SoftBank CEO meeting with FCC today, T-Mobile merger discussion on the agenda

masayoshi son

Until SoftBank/Sprint makes an official bid for Deutsche Telekom’s controlling stake in T-Mobile US or makes an official statement that it’s not interested, rumors will continue regarding the possible merger. Today, WSJ reports that Masayoshi Son, CEO of SoftBank and Dan Hesse, CEO of Sprint will be meeting with the FCC.

Although there are many things to be discussed during the meeting, it’s expected that Son will put forward a case to try and persuade the regulators that a Sprint/T-Mobile merger would be good for the US market. Unlike the AT&T prospective buyout in 2011 – which would have essentially created a monopoly in the GSM network market – the proposed SoftBank buyout of Tmo, and resulting merger with Sprint would create much needed competition to the big two carriers.

Of course, the argument is sound. Sprint and T-Mobile combined would create a genuine competitor to AT&T and Verizon, but that may not be enough to convince the DoJ that the merger should go ahead. In fact, it’s widely known that the Department of Justice wants to see 4 major carriers to continue operating. Reducing it down to 3 isn’t something it wants to consider. A report from last week virtually confirms that much, as an antitrust official put dampers on the deal.

Whether or not Son heads the advice of the DoJ is yet to be seen. Earlier reports have indicated that he’s already sounding out banks on financing the deal, and has been finalizing details of the deal with Deutsche Telekom.

One thing we know for certain: This is not the last we’ll hear of the deal between SoftBank and DT.

Via: WSJ 

Tags: , , , ,

  • Binny Gupta

    I hope they say yes now and then the deal gets shot down and they have to pay a break up fee.

    • TechHog

      You want T-Mobile to be forced to sit on its ass doing nothing for 6+ months while subscribers leave in droves to avoid Sprint? It would take years to repair the damage this deal will do.

      • Adrayven

        Agreed.. would suck rotten eggs… bad.. No expansion, horrible support, and people dropping from T-Mobile like flies as they try to avoid the plague that is Sprint..

      • Binny Gupta

        I think they would still expand because I think they learned from the first merger,

        • hanfeedback

          You believe this? Seriously? If you had your car sold to a buyer would you continue to paint it, put new tires on it etc when you already had a buyer? Please tell me you don’t really believe this.

        • philyew

          It depends how you define expansion. I agree there would be no new investment during the decision period, but it’s possible they will continue with deploying the 700MHz A block spectrum because they have already spent the money upgrading the tower equipment and buying the licenses. Deployment should be a matter of running software updates to the cell sites.

        • hanfeedback

          At the very least they have to pay someone to update them, if you think they would spend a penny they didn’t have to once they have a deal ironed out then Im sorry you are delusional. Even more so we know this from the ATT failed merger.

        • philyew

          The work can be done by people already on the payroll. I’m as opposed to this takeover as anyone, but there’s no point in over-reacting.

          In this case, there are time limits on the licenses. Verizon unloaded them in part because they were running out of time to deploy them before the FCC revoked Verizon’s rights, and they had no immediate plans to make use of the spectrum.

          TM will also have to make use of the A block licenses or risk losing them. They have to position themselves to deal with the possibility that the federal authorities will turn down the bid.

          TM will certainly make changes to limit their investment, but they also have to meet their fiduciary responsibilities – even more so now that they are a publicly traded company. If DT can make money with negligible spending over the next 12 months, during the course of a takeover process, they will do so. They diluted their holding in TM US in order to raise the money to buy these licenses, all the time knowing that they could be selling the company, so I doubt they will consider it in their best interests to just sit on the asset, when deployment is so much easier because of everything else they have done in the last 18 months.

        • UMA_Fan

          Well T-Mobile essentially did do that during the at&t merger period… Throughout that year they upgraded to hspa+ 42. They also spent the money to remodel the majority of their retail stores to look like the international ones with wood floors and pink lights.

        • philyew

          Good point.

      • KingCobra

        I agree. I for one would be heading to AT&T if Sprint/Softbank announces a buyout of T-Mobile and this time I won’t come back.

  • sushimane

    Im hoping the fcc and doj would strike down the deal. the doj already express their opinion on this deal so let’s just cross our fingers that the regulator push back and say no softbank you cant have two company under one parent company and eventually merge them together we want four national carrier not 3. We see other country cellphone carrier when it comes to 3 carrier price went up and innovation went down. We dont want to see that in this country so is that gonna be check or cash that you would be sending to tmobile? Dt need to stop trying to sell tmobile they see them growing gaining alot of customer from other carriers. seeing everything going up not down what more do want? Dt just need to give tmobile us more credit on everything and atleast give them some cash to grow coverage and they will see future for tmobile as one great carrier the only thing that’s hurting them is coverage buying spectrum from verizon is a start covering an extra 158 million people its a good start. Hopefully the next auction of spectrum tmobile would get some that would help a lot. Let’s just hope the new Ceo of Dt can see the future of Tmobile US then the former Ceo where he wanted to make a quick billion.

    • gpt2010

      In a perfect world, I wish that TMO USA had the money to buy the 67% of stock the DT owns. Like Verizon did with Vodafone. But unfortunately that is not going to happen.

      • sushimame

        I feel the same way. The only way that would happen if T-Mobile became like Verizon charging like crazy which no one want. But I’m hoping sumthing like that would happen

      • Wilfredo Martinez

        What needs to happen is that a new entrant with $ interested in the U.S market, buys T-Mobile’s shares. That way DT is out like they want, and the U.S still continues to have 4 wireless companies controlling the people’s AIRWAVES.

      • randian

        TMO USA could do a stock offering to buyout DT, in effect taking the entire company public.

  • sidekicker89

    Let’s say Softbank/Sprint agree to buy T-Mobile now and the process to approve or decline the deal goes till next year. Will T-Mobile or Sprint be allowed to purchase more spectrum during this process? Will the 600Mhz auction be pushed back until the deal gets approved or declined? I’ve read that the FCC would have to rework the rules of the auction if Sprint/Softbank acquired T-Mobile.

    • TechHog

      That auction won’t happen this year.

    • philyew

      The FCC announcement about delaying the auction stated that mid 2015 was a likely time for it to be scheduled.

      If a takeover is announced in the next 3 months, it should be resolved one way or the other before the auction takes place.

      It will depend on how convoluted the rules become how they need to be baked into the software used to run the auction. We already know that those rules will have to change, if TM is to get its wish and see AT&T and Verizon have their buying opportunities restricted.

  • fsured

    If anyone is interested, check out the CNN story about At&t cutting prices. They termed T-Mobile the number 3 carrier with no mention of Sprint!

    • KingCobra

      Sprint is currently the laughing stock of the wireless industry. No one in popular media mentions them anymore.

  • Aurizen

    How would spectrum be dealt with if this merger happens? I wonder if we have to buy new phones or will sprint convert their spectrum to work with Tmobile phones…

    • Hamster

      What I expect will happen is that neither will be “converted”. They’ll share LTE spectrum, but 3G and 2G spectrum will continue to be used as is by each carrier until they’re naturally phased out. They’ll share spectrum where there’s crossover (like PCS) where the technology allows both CDMA and GSM to coexist on the same airwaves, but it would really surprise me to see either network just stop selling their previous-gen phones.

    • KingCobra

      Lots of their spectrum would have to be divested to none other than AT&T and Verizon since the combined company would have so much of it. So no one knows what spectrum would even remain with the combined company. Just another reason why this isn’t going to help competition.

  • TechHog

    Well, RIP T-Mobile.

  • philyew

    Why is the argument sound that “the resulting merger with Sprint would create much needed competition to the big two carriers.”?

    All the anti-trust analysis which has been conducted over the last 100 years or more concludes that the outcome for a market dominated by three companies controlling over 90% of the market share is most probably going to be detrimental to the consumer.

    Softbank will control a 30% share (over 100 million customers) in a saturated market. They will have little reason to differentiate themselves from their competitors and certainly no reason to pursue Uncarrier policies which are predicated on achieving much lower margins than are currently enjoyed by AT&T and VZW.

    The debt burden for Softbank as a result of adding new debt from the proposed transaction to the substantial debt they already carry with Sprint, would absolutely preclude a budget carrier approach.

    The only way the argument in favor of the takeover is sound is if you don’t give a damn about the US consumer.

    • archerian

      If I’m not wrong, we can see the problems with having 3 major carriers in Canada … I believe they have 3 year contracts on phones?

      • Stone Cold

        That is disgusting being locked into a phone for that long.

      • KlausWillSeeYouNow

        Now Telus has the T-Up! program which apparently makes it easy for people to upgrade to a new iPhone for $9 CAD/month.

        Not exactly groundbreaking…

  • Chad Dalton

    Break up Fee! Break up Fee! Break up Fee!

  • steveb944

    I hope this doesn’t happen as the last time the company was going to be bought out everyone started leaving and the corporate message they were delivering was ‘we suck, we need to be bought’.

  • DetroitTechnoFan

    Sprint is about the least worthy partner T-Mo could ever ask for. Their network is a dinosaur. They’ve talked about getting “4G” coverage in this area since before the original HTC EVO 4G (with WiMAX) was released, charged their customers an extra $10 a month just to have the device, and never built out the 4G WiMAX coverage. Then they did the same with LTE. Sprint’s LTE doesn’t exist in Michigan, and probably never will.

  • Adrayven

    The ONLY thing that could bring a gleam to my eye, if this went through, is if Dan Hasse was forced to step down and John Legere was able to take over and continue his Uncarrier plans…

    Short of that, I’d be gone, done, moving on and away from the plague that is Sprint.

  • Jay Holm

    I wonder what mood, and looks are on the FCC’s faces as they meet with Son and Hesse. . .hmm.

    • fsured

      ha, to be a fly on the wall for that meeting.

  • Bklynman

    Does anyone would to put out why they think SB,didn’t buy Tmo 1st?
    Just asking to see what the readers of this blog think is the reason.

    • KingCobra

      At the time that they were preparing to make an offer for a US carrier, T-Mobile had not yet begun their Uncarrier movement and turnaround. They probably thought Sprint was the better investment. They likely thought that if they purchased Sprint and T-Mobile continued to flounder, it would be easy to get approval from the DOJ to buy a weak T-Mobile. Now they realize that they screwed up and should have bought T-Mobile first as Sprint is the one who is floundering right now.

      • Jay Holm

        “right now”? Sprint has been floundering for, like 7yrs!

        • KingCobra

          True but at the time T-Mobile looked almost as bad but with less spectrum. They were both bleeding subscribers every quarter to the big 2.

    • Hamster

      T-Mobile is a spectrum-starved carrier while Sprint has a bunch of it just lying around.

  • Jamestown

    Yuk yuk nononono

    • FluX

      You couldn’t say it any better! :)

  • Nic83Josh

    I am really getting tired of this Sprint/T-Mobile merger. If it goes through then that will be the of T-Mobile and probably the Sprint name will continue.

    • Nic83Josh

      * I meant the end of T-Mobile.

      • UMA_Fan

        But if you were the Softbank CEO which brand would you WANT to continue? Keeping the Sprint brand would be an uphill battle.

        • philyew

          Softbank would want to keep the brand that had the most potential in the future.

          The brand and marks are associated with other companies overseas and would have to be obtained under license from DT, which limits the possible spread of the brand outside the already saturated US market. For a company like Softbank, TM wouldn’t be the best option.

        • UMA_Fan

          I think it would make more sense to do a whole new name if they merge with T-Mobile (if they cant keep the tmobile brand) rather than Sprints brand. Essentially the merged company would be far different than what Sprint and Tmobile ever were. Maybe bring Soft banks brand to the US?

        • philyew

          Well, I imagine they had the chance to bring the Softbank brand to the US when they took over Sprint, but decide it wasn’t a good idea.

          While I understand your point about the fact that there is a certain amount of liability associated with Sprint, you have to balance that against the fact that there are so many MVNO brands flying around now and there is a danger that a new name would lose the significance of being a primary carrier with a combined subscription close to the top 20 in the world. You definitely have that with Sprint, despite the baggage.

        • KlausWillSeeYouNow

          I actually like the name “Sprint.” And their logo. It’s really well-designed. Unfortunately, that neat-o name has a lame-o network attached to it. That’s their setback, and it’s a hard one to overcome.

    • Todd

      My question is, “Why do they have to get rid of one of the brands?” I think each brand targets different customers. Plus, each brand has its share of haters and supporters. So, why risk alienating those customers? Just keep both.

      • KlausWillSeeYouNow

        Because multiple names confuse consumers, and Deutsche Telekom would never allow Sprint to use T-Mo’s name. The “T-” is their trademark, and they don’t allow others to use it. Particularly not an international player like SoftBank.

        • Todd

          You mean like how Sprint also has Boost and Assurance? T-Mobile has Metro PCS and Go Smart, and AT&T also has Aio? The major carriers already do this today. It’s not confusing. It allows companies to target different demographics. Sorry, but it’s business as usual.

          Also, yes, DT will allow T-Mobile to use the “T” trademark. They already have. TMUS is a publicly traded company where DT is only a shareholder. When TMUS incorporated, DT gave the new TMUS company all rights to use this name, color, and trademark in the US – even after they sell their shares. After 2 years, they’re going to get rid of their shares anyways. Did you think T-Mobile would have to change their name when they start selling their shares? /facepalm

        • KlausWillSeeYouNow

          You’re dead wrong. And, if you already knew the answer, why’d you ask?

          First off, Assurance and Boost are not international companies. They are names and logos dreamed up in boardrooms of existing companies, like Sprint, to attract a different kind of audience. T-Mobile, on the other hand, is a franchise of sorts: it is a name used by various wireless companies under the control of DT.

          Secondly, the reason that T-Mobile is T-Mobile is precisely because of the fact that DT is a majority shareholder… what, did you expect Deutsche would let some Texas-based smallfry start running the T-Mo show if DT had no control over the destiny of their own name? Get real. It is not business as usual – because the determining force and leadership of the business did not change hands. For all intents and purposes, DT did – and still does – run the show. These Uncarrier moves are not in spite of DT, they’re because of them. They drive up value of the company so it can be sold.

          Truth is, we don’t know if the name will change after two years. It’s naive to think it couldn’t. I’m sure that an existing established brand (like Sprint or DISH) could, in theory, negotiate the right to use the branding, but I’d be more inclined to believe that DT would let DISH use the branding and not SB because DISH is not their enemy. SoftBank is an international operation – DISH isn’t, really. They’d be less concerned about an American pay-TV provider using the name than a Japanese global wireless provider. It’s just good business sense.

        • Todd

          First, “if you already knew the answer, why’d you ask”? It was a rhetorical question. I didn’t expect an answer.

          What do “international companies” have to do with subscribers being confused by multiple brands? I gave many examples where one company has multiple brands. You said it would confuse people. Obviously, it doesn’t, since it happens now, and there are no issues.

          Second, you really think that TMUS leaders and Legal team would create a loophole where they could lose their brand? That would be gross negligence on their part, although I guess anybody could be negligent.

        • KlausWillSeeYouNow

          Wait… I’m sorry, I failed to clarify that I don’t think it actually causes brand confusion. The big-wigs do. :-) And agreed!

        • Todd

          Here’s the legaleese from the SEC filing. The part to focus on is “non-revocable”. DT cannot, legally, revoke the license that it gave TMUS. It’s right there.

          Trademark License Agreement

          On April 30, 2013, pursuant to the Business Combination Agreement, the Company and Deutsche Telekom entered into a trademark license agreement, pursuant to which the Company is entitled to receive (i) a limited, exclusive, non-revocable and royalty-bearing license to certain T-Mobile trademarks (including Internet domains) for use in connection with telecommunications and broadband products and services in the United States, Puerto Rico and
          the territories and protectorates of the United States, (ii) a limited, non-exclusive, non-revocable and royalty-bearing license to use certain other trademarks for use in connection with telecommunications and broadband products and services in the United States, Puerto Rico and the territories and protectorates of the United States and (iii) free of charge, the right to use the trademark “T-Mobile” as a name for the Company.

        • Wilfredo Martinez

          This isn’t just business as usual, we are talking about the people’s AIRWAVES, these are OUR airwaves and they cannot be controlled just by 3 wireless companies. That’s too much control in the hands of 3.

  • Jay J. Blanco

    10 billion dollar break up fee would be good :-)

    • macman37

      And a good break up fee is why T-Mobile agreed to be acquired by AT&T!! You have to know how to play possum sometimes to come out ahead when compared to what you started with!!

  • sushimane

    i hope the fcc put them on blast lol telling them this merger would be great for the consumers etc. the fcc doesnt wanna be like other countries where theres only 3 big carrier. but it would be funny to hear son,dan demand the fcc and the doj to let the merger go through.

  • Alex

    I hope it goes thru. Sprint’s coverage is miles better than tmo. Me & a co-worker are truck drivers & i cant count how many times he is enjoying pandora radio on his sprint phone while i cant even make a phone call on my tmo phone. Frustrating!

    • philyew

      So why, if you don’t mind me asking, are you still a TM customer, when you can get better service elsewhere?

      • Alex

        I havent finished paying off my galaxy s4 yet. But i dont think it matters because i dont think the networks are compatible.

        • philyew

          So what’s changed for the worse since you got the S4?

          You must have got it sometime in the last 9 months, the period during which the TM network has generally improved more than at any other time in the company’s existence.

          I’m just curious why you thought TM was worth the investment in a new phone when your experience of coverage with Sprint is so much better?

        • Alex

          Yea i got the s4 last summer & the lower prices attracted me. But i was a local city driver back then so i always had signal. Till i went over the road i noticed the difference.

        • philyew

          That’s tough. You could always sell the S4 to get the balance of your EIP and make the change…

        • dtam

          go to ATT, they are paying you to switch

    • superg05

      oh noes no pandora for you download the fracking songs you twa# why waste data

    • KlausWillSeeYouNow

      Please hang in there. Good things are in the works. In the meantime, while the network is built outward, you’re still saving major $$. I’d hate to see you go. :-(

  • vinnyjr

    Please anything but Sprint. Been with T-Mobile for a long time and my service has never been better. My data speeds are lightning fast. On HSPA+ getting 15mb down & 4mb up, on LTE Getting 35-40mb down & close to 20mb up.

  • Bklynman

    Some people think if this gets started,the progress of making a offer to DT,then waiting for the DOJ,FCC,to say yes or no to it,it will stop everything Tmo has been doing now ever since John became the Ceo,I believe the only way that’stops would be if DT,tell him to stop everything what you are doing,and wait and see if we get the ok to sell,or tells him to slow everything down. But if DT,doesn’t telll him anything,but to keep doing what you are doing,go full speed ahead, that is the only way I believe it would stop John doing what he is doing. If DT,tells him to stop.

  • KlausWillSeeYouNow

    It won’t happen unless there’s some bribing involved. This would be the single most destructive merger in the telecom industry in the last 40 years.

    There are other players. DISH is biding its time. I think (and hope!) before long they’ll act…

  • KlausWillSeeYouNow

    Remember when AT&T was trying to purchase T-Mo? We were told that it would be bad for consumer choice. Now, Sprint’s trying to do the same thing… and it’s OK.

    Hypocrisy in action: Check out this Sprint-sponsored AD on THAT takeover!

    http://www.wirelessandmobilenews.com/0511art/maninTmodress.JPG

    • loopyduck

      >Now, Sprint’s trying to do the same thing

      It’s… not really the same thing. If AT&T had successfully bought T-Mobile, the market would look like this (using today’s figures from Wikipedia):

      1) AT&T – 156 million subscribers
      2) Verizon – 119 million subscribers
      3) Sprint – 54 million subscribers

      Now this is what it would look like if Sprint bought T-Mobile

      1) Verizon – 119 million subscribers
      2) AT&T – 110 million subscribers
      3) Sprint – 100 million subscibers

      I’m not saying it would be automatically turn out well, but you’re being disingenuous if you think the two scenarios would amount to the exact same thing.

      • KlausWillSeeYouNow

        It is exactly the same in terms of industry consolidation. Either way, there are only three wireless players. And if that happens, we become Canada.

        • loopyduck

          Right now there are two wireless players with a couple of anklebiters bringing up the rear.

          I don’t see anything wrong with a merger if Legere leads the combined company. If you do, then what you’re saying is that Legere is an opportunistic phony.

        • KlausWillSeeYouNow

          If you believe there are only two players, you must have either AT&T or Verizon. Because apparently, the other two are irrelevant. :-/ I disagree with that characterization.

          I see plenty wrong with a debt-ridden, foreign-owned company cramming a company with a long history of mediocrity together with the only single, viable innovator in the market. (I’ll let you guess which is which.) Legere is here to increase T-Mo’s appeal and value, but I don’t think he’ll necessarily have to go if DISH takes the reins.

        • loopyduck

          I’ve had T-Mobile for the past seven years, thank you very much. I think T-Mobile has demonstrated that there’s another way of doing business. T-Mobile has shown that it can survive. But can it thrive? Can it actually have an impact on the wireless industry? When AT&T (or Verizon, for that matter) actually starts cutting prices instead of deploying smoke and mirrors marketing, when they have fewer net gain subscribers than T-Mobile, when Congress starts listening to T-Mobile lobbyists… then I’ll believe that T-Mobile matters.

          You highlight “a company” as being foreign-owned. What does that have to do with anything, besides reflect a streak of xenophobia? You do realize that BOTH Sprint and T-Mobile are foreign-owned, right? You do realize who helped pay for the AWS build-out, right?

          EDIT: Technically as DT owned 100% of T-Mo US, they didn’t just “help pay” for it, either.

        • KlausWillSeeYouNow

          I think that T-Mobile can thrive if it finds a suitable partner, which, in my view, is not Sprint. No, no. DISH is more their style. T-Mobile has already had a massive impact on the wireless industry, and your outsider tone makes me wonder if you’ve seen it.

          AT&T has introduced many measures to combat T-Mo’s advances, like Next, new family plans, and a model that is trending against the traditional subsidy game. (See the Android Police for that one.) Verizon introduced Edge and free international messaging (for a limited time). Sprint introduced (and later pulled) One Up, Framily, and has been heavily touting its “New Network.” Can’t you see that these are all because of T-Mobile? Why would an industry change if they didn’t have to? There can be no response without a catalyst.

          I’m going to respond to your cheap jab that I’m xenophobic by simply saying this: I’d prefer to see an American company continue to pioneer revolutionary changes in an industry, especially opposed to SoftBank, which could give a damn about the U.S. market until the 11th hour. (And DT did exactly the same thing. T-Mo’s network was severely outgunned until their AT&T fiasco flopped.) If that makes me xenophobic, then I’m a proud xenophobe. But I think both you and I know that it doesn’t. So let’s keep the conversation classy and refrain from name-calling. You don’t see me attacking your zeal for foreign entities as anti-American, do you?

          I realize everything. And I challenge you to validate this idea that you seem to have that DT has been a good parent entity for TMUS. It hasn’t. T-Mobile has image problems that are almost entirely due to their negligence. I want them out – and if you want T-Mobile to succeed, I can’t see why you wouldn’t, either.

  • JBrowne1012

    A merger of any kind would put t-mobile back in a deep dark hole. Thanks to Mr.Legere T-mobile is profitable again. These type of articles are sending the wrong message to any potential customers.

  • Wilfredo Martinez

    This is ridiculous, you state in your article that both companies need to merge to be REALLY competitive with AT&T and Verizon.

    LISTEN UP PEOPLE, 3 BIG WIRELESS COMPANIES IS NOT I REPEAT NOT COMPETITIVE! GOOGLE CANADA’S OLIGOPOLY! CANADA IS DESPERATELY SEEKING A FOURTH COMPETITOR JUST BECAUSE THEIR 3 BIG CARTELS OF ROGERS WIRELESS, BELL AND TELUS ARE ALL OFFERING THE SAME PRICES, DEVICES, AND NOT COMPETITING AT ALL WITH EACH OTHER! THE CANADIAN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT GOT EXCITED WHEN THEY THOUGHT VERIZON WIRELESS WOULD ENTER THE CANADIAN MARKET, BUT THAT DID NOT HAPPEN OF COURSE…..
    Why on earth would the U.S if they have 4 big nationwide wireless companies allow the two smallest ones to merge in order to create the same kind of OLIGOPOLY that we already can see happening to our neighbor across the border.
    Softbank is wasting its time. Go away T-Mobile is adding subscribers like pancakes every quarter and AT&T is feeling the pressure!

    • Jay Holm

      Canada is a perfect example! 3 companies control 95% of the market.

    • jej

      Is the high cost of cell service in Canada truly the result of 3 companies vs 4 or is it because of the lower pop density and higher costs in Canada? Are the Canadian companies actually more profitable?

      • Wilfredo Martinez

        Wind Mobile and other smaller carriers offer lower prices, but unfortunately they do not have the power to offer nationwide coverage. Canada’s government and everyone knows that these companies are getting enough profit, eventually all companies are greedy and because they control most of the market they take advantage. Having a fourth or more competitors, increases competition and benefits consumers and then companies cannot get greedy and take advantage of their consumers.

  • superg05

    its’s OK’ fishy there’s been alot of sprint ads here lately

  • superg05

    t-mobile us needs to purchase its shares back from dt

    • Jay Holm

      As nice as that would be, the near term priority really should be trying to raise the profit/capital to get at least 10×10 mhz of 600mhz at auction next year.

  • Getitright

    Stop saying “Sprint” is looking to buy T-Mobile people!!! SOFTBANK is trying to buy them who also owns Sprint…not the same thing!

  • Thor God Of Thunder

    It’s like another Fukishima for Japan. I think Japan should worry about their problems with China more than a merger. Perhaps Russia or China should buy T-Mobile.