics. Soviet leader Joseph Stalin later designated Nagorno-Karabakh — known by Armenians as Artsahk — and Nakhchivan to be governed by Azerbaijan, which is still recognized internationally. Stalin's dictate planted the seeds of war between the two countries, generating a simmering pot that is ready to boil. Nagorno-Karabakh is over 8o percent ethnic Armenian, completely surrounded by Azeri Turks. It covers seven rayons, or "districts," in the southwest quadrant of Azerbaijan. In September 1991, Armenia claimed independence and included Nagorno-Karabakh in their referendum. Three months later, Azerbaijan, with Nakhchivan, claimed independence and also included Nagorno-Karabakh, as it is inside of their national borders. The battle over Nagorno-Karabakh immediately ensued. By 1994, 30,000 from both sides had been killed, before a fragile ceasefire was put into place. Conditions have risen to near-war status several times since, inflamed by actions from one side or the other. With decades of talks between the countries going nowhere and deadly battles flaring from time to time, Nagorno-Karabakh has been in a state of limbo. The citizens of Nagorno-Karabakh are fed up with both sides and are calling for their own independent state. Armenia is cautiously supportive. However, Azerbaijan rejects the idea because it would leave a large foreign-governed island within their state. The geography is multi-dimensional and complex, confused more by the positions of allies and the allies' security agreements with outside interests. Armenia is landlocked between Azerbaijan to the east, Georgia to the North, Iran to the south and Turkey to the West. Azerbaijan's capital, Baku, and its eastern shoreline on the Caspian Sea are rich with oil and natural gas reserves, affording Azerbaijan political clout and wealth for their military. Armenia has the tactical advantage of mountain ranges, which are more defensible than offensive, and they have weapons availability from their allies Russia and Iran. As a recipient of United States foreign aid, Azerbaijan allied with Israel against Iran, regardless of their common Shi'a majorities. Turkey, with its massive military, is also allied with Azerbaijan, pitting Russia — an ally of Armenia — and Turkey against each other. Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon welcomed millions of Armenians fleeing the Ottoman Empire during World War I, so they ally against Turkey, which also allies Iran with Russia. Armenians served in both the Russian and Iranian armed forces. The U.S. attempts to ally with both countries, but U.S. partnership with NATO Turkey and the perceived war against Islam ensures that neither country trusts U.S. policy. In 2012 things were especially tense when Hungary released convicted Azeri officer Ramil Safarov back to Azerbaijan. He had killed Armenian officer Gurgen Markarian in a training camp in Budapest. And the situation just keeps getting hotter. Both the Armenian and the Azerbaijani presidents have exchanged military action-laced barbs and threatening comments. Nagorno-Karabakh is about the size of Sarajevo and is situated among similar nationalist warring cultures. If a 21st century Archduke Franz Ferdinand happens by at the right time, we could repeat the events of one century ago this year — only this time we have weapons of mass destruction. [e-mail]