Organizational Context Verizon is a national telecommunications company, headquartered in New York City. The company was formed from the breakup of Bell and subsequent mergers and acquisitions. The company has divisions for media, network and technology and customer/product operations. The latter is by far the largest component of the company, encompassing Verizon Wireless, and a number of companies aimed at the enterprise market. Verizon competes against AT&T and Sprint, both of

The latter is typically used for network equipment for local telephone operations. Depreciation policies include the recording of plant, property and equipment at cost. Local telephone operations again are subject to different depreciation methods, and use the straight line method and the group remaining life method, depending on the asset. The company also chooses to capitalize all software that has a useful life of over one year. The straight

AT&T is in basic terms a telecommunications services provider with operations not only in the U.S. But also in other parts of the world. In this text, I conduct an analysis of the company. In so doing, I will amongst other things explore its accounting systems and internal controls. Further, I will also conduct a brief review of its financial statements. Company Overview In so many ways, AT&T can be regarded an

This could bring a flood of new competitors to the market. Verizon is working with other wireless providers to gain preferential access to new wavelengths. Previous auctions, including the 2007 auction of the 700 MHz spectrum that Verizon won, came with open-access rules. Verizon is battling the FCC with regards to the regulator's desire for openness rules on all bandwidth, something Verizon considers a threat to be actively combated

Overall, at&T is the more profitable of the two companies. That Verizon has the stronger gross margins and at&T the stronger net margins indicates that at&T does a better job of controlling its cost structure than does Verizon. The Industry The telecommunications industry is highly competitive in both the landline and wireless segments. By 2006, wireless spending had match wireline spending. While this presents significant opportunities for telecommunications, much of that spending

The deal was immediately criticized as anti-competitive by William Kennard, the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, and by the Communications Workers of America, which represents some workers at both of the merged companies. But neither government regulators nor union bureaucrats will have the slightest impact on the latest merger. They have neither the power nor the desire to oppose the plans of the giant telecommunications monopolies. More substantial opposition