Altice/Cablevision Would 'Deliver Substantial Net Detriments,' MFRConsulting Says
"The ethos and behavior" of Altice would mean considerable harm for New York City-area residents and Cablevision employees if it's allowed to buy the cable company, MFRConsulting said in a pair of filings (see here and here) Friday in docket…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
15-257. One filing cited disputes between Altice and workers at a 2015 acquisition, Portugal Telecom. "Altice takes actions that affect others (possibly with harmful consequences) unilaterally and obliges them to respond and object after the fact ... instead of engaging in good faith negotiations to arrive at an agreed outcome about changes," said MFRConsulting, which has been a critic of both the Cablevision deal (see 1512300024) and previously raised questions about Altice's now-approved buy of Suddenlink (see 1512180035). The other filing submitted comments by New York Department of Public Service staff, plus a debt analysis, to argue claims Altice/Cablevision would bring any net public benefit are groundless, "whereas there are multiple independently identified and validated grounds for expecting it to deliver substantial net detriments." Altice didn't comment.