Sprint and T-Mobile Extend Merger Deadline to July 29

Discussion in 'MacRumors.com News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Apr 30, 2019.

  1. MacRumors macrumors bot


    Apr 12, 2001

    Sprint and T-Mobile have announced an agreement to extend the deadline for their proposed $26 billion merger deal to July 29 (via Reuters).

    The extension was revealed in a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and means that the two carriers now have more time to get the proposed merger approved by both the Federal Communications Commission and the U.S. Department of Justice.


    The Justice Department's antitrust division has been exploring whether the deal would result in a major threat to competition. Earlier this month, Justice Department staff members reportedly told Sprint and T-Mobile that their planned merger is unlikely to be approved as it is currently structured.

    However, in an interview on CNBC, Justice Department Antitrust Division chief Makan Delrahim said he had not made a decision regarding the T-Mobile and Sprint merger and is waiting for more information from the two companies.
    T-Mobile and Sprint first announced plans for a merger in April 2018. If approved, the merger will combine two of the four major wireless carriers in the United States, giving the new company nearly 100 million customers.

    With discussions ongoing, Sprint and T-Mobile may be willing to offer concessions that include assets sales to get the government to approve the merger plans.

    However, other challenges await the two carriers, with multiple state attorneys prepared to launch lawsuits if the Justice Department doesn't end up challenging the merger, according to sources that spoke to The Wall Street Journal.

    Article Link: Sprint and T-Mobile Extend Merger Deadline to July 29
  2. LinusR macrumors 6502


    Jan 3, 2011
    26 billion! These numbers are out of this world.
  3. GuruZac macrumors 6502a


    Sep 9, 2015
    They should deny merging. It ends up being less choice and the consumer pays more.
  4. cashville2400 macrumors regular


    Nov 29, 2011
  5. Rocketman macrumors 603


    False narrative in such a competitive industry all about coverage and network. It's all about tower locations not handset rentals. One preceeds the other.
  6. progx macrumors regular


    Oct 3, 2003
    Typically, I would agree with your statement. However, Sprint needs this merger more than T-Mobile. Plus, it would create a third competitor in a two horse race. This merger would be good for consumers. Since Verizon and AT&T still have their "cooperative" grip on the US, T-Mobile and Sprint as they are now don't have an effect on the market as whole unfortunately.

    If this deal doesn't go through, someone else will attempt to pick up Sprint and their frequency waves.
  7. lyngo macrumors 6502a

    Sep 10, 2007
    If the merger gets denied and sprint goes belly up, what happens with all of their employees and FCC frequencies? Does it go to auction for both Verizon and att to gobble up? Wouldn’t it be best for this merger to happen in order for better competition with T-Mobile receiving more spectrum and keeping most of sprints employees?
  8. progx macrumors regular


    Oct 3, 2003
    You put it better than I did. Exactly my thoughts on this merger. This isn't the same when AT&T tried to buy T-Mobile years ago, this is survival for Sprint and a boost for T-Mobile.
  9. BuffaloTF macrumors 6502a

    Jun 10, 2008
    Except the opposite is true. Consolidation in wireless has led to falling prices.
  10. Victor Mortimer macrumors regular

    Victor Mortimer

    Apr 17, 2016
    Not at all. Prices are probably higher than they would have been if there had been more competition. Prices fell because of technology improvements. But we're almost certainly seeing higher prices than we would if there had been less consolidation.

    Going from four to three major carriers will likely be the tipping point on competition, the point where prices start going up. It's an incredibly bad idea to allow this merger.
  11. MoreRumors? macrumors 6502a

    Feb 28, 2018
    Tim's eyeglass lens
    It's hard to say whether this merger may or may not be beneficial. If the merger would provide more leverage to compete against Verizon and ATT by offering better service with lower price, then it may be good. We rely on the government to do what's right for the consumer but sometimes that doesn't always work out too. I am wondering what assets Sprint and T-Mobile is willing to concede in order for this merger to go forward.
  12. 4jasontv macrumors 68000

    Jul 31, 2011
  13. GuruZac macrumors 6502a


    Sep 9, 2015
    This makes more sense and I was unaware of the specifics of Verizon and AT&T’s stronghold.
  14. msp3 macrumors regular

    May 9, 2015
    Yes, let's throw the book at the 2 half-sized carriers that can't truly compete against the 2 full-sized carriers that effectively have a duopoly going on in most markets/people's minds but allow every other company under the sun (especially the shill media, looking at you ATT/Time Warner, NBC/Comcast, Disney/Fox) to merge and actually corner the market.

    Great job DOJ
  15. 4jasontv macrumors 68000

    Jul 31, 2011
    We could use the opportunity to no longer permanently license spectrum to one organization. Mergers and buyouts should return spectrum to the government without compensation. Spectrum is a community recourse. Let the taxpayers vote each year on a companies right to keep using it. If they vote no, they lose the spectrum and equipment tied to it, and can not participate in that round of licensing.
  16. Breaking Good macrumors 65816

    Sep 28, 2012
    If you have data to support your assertion, please share. Otherwise this is just speculation on your part.

    In the United States, you need about 100 million subscribers to have a sustainable, nationwide, cellular network that allows you to continue to re-invest in your infrastructure as new technologies come about. T-Mo and Sprint can’t get there on their own.

    As for prices, I suspect that in the mid-term, 3 to 5 years, I suspect that prices will rise as the cellular companies attempt to finance the buildout of 5G.

    However, once 5G is built out, I believe that capacity will increase so much that smartphone cellular service will become an afterthought.

    I suspect that smartphone cellular service will become bundled in with other broadband services. This is the same thing that has happened through the history of telecommunications services. New technologies are priced at a premium and eventually bundled in with other services as newer technologies come online.
  17. Elijen macrumors 6502


    May 8, 2012
    How is this even legal? I guess US does not care about monopoly? RIP "cheap" data plans.
  18. curtvaughan, Apr 30, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 30, 2019

    curtvaughan macrumors 65816


    Dec 23, 2016
    Austin, TX
    The status of Sprint, of which I've been a customer for 20 years, has become precarious enough that it needs this merger in order to survive. If the merger is denied Sprint will likely go belly up, and T-Mobile will be the weak sister to ATT and Verizon. The merger would create three strong competing carrier corporations; its denial would also eventually lead to three carriers, one at a strong disadvantage. As a Sprint customer, the merger likely would entail that my current CDMA devices would need to be replaced or altered to accommodate T-Mobile's GSM networks. I'm not sure exactly what would become of Sprint's current CDMA networks. In any case, by the time the merger finalizes and the technology changes I'd likely need new phone hardware anyhow.
  19. cfj2222 macrumors newbie

    Aug 28, 2014
    Wake me up when carriers stop capping landline broadband and stop charging for wireless by the gigabyte.
    --- Post Merged, Apr 30, 2019 ---
    That voting idea is terrible and impractical. But the rest seems like a good idea.
  20. Sasparilla macrumors 65816

    Jul 6, 2012
    As has been pointed out by others Verizon and AT&T do not want this merger to go forward.

    Its been interesting watching T-Mobile's execs try and gain favor with the President (like the administration was run by the mob) under the impression the President controls what happens over at antitrust (which shouldn't be the case, but sure seems like it might be with this administration).
  21. Plutonius macrumors 604


    Feb 22, 2003
    New Hampshire, USA
    Sprint's management along with T-Mobile's infrastructure would make a good pairing.
  22. curtvaughan macrumors 65816


    Dec 23, 2016
    Austin, TX
    I've wondered how this merger is being affected by the Trump organization. The Obama administration was behind caution in allowing the merger as it was conceived around 2014. Five years later, after two years of Trump and Republicans in control, I suspect there will be a tendency to push the merger through prior to the 2020 election. I'm at the point of seeing the merger as favorable for customers of a flagging Sprint carrier, and favorable to parity between the remaining three major carriers after the merger. I'm neither a Republican nor a Trump supporter, but a successful merger might be politically more viable while Republicans hold both the Whitehouse and the Senate.
  23. Kabeyun macrumors 68020


    Mar 27, 2004
    Eastern USA
    I’d really like this to succeed. I’d love an alternative to the Blue and the Red. (Off topic, but in politics too, I might add.)
  24. scupking macrumors 6502a

    Dec 14, 2010
    If the merger doesn't happen Sprint will not last much longer and lots of people would lose jobs.
  25. sw1tcher macrumors 68000


    Jan 6, 2004
    T-Mobile and their "Un-Carrier" initiative led to lower prices, among many other things copied by the other carriers
    --- Post Merged, Apr 30, 2019 ---
    T-Mobile is a competitor to Verizon and AT&T. It is slowly gaining customers. It keeps adding more wireless subscribers per quarter than the others.

    Per https://www.barrons.com/articles/t-mobile-earnings-stock-51556226108

    T-Mobile’s business has been respectably humming along in recent years. The self-identified “Un-carrier” has found success chipping away at its larger rivals with lower prices, heavy promotion of new plans, and focus on customer service. It had its best three months ever to close out 2019, adding 1.4 million new monthly wireless subscribers—the 23rd straight quarter with at least a million adds.

    T-Mobile’s subscriber growth continued its industry-leading streak. The company added 1.0 million net new postpaid subscribers in the first quarter, versus analysts’ estimate of 867,000. AT&T and Verizon added just 80,000 and 61,000 net new postpaid wireless subscribers, respectively, in the first quarter.

    T-Mobile sees continued robust subscriber gains for the rest of 2019. It raised its full-year outlook for postpaid net adds to 3.1 to 3.7 million, up from 2.6 to 3.6 million previously. It still expects adjusted Ebitda to rise to $12.7 billion to $13.2 billion, from $12.4 billion in 2018, and free cash flow of $4.5 billion to $4.6 billion this year, from $3.6 billion last year.

    Many people underestimate T-Mobile. That's how they overtook Sprint several years back to be the number 3 carrier.

    I agree that Sprint is very weak and the company may go belly up if the merger doesn't go through. Still, I say let things play out and if they file for bankruptcy, T-Mobile can come in and pay less than half of what they're paying now for them.

Share This Page

71 April 30, 2019