August 31, 2011

DoJ Gets to Pick Corporate Winners and Losers Too
— Dave in Texas

Kind of a recurring theme in the Obama administration, we'll tell you what's good for your economy. And if we decide your acquisition of T-Mobile is "bad for America", we don't have a problem at all forcing your commitment to pay your competitor $3 billion to its parent Deutsche Telekom because we pulled you out against your will.

Not to mention airspace and a roaming agreement worth considerably more.

The termination requirements are designed to protect Deutsche Telekom and T-Mobile in a particularly precarious deal, said Robert Bell, co-chairman of law firm Kaye Scholer's antitrust practice group. Waiting for the controversial proposal to go through could leave T-Mobile vulnerable as key employees consider leaving and competitors circle, Bell said.

"Agreeing to this fee was part of the price AT&T had to pay to convince T-Mobile to go forward, to take a calculated risk in this transaction" he said. "Typically, the longer it takes to get to closing, the more problematic it can be for the seller. You're really putting your company in limbo."

Someone remind me again why businesses are unwilling to invest capital to expand right now? Why they want to punish Obama by sitting on their capital and adopting a wait and see attitude?

What could it be, what could it be?


Posted by: Dave in Texas at 04:38 PM | Comments (87)
Post contains 232 words, total size 2 kb.

1 GOT SCOAMF?

Posted by: steevy at August 31, 2011 04:41 PM (1Nzoh)

2 Iis this a curious-free zone?  please?

Posted by: Jane D'oh at August 31, 2011 04:42 PM (UOM48)

3 1 Steevy,

got Fascist?!?

Posted by: sven10077 at August 31, 2011 04:42 PM (AEIYh)

4 WTF.  The NLRB has done its best to squash job creation.  Heinrich Holder might as well send his goons out to pile on small business. 

Posted by: Peregrine Took, Hobbit who thinks Obama is a SCOAMF at August 31, 2011 04:42 PM (mJznp)

5 seriously Dave in Texas Barry has declared war on growth....the execs who got suckered in by HISTORIC!!!!!!

get the gag now...he's done

Posted by: sven10077 at August 31, 2011 04:43 PM (AEIYh)

Posted by: nickless at August 31, 2011 04:43 PM (MMC8r)

7 Sorry, I support this. At&t-mobile was bad news. Also, this is a big blow to Communication workers of America, as T's workforce isn't unionized.

Posted by: Archades at August 31, 2011 04:44 PM (uR4qs)

8 Yeah..  I saw the lefties touting this as a big win for Obama today..

Question - why was Comcast's merger with NBC OK with these libtards?  Apparently, not enough campaign cash exchanged hands to make it happen.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at August 31, 2011 04:44 PM (UTq/I)

9
Well, as a committed capitalist, I'm going with T-Mobile!

Posted by: Fish the Impaler at August 31, 2011 04:44 PM (Lt/Za)

10 4

There are those that say I target only big business.....look left

there are those that say I need to hit more business look right

well to those who say those things I simply say "wait your turn"....

look forward to future

//Ogabe

Posted by: sven10077 at August 31, 2011 04:44 PM (AEIYh)

11 Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.

Posted by: steevy at August 31, 2011 04:45 PM (1Nzoh)

12 Yeah, this is fucked up.  AT&T would (and still might) add almost 100,000 jobs if the deal goes through.  Also, they would have invested an additional 13 Billion to roll-out 4G broadband to rural areas. 

This is just chapter 10 in Obama's war on business. 

Posted by: Ugknown at August 31, 2011 04:46 PM (E4Cuj)

13 What could it be, what could it be?

There greedy.

Posted by: Illiterate Lefty at August 31, 2011 04:46 PM (ZMHGo)

14 I think the cellular market is already too concentrated.

When you ask, "Someone remind me again why businesses are unwilling to invest capital to expand right now?" it begs the question, since at net it's not expansion, but acquisition, consolidation, then downsizing.

Shouldn't we be wary of "too big to fail" mega companies dominating markets?

Posted by: logprof at August 31, 2011 04:46 PM (lh7Yc)

15
Shouldn't we be wary of "too big to fail" mega companies dominating markets?

Posted by: logprof at August 31, 2011 09:46 PM (lh7Yc)

Kinda like those successful entities, Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac?


Posted by: Fish the Impaler at August 31, 2011 04:48 PM (Lt/Za)

16 14 Logprof,

there is still plenty of competition, frankly I am bothered that AT&T's capital will not be spent improving our 4g coverage for a better cyber infrastructure more than I am scared of ma bell's ghost

Posted by: sven10077 at August 31, 2011 04:48 PM (AEIYh)

17

Kinda like those successful entities, Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac?


Posted by: Fish the Impaler at August 31, 2011 09:48 PM (Lt/Za)

--Yup.  Schumpeter Über Alles!

Posted by: logprof at August 31, 2011 04:49 PM (lh7Yc)

18 Suckers of Cock.

Posted by: toby928 at August 31, 2011 04:49 PM (GTbGH)

19 If the $39-billion deal disintegrates, AT&T would have to pay more than $3 billion in cash to T-Mobile's German parent, Deutsche Telekom... Dude. Dude! There was wilder stuff than this in Atlas Shrugs - but not in this area!

Posted by: Comrade Arthur at August 31, 2011 04:50 PM (+JhHG)

20 I hate having to pull out against my will . Having gotting that off my chest , if the hunchback doesn't stomp this post in three minutes I will be truly disappointed .

Posted by: Bill D. Cat at August 31, 2011 04:50 PM (npr0X)

21 Can Hannity go on vacation?

Posted by: cherry pi at August 31, 2011 04:51 PM (OhYCU)

22 Gotten ^ ..... hiccup .

Posted by: Bill D. Cat at August 31, 2011 04:51 PM (npr0X)

23 Obama "T-Mobile" economy

Posted by: James Loughner at August 31, 2011 04:51 PM (e8kgV)

24 21 Cherry Pi,

preferably one lasting twenty-five years to life?

Posted by: sven10077 at August 31, 2011 04:52 PM (AEIYh)

25 If I were a CEO who got screwed like this I'd do something nasty. For example, if I were the Boeing CEO (ref the NLRB screwjob) I would very publically fly to China and tour, with Chinese Govt. reps, plausible airplane factory sites. And it would not be a bluff.

Posted by: Comrade Arthur at August 31, 2011 04:52 PM (+JhHG)

26 25 Comrade Arthur,

you'd be playing into his foreign backers' hands at that point....

Ogabe has been wildly successful not a failure....

his goal is our failure

Posted by: sven10077 at August 31, 2011 04:53 PM (AEIYh)

27 obama dservs a $20 mllyn dollur sign bonus.

Posted by: Chris Johnson at August 31, 2011 04:53 PM (lh7Yc)

28 It's Bilderbergites doing it. And in three more beers, when I get more clarity I'll fully explain it.

Posted by: Jimmah at August 31, 2011 04:53 PM (Ky8qS)

29 @ 14.  There are some technical advantages not generally understood by anyone out of the industry, but aggregating user bases (customers) under fewer companies provides the large amount of capital necessary for expansion and inovation.  Think about the iPad and iPhone - where the hell do you think they came from?  No, Apple did NOT invent those devices on their own - they had to have capital.  Where did the capital come from?  Think about it.

Posted by: Ugknown at August 31, 2011 04:54 PM (E4Cuj)

30 29,

indeed three to five companies is probably optimal especially considering we are expecting a generational shift in system architecture....

AT&T should have donated more cash to ACORN I guess

Posted by: sven10077 at August 31, 2011 04:55 PM (AEIYh)

31 Okay, I am a total ignoramus on this kind of stuff.  Why does AT&T have to pay T-Mobile money for NOT aquiring them?

Posted by: jewells45, tea party terrorist at August 31, 2011 04:55 PM (Z71Vg)

32 This is great news and will likely result in the availability of a plethora of new ring tones for consumers. Thank your lucky stars that gifted public servants are willing to go to bat for you, even though you`re stupid.

Posted by: SCOAMFOTUS at August 31, 2011 04:57 PM (XhcnD)

33 So behind the scenes, Harvard lawyeers craft a plan to clip AT&T of a few billion. Draw up the details, have AT&T agree and out of left field, Ivy League Lawyers in the Obama Administration block the deal, trigger the penalty and get some nice fat checks .
That's the Chicago Way

Posted by: De' Debil Hisself at August 31, 2011 04:57 PM (lpWVn)

34 The business of America is none of your business.

Posted by: Barack Coolidge at August 31, 2011 04:58 PM (KbEJl)

35 31 Okay, I am a total ignoramus on this kind of stuff.  Why does AT&T have to pay T-Mobile money for NOT aquiring them? Posted by: jewells45, tea party terrorist at August 31, 2011 09:55 PM

The T-Mobile girl's pink dresses aren't free you know

Posted by: kbdabear at August 31, 2011 04:58 PM (Y+DPZ)

36 @ 31.  It's called an Intent to Purchase contract.  T-Mobile is taking a risk agreeing to the merger.  AT&T was/is showing their commitment to making the purchase.

Posted by: Ugknown at August 31, 2011 04:58 PM (E4Cuj)

37 31 Jewell,

contracts were signed and there was likely a reasonable expectation of proft on T-Mobil's parent part....

thus Ogabe once again ignores contract law and uses DoJ to do work more properly done by the SEC.....

he is a moocher par excellence

Posted by: sven10077 at August 31, 2011 04:58 PM (AEIYh)

38 35 KDKabear,

bunk

Posted by: sven10077 at August 31, 2011 04:59 PM (AEIYh)

39 36,

correct essentially "earnest money" on a far bigger scale

Posted by: sven10077 at August 31, 2011 04:59 PM (AEIYh)

40 Someone remind me again why businesses are unwilling to invest capital to expand right now? Why they want to punish Obama by sitting on their capital and adopting a wait and see attitude?

It must be because they're racist because everyone knows Obama has a plan that will work if only the teabaggers would let him do it

Posted by: proudonkey, AKA palin steele but always dum-dum to us at August 31, 2011 05:00 PM (Y+DPZ)

41

 There are some technical advantages not generally understood by anyone out of the industry

There were definitely technical advantages to this merger, and also ultimately advantages to users of cellular technology. This was a very stupid move by the US government. A. Very. Stupid. Move. If you think that companies outside the US are sitting still in terms of trying to get the advantage in cellular service, well, you are a fool and this is ultimately just going to lead to more lost jobs in the US as well as more non-US companies reaping the profits of providing what is rapidly becoming a necessary service.

Hate on AT&T all you want, but this merger would've been good for cellular customers.

Posted by: ParanoidStillAGirlInSeattle at August 31, 2011 05:00 PM (RZ8pf)

42 36, 37.  Ahh... makes more sense now.  I admit my eyes tend to glaze over sometimes when reading about this stuff.

Posted by: jewells45, tea party terrorist at August 31, 2011 05:00 PM (Z71Vg)

43 It's Bilderbergites doing it. And in three more beers, when I get more clarity I'll fully explain it. Jimmah , Word to the wise . You have no idea how far those bastards will go . When the dust settles , ask DiT what they did to him when he started talking about his research into the G-Spot .

Posted by: Bill D. Cat at August 31, 2011 05:00 PM (npr0X)

44 two minds on this one. I hate that the doj is getting into this mess at this late date... and not sure I like the merger all that much. but then again I'm old enough to remember true "monopolies"

Posted by: The Great Satan's Ghost at August 31, 2011 05:01 PM (UrPTC)

45 Wise companies will have to include a stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure clause into their contracts.

Posted by: toby928 at August 31, 2011 05:02 PM (GTbGH)

46 Why in Gods name was the DoJ involved in this at all?  Well, I know why..it's a rhetorical question.  But as was mentioned, isn't this something the SEC would be involved in?  Not the DOJ

Posted by: jewells45, tea party terrorist at August 31, 2011 05:03 PM (Z71Vg)

47 41 PGiS,

and good for ALL cellular customers as the increase in 4g coverage would have forced Sprint to compete....

we are rapidly falling behind the Japanese, Koreans, Chinese, and Western EUtopians in cellular tech

Posted by: sven10077 at August 31, 2011 05:03 PM (AEIYh)

48 46

yes it is an SEC matter...

this is Eric "what black panthers' holder shakedown of the phone industry....

"donate or else"

Heinrich Holder

Posted by: sven10077 at August 31, 2011 05:04 PM (AEIYh)

49 When our kid arrived in Japan less than two years ago, he bought an iPad and told us the technology over there surpasses anything here.  He's gotten used to high-tech everything, electronically. 

Posted by: Jane D'oh at August 31, 2011 05:05 PM (UOM48)

50 Did someone not do their due diligence by paying off a community organizer/faith leader/Al Sharpton/Jesse Jackson to get behind the deal like Comcast had to.

Posted by: befuddled at August 31, 2011 05:05 PM (xJU23)

51 @48  dammit....iPHONE, not iPAD.


Posted by: Jane D'oh at August 31, 2011 05:05 PM (UOM48)

52
EUtopians in cellular tech

Posted by: sven10077 at August 31, 2011 10:03 PM (AEIYh)

Yeah, our tech sector is very robust, and we expect to deploy at least four new cell towers this calendar year.


Posted by: Nepalese Phone Co., Kat Man Du, Nepal at August 31, 2011 05:06 PM (Lt/Za)

53

we are rapidly falling behind the Japanese, Koreans, Chinese, and Western EUtopians in cellular tech

Exactly. It's bad news.

Posted by: ParanoidStillAGirlInSeattle at August 31, 2011 05:07 PM (RZ8pf)

54 Don't worry, SCOAMF will make another speech, then all will be well. And in that speech he will tell us all about how pro business he is. Screwing over Boeing and Gibson Guitar? Those are just flukes. Don't mean anything.

Posted by: nerdygirl at August 31, 2011 05:07 PM (EJlMQ)

55 @ 41.  Well said Sir, Well said. 

Posted by: Ugknown at August 31, 2011 05:07 PM (E4Cuj)

56 Holder is a useful idiot to BarryO and the Marxist way. All going according to plan.

Posted by: Robert17 at August 31, 2011 05:08 PM (LaaRT)

57 As a long-time T-Mobile customer, I can't say I'm sorry to hear this deal is being challenged. I have no desire to be a customer of AT&T's unionized workforce. (T-Mobile's customer service has been exceptional and this deal would most likely have killed that.)

If AT&T has $39 billion dollars to buy T-Mobile, why can't they just invest that money in their network directly?

Posted by: Obama is a SCOAMF at August 31, 2011 05:09 PM (ymBoi)

58 The anti-trust department obtained a memo during their investigation that claimed that a three billion investment by AT&T, that would have covered essentially all people in the US, was scuttled because it didn't make business sense - that is, there was no cost:benefit argument for it on the merits.

Posted by: The Great Satan's Ghost at August 31, 2011 05:09 PM (UrPTC)

59 57,

it would be cheaper to buy T-mobil and use the non union workforce to do the job as well as allow them access to the parent companies vendors on tower technology at T-mobile's EU friendly contract cost....

now not so much

Posted by: sven10077 at August 31, 2011 05:11 PM (AEIYh)

60 OT. Rahm Emanuel is cutting the budget in Chicago? Chicagobudget.org

Posted by: Beefy Meatball at August 31, 2011 05:12 PM (bZ8J6)

61 When SCoaMF gives his stupid speech next Thursday, I want Darryl Issa and Brian Terry's family (the murdered Border Patrol agent) FRONT AND CENTER, staring laser-like at Barky.


Posted by: Jane D'oh at August 31, 2011 05:12 PM (UOM48)

62 O/T but ONT is up!

Posted by: runningrn at August 31, 2011 05:12 PM (0fUOB)

63 58 GSG,

it is not their job to prevent trusts it is their job to punish formed ones....

coverage was the goal

Posted by: sven10077 at August 31, 2011 05:12 PM (AEIYh)

64

Antitrust has always been a political game.  TMobile must have the right lobbyists this time.  Ratchet your competition, force deals through, break deals up, or a host of other "creative" solutions, all in the name of preventing "restraint of trade" - a term as currently amorphous as "interstate commerce."

Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 31, 2011 05:12 PM (yK8YH)

65 ............isn't this something the SEC would be involved in? Hey ! Fuck off ! The SEC is using the best supercomputers money can buy ....... for the purpose supercomputers were invented for ........ busting Wallstreet fraud and downloading porn .......OK , mostly downloading porn .

Posted by: SEC Employee at August 31, 2011 05:13 PM (npr0X)

66

Is a justice department lawsuit the typical process for denying a merger/acquistion based on anti-trust concerns? 

In other words, is Holder taking action here, despite the matter being  subject to approval of the FCC/FTC or some other F'ing agency? 

Posted by: California Red at August 31, 2011 05:14 PM (DXTKe)

67 I'm sure that the DoJ's actions here are completely unrelated to AT&T's prior stance on the FCC's proposed Net Neutrality rules. Nope, couldn't be a connection.... As Ugknown said, there are some definite technical reasons this is a good idea. AT&T's primary motivation here was spectrum; each company individually is fairly narrow-banded for 3G/4G which complicates both network planning and handset design. Combining their frequency allocations will go a long way to improving the quality of service they can offer, as well as the performance of phones on their network. And finally, there's already been a fire sale on TMO employees as a lot of their top talent has already jumped ship in anticipation of the merger...

Posted by: acrojason at August 31, 2011 05:17 PM (9iZk/)

68 There was a diary on Redstate linking this decsion to a Sprint exec that was on Obama's transition team.  Sprint would stand to lose if ATT got the tech from TMobile is the possible rationale for the moochian tactics.   

Posted by: California Red at August 31, 2011 05:18 PM (DXTKe)

69 "60 OT. Rahm Emanuel is cutting the budget in Chicago? " Well, this could be a real blow to the corruption industry. How many politicians' relatives are losing contracts? I'll be impressed when I hear about the 19 year old nephews of aldermen losing their jobs.

Posted by: nerdygirl at August 31, 2011 05:22 PM (EJlMQ)

70 #61 I want Joe Wilson in there, heckling up a storm.

Posted by: nerdygirl at August 31, 2011 05:24 PM (EJlMQ)

71 68 CR,

it is ALWAYS about dollars and sense

Posted by: sven10077 at August 31, 2011 05:25 PM (AEIYh)

72 @ 67.  That's perfectly stated.  Spectrum was/is the real motivation.  Also, this deal is not over yet.  Randall Stephenson (AT&T CEO) is no pussy.  The likely outcome is a counter-suit by AT&T and a settlement with AT&T agreeing to certain "concessions".  So, the deal is not over - there is way too much riding on this to be dropped without a fight.  Stay tuned.

Posted by: Ugknown at August 31, 2011 05:28 PM (E4Cuj)

73 72,

catastrophic worst case scenario is AT&T protecting their assets by moving as much of their grid as possible up north.....


Posted by: sven10077 at August 31, 2011 05:30 PM (AEIYh)

74 There is no corruption in this administration. And when I say none, I mean there is a certain amount, more than we would like to admit. Jenkins! Stop taking those bribes from Sprint!

Posted by: Eric "The Red" Holder at August 31, 2011 05:31 PM (bxiXv)

75 19 Isnippage

There was wilder stuff than this in Atlas Shrugs - but not in this area!

Posted by: Comrade Arthur

Ya, but "Atlas Shrugged" was a book, this is real life...

Posted by: Gmac at August 31, 2011 05:31 PM (W8JxB)

76 I actually think this is a good deal, but, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't several Federal agencies, including the FCC have to approve the merger to start with?

Letting them merge would reduce the major field to 3. And, as someone who was there, when BellSouth Mobility merged with SBC, lots of jobs were lost. When Cingular bought AT&T Wireless, lots of jobs were lost. There would be lots of duplicate jobs that would go away. T-Mobile has many stores, including agents, in the vicinity of AT&T stores, so even more jobs would be lost as stores are closed.

Then there are the customers, who would be forced to give up their plans and move to more expensive plans in order to upgrade their equipment.

Posted by: William Teach at August 31, 2011 05:38 PM (Pq9u/)

77 I am not sure I actually thought this was going to be a good merger myself. Mixed feelings, I guess, having been a victim of both companies, all that I could see happening was that instead of two lousy service companies, there would be one big one. Fewer numbers to call to be placed on infinite hold, then speak to either a moron or a Martian. On a good day.

Posted by: Mister Money at August 31, 2011 05:41 PM (wN82N)

78 @72 Thanks. This just adds to what has turned out to be an interesting few weeks in wireless... Somebody brought up Sprint and how they're hopping mad about this deal. In the long-run, Sprint is irrelevant and they'll change their tune when/if the AT&T/TMO deal is completed and VZW comes knocking on Sprint's door... I'll be far more surprised if further consolidation does not happen than if it does.

Posted by: acrojason at August 31, 2011 05:44 PM (9iZk/)

79 testing

Posted by: city gal at August 31, 2011 05:56 PM (k1rwm)

80 Obama and his cronies simply want to destroy America.  That's the only answer that makes any sense and hits all the right points.

Posted by: BeckoningChasm at August 31, 2011 07:10 PM (i0App)

81 I used to be an AT&T blue account holder, and after the merger with Cingular, we were nickel-and-dimed to death, no doubt to try to get us to enter into new contracts. Fuckers.

Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque at August 31, 2011 07:22 PM (PaYgs)

82 One more thing - if T-Mobile is acquired by AT&T, they will end up with a monopoly on nationwide GSM service.

Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque at August 31, 2011 07:24 PM (PaYgs)

83 " Why they want to punish Obama by sitting on their capital and adopting a wait and see attitude?

What could it be, what could it be?"


Because they haven't figured out how to punish him "with a babeh".

Posted by: K~Bob at August 31, 2011 09:11 PM (9b6FB)

84 @57, "As a long-time T-Mobile customer, I can't say I'm sorry to hear this deal is being challenged. I have no desire to be a customer of AT&T's unionized workforce. (T-Mobile's customer service has been exceptional and this deal would most likely have killed that.)

If AT&T has $39 billion dollars to buy T-Mobile, why can't they just invest that money in their network directly?"

$20B dollars this year, cocksucker.  How much is Ford or GM or anyone else dumping into the US economy?  Anywhere near there?  No?  Eat a dick.  AT&T can't buy bandwidth from Mexico or China.  Read the fucking quarterly statements that this publicly traded company is required to file and you will find out exactly how much money they are paying towards infrastructure.  Plus, if you knew your asshole from a hole in the ground, you would know that AT&T is trying to match Verizon's LTE network by 2013.  You think that's cheap?  The deal was for towers, MTSOs, and backhaul, all of which AT&T needs, and needs a lot of.  It makes sense since AT&T and T-Mo have the same Radio Access Network technologies, specifically GSM and UMTS (HSPA).  Minimal retraining.  Same OEM providers (Ericsson, Nokia, Nortel, Siemens, etc).  Spectrum is involved too, but that's more important for future growth due to needing 20 Mhz chunks to compete with Verizon's future LTE RAN offerings.

@83 One more thing - if T-Mobile is acquired by AT&T, they will end up with a monopoly on nationwide GSM service.

Oh sob sob sob!  It's almost like there isn't more diversity in carriers here in the US than any country on earth... oh wait, it is exactly like that.  If all you care about is getting on the network, we have many RAN technologies for you to choose from.  And guess what?  If you're willing to actually pay for your phone, you can get handsets with *gasp* multiple radios that can handle multiple RAN technologies!  What you are really bitching about is that a carrier might not subsidize your purchase of a world phone.  Well, fuck off and eat a dick.  Reach into your own wallet and pay for it.

Posted by: flashoverride at August 31, 2011 10:42 PM (8JPcC)

85 The thing that stumps me is how Jesse Jackson missed an opportunity like this to siphon off a little "cream". Obviously Eric Holder has called his bluff and raised him, although it's odd that the spoils go to the Germans and not to Holder's "people".

Posted by: Snake Plissken at September 01, 2011 01:34 AM (4SDHr)

86 I'm surprised at this action: the AFL-CIO fully supported it because AT&T's plan was to lay off a ton of T-Mob's non-union workforce and replace them with CWA drones.  (And force those not laid off to join the union).  If Obama's going against the unions, either the unions were damaged more by Scott Walker than we know or there's something else going on.

Posted by: Ian S. at September 01, 2011 03:41 AM (WXhxA)

87 Wow this is soo helpful I have been trying to figure this out on my own for a long time now. Hopefully making this change will help encourage discussion on my blog.

Posted by: The Cut AudioBook at September 01, 2011 04:26 AM (aGYay)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
109kb generated in CPU 0.11, elapsed 1.1204 seconds.
62 queries taking 1.0384 seconds, 323 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.