T-Mobile brand to remain if Sprint merger’s approved, $2B compensation if blocked?

Screen Shot 2014-06-13 at 18.59.49

You may be sick to the back teeth of analysis and speculation on the purported deal between Deutsche Telekom and SoftBank to merge Sprint and T-Mobile in to one giant carrier capable of matching Verizon and AT&T. But, some further rumor mill spinning took place today at CNBC. And – if true – it could see the success, or failure of a merger leaving T-Mo in a better state than it is now.

A report by David Faber at CNBC, who obtained his information from unnamed sources, claims that if the merger does go ahead, that the T-Mobile brand will remain complete. That means magenta livery, T-Mo brand and John Legere running the show. This goes against a rumor earlier this week which claimed the new network operator would come under the SoftBank brand name. And another rumor – later on in the week – which claimed the deal would see the Sprint name kept, but with pink coloring instead of yellow.

In that case, the name – if all sources are as reliable as each other – it’ll be T-Mobile, Sprint or SoftBank. Glad we needed rumors from “in the know” sources to tell us the options available. (Apologies for the sarcasm).

T-Mobile and Sprint representatives are understandably quiet on the whole deal. But from previous interviews with various executives, we get the picture that they all think consolidation is necessary for the future of the market, and the benefit of consumers.

Of course, we’d love it if the Sprint name and colors vanished in favor of the magenta of T-Mo. We’d love it more – I presume – if there was no merger whatsoever, and SoftBank just left the company alone. Or if the regulators blocked the move. A result which could leave T-Mobile in an even better financial state.

According to Faber’s report, the carriers have apparently agreed on a generous break-up fee. In the event that the DoJ rejects the deal on antitrust grounds, it would see T-Mobile US gain $2B. Some $1 billion more than was claimed previously.

If all Faber’s information is correct, I don’t really see a bad angle here for T-Mobile. On the one hand, T-Mobile essentially becomes a company double the size of its current state. On the other, it gains $2 billion. Win, win?

Via: CNBC
Image Credit: AH

Tags: , , ,

  • UMA_Fan

    Hell yeah. Tmobile with 90 million customers would be amazing.

    I also think the whole CDMA/gsm issue is oveeblown. Since both companies LTE bands will stay for sure all Tmobile really has to do is software update Sprint phones to support VoLTE. Then simply decommission CDMA as LTE coverage equals the CDMA coverage. A LOT less complicated and expensive than device swapping everyone with a CDMA phone to GSM

    • Tmoemp

      Yup,, that easy. Just a few little tweaks.

      Just like nextel.

      Yeah, it’ll be 5 years before the networks are merged, at best.

      • Brian Miller

        >Just like Nextel.<

        Hardly.
        Sprint and T-Mobile are both LTE networks with legacy CDMA and GSM (respectively) for fallback. 100% compatibility for current generation tech — the only incompatible bits are old tech that's going to be decommissioned over the next five to ten years anyway. VoLTE means that T-Mo and Sprint LTE customers could easily roam on each other's networks with current handsets and see no difference (other than more bandwidth and more coverage in areas where one or the other doesn't have a presence today).
        Nextel and Sprint were totally separate network technologies with no overlap whatsoever, and Nextel suffered from a serious problem of overlapping signal bandwidth with federal and state emergency radio equipment. 100% incompatibility with no path forward for Nextel customers other than switching over to CDMA, hence the big problems they had for years.

  • JM

    Are you serious? Are you Joking?

    If Sprint buys TMO, for sure the TMO brand is gone. The TMO brand belongs to Deutch Telecom. They will not allow it’s use outside the company. If I were selling, I would never sell my brand,

    During a limited time, there could be a provision of use during transition but not permanant.

    It can not happen. It will not happen.

    • Nurdface Gamerhandz

      Nope. T-Mobile US owns the T-Mobile brand in the US, the US trademark was transferred with the IPO

      • philyew

        What’s your source for this?

    • http://www.androidheadlines.com/ Alexander Maxham

      You do know that DT is still going to have a stake in the company right?

    • bkin94

      Nurdface knows what’s up. Also, other reports say DT will keep a small stake in the company

    • UMA_Fan

      You know Sprint isn’t buying anyone right? It would be the company that BOUGHT Sprint last year, and now doesn’t know what to do with them, Softbank.

      Softbank wanted with Sprint what T-Mobile is doing to the industry now. He wants T-Mobile bad because he knows there is no other option for Sprint.

  • bob90210

    Cam, please use more British idioms in the articles; you can even use British spelling if it’s less confusing for you. It will make us Americans less sick to the back teeth of reading the same story. If the content is the same, at least the delivery will be new!

    • Cam Bunton

      lol… Which idioms would you like? In my next article: “Good ol’ guv’ner Legere looks well ‘appy that he’s gonna be boss of a mahoosive conjoined carrier! He’s even gone and bought himself a massive aluminium Bentley to celebrate. Would you adam-and-eve it?”

  • Aaron Davis

    Depending on how much of a burden $2 million is to Sprint, we might end up with only 3 major carriers regardless of whether the merger is approved or not.

    at&t was able to afford a break-up fee, but I’m not so sure that Sprint can (unless it comes out of Softbank’s wallet instead)

    • Jeremiah McCurry

      With a merger, T-Mobile would get most of Sprint’s spectrum. If an independent Sprint goes belly up, the Big 2 could buy up most of it.

      • Adrayven

        Did you look at the map in the previous post? They basically cover the same footprint..

        PLUS, they both are overloaded with HIGH band spectrum.. They DONT NEED IT.. it’s to costly to use in rural areas. They BOTH need low-band spectrum…

        This is not a very good deal.. All Sprint brings is debt, a load of pissed customers, and no real spectrum value.. Sure some if it might be usable.. but most of it would need to be unloaded and/or remain unused.

        T-mobile is MUCH better off remaining independent, low on debt, and flexible to bid in future spectrum auctions.. DT just doesn’t care, they just want a cash out, or they wouldn’t consider it.. it’s BAD BAD BAD.

        • Jeremiah McCurry

          So the 800 and 1900 LTE that Sprint has already deployed and is currently deploying would be of no use to T-Mobile? Isn’t TMO deploying LTE on 1900? The combination would give them capacity they might never get on their own.

        • Adrayven

          Except in the 600Mhz auction.. in which ATT/Verizon is limited to 1/4 each unless Sprint/Tmo try to merge.. at which point ATT/Verizon are free to hog it and leave scraps.

          Cuz, the combined T-mo/Sprint won’t have the CASH to bid.. Softbank would have leveraged it’s ass to the hilt to get T-mobile..

          Besides.. that 800Mhz won’t impact them that much.. it’s the SAME FOOTPRINT as most of T-mobile.. it doesn’t expand them really. shore up some weak spots.. but.. not really worth it if one ultimately needs to go into new markets.

        • Jeremiah McCurry

          There is no proof the FCC would give the Big 2 unrestricted access to bid on 600, only internet speculation.

          Sprint holds 800 nationwide regardless of current footprint. T-Mobile could use it to expand.

        • philyew

          I’m not clear what your source is, but this really does not represent the decision that the FCC made at all accurately. Here’s an article that explains the decision quite well.

          http://www.fiercewireless{dot}com/story/mosaik-verizon-could-face-bidding-restrictions-across-much-country-600-mhz/2014-05-19

        • kk888

          Sprint’s 1900 LTE is currently on PCS block G ( band 25), not compatible with current T-Mobile devices. 800 band 26 LTE is also Sprint exclusive

        • maximus1901

          And it will also increase our bill.

        • Jeremiah McCurry

          Prices won’t increase in the short term. The government will most certainly demand some lower pricing in order to approve the merger.

        • Blake

          Great point made. T-Mobile needs to remain by itsself. Sprint can just simply remain all by themselves as well too. I want Both Sprint/T-MOBILE to remain separate away from each other for the better!!

      • http://www.jeffkibuule.com Jeff Kibuule

        I’m not sure any of that spectrum really meshes well with what AT&T and Verizon have, especially since a large chunk of it is cost-prohibitive 2.5Ghz spectrum which you need a TON of towers to deploy to use effectively.

    • Nurdface Gamerhandz

      Seeing as Softbank and not Sprint is making the bid, I don’t see why it would touch Sprint

    • noyb

      *2 billion

    • philyew

      Softbank’s wallet.

  • Adrayven

    Meh.. it’s corporate politics.. which, amazingly, is worse and more dangerous for the consumer than government politics.. It conflicts with general physics of the universe and has a tendency to paint a truth that has no basis in reality what-so-ever..

  • Jeremiah McCurry

    I’m going to guess that a CNBC analyst is slightly more credible than the TK blog guy.

    • Matt Pankey

      Glad I wasn’t the only one thinking that.

  • Fritz

    Wonder if Tmo is only going along for the ride, to get more free cash once its rejected. 2Billion is an aweful lot of money to improve the network with…

    • Adrayven

      An awful risk for just some cash.. they look to be positive in a year w/o this.. they’ve a solid plan.. this really just messes things up.. like their ability to buy the 600Mhz spectrum.. Rules state if there is a T-mo/Sprint merger, ATT/Verizon is unhindered from just buying it up and leaving scraps..

      • philyew

        What is your source for the comment about the spectrum auction rules?

        This is what the FCC said in a press statement the day it announced the rule changes:

        “Finally, the Commission clarified that the rules it adopted today are based on current market structure, and that it reserves the right to modify the rules based on significant market changes, including proposed transactions.”

        • UMA_Fan

          Its true. In the event of a large scale merger the auction rules are null. Maybe Softbank has assured to bid big?

        • philyew

          Where is your source that is more up-to-date and authoritative than this quote directly from the FCC?

          http://transition.fcc{dot}gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2014/db0515/DOC-327109A1.pdf

        • fsured

          I don’t think it will null the rulls. It might exclude the companies from that set aside spectrum. That I can see but not causing the other small regional players to lose out. It may actually benefit those companies since they can bid on more spectrum without two giants and cause their coverage to expand.

    • Erick

      TMO has no saying on what DT it’s doing, they own 67% of the company, no one can’t stop them from selling their shares to Softbank, the only way that TMO can have a saying in this, it’s if DT owned 49.9% or less of the company and the other 50.1% of the investors(which are a bunch of smaller ones) get together and reject the offer as majority owners. So no, TMo has no saying and probably wont see much benefit form the $2B break up fee, unless it came with spectrum.

  • bkin94

    Would TMO get the breakup money, or DT?

    • JBLmobileG1

      Probably DT, but it would be wise and in their best interest to use it on expanding T-Mobile USA. I am sure they whole reason to sell T-Mobile is to pay off any debt they have in Europe. If the deal fails at least they can continue to feed their baby…. T-Mobile USA.

      • maximus1901

        No tmus. It’s an independent company. DT would only get money through a dividend or share buy back.

        • philyew

          I understand your point, but as the deal is to buy part or all of DT’s holding, surely the compensation would also be local to DT?

      • xmiro

        the agreement is between DT and SoftBank, for DT’s 67% of TMUS. So DT will get the breakup fee and likely spectrum for TMUS

  • sushimane

    Come on doj and FCC reject it.

    • erick

      What do you think it will happen to tmobile if Softbank decides that after the rejection of the merger the the only feasible way they can achieve their goals and really compete its to basically ride the train sprint to wherever it needs to be taken. They will buy a few smaller local carriers to add to the coverage footprint and subscribers base, and to take advantage of the existing infrastructure.
      Imagine what would happen if they re-brand it and go with Softbank USA, and start a marketing campaign saying that this isn’t Sprint anymore, throwing a lot of money at the customers, the network and the public perception?
      End result? T mobile would get hurt really bad unless DT does something similar.

      • sushimane

        OK let’s just say that the deal gets rejected softbank is out 2 billion and DT or t-mobile whichever u prefer has a positive 2 billion in their bank account. So they can basically do whatever they want to buy another regional carrier maybe like us cellular sense they bought spectrum from them last year. from what I remember us cellular are the number 5 or 6 larger regional carrier. So t-mobile could gain spectrum,coverage and customer base in all us cellular. There’s plenty of possibility in the future for t-mobile like the 600 MHz auction is coming up they can save up and buy spectrum too. Sprint are in a big over haul on their network right now with spark LTE you just don’t know when their whole network would be ready. They just have bad management with wimax the first true 4g come on t-mobile hspa+ 21 or 42 out perform it and that’s just a 3.5g network. Maybe with Softbank management they might mange out a good network but its gonna take a long time before anything could happen. Sorry for rant just my opinion you may think otherwise

        • Erick

          DT it’s getting the $2B not TMUS, DT it’s selling it’s shares, not the company, most likely TMUS won’t see most of that money, remember that this is a negotiation between Softbank and DT, not Sprint and TMUS.

        • sushimane

          Yeah DT would get the 2 billion but its their choice the to invest 1 billion on tmus or keep it themselves. But most likely they would still invest a billion on tmus if not tmus themselves have the money to bid on the auction sense the FCC made the rule for small carrier to get a decent amount of 600 mhz. Their share are part of the company it’s like saying Softbank own 80% of sprint share doesn’t that mean Softbank basically own sprint? Now that we know Softbank wants to buy a percentage of the tmus and let DT 15-20 keep percent of the combine company. That just give the FCC and doj more of a reason to reject it 1 majority parent company and 1 minority company. We don’t know the mind set of DT they may just go along with Softbank .DT may think sense FCC and doj want four major carrier were gonna milk the other carrier they got 6 billion dollars worth from att 2 billion dollars from Softbank/sprint when it happen. Just like the t-mobile team said t-mobile are the fast growing cellphone carrier in the u.s. that just tell u with the mangerment is working. When 600mhz comes up let’s talk coverage is gonna be good or best compare to sprint. Sprint has spark LTE t-mobile,att,Verizon would be on the next generation of LTE.

  • Qbancelli

    I like it!

  • SEBA

    That would make sense. I think Tmobile is playing really hard ball, knowing that the deal will not go through and hoping to gain 2B.

    • Tmoemp

      Fuck the 2 billion..

      Between the time AT&T offered, and it ended, was a pretty dark time for t mobile,

      Care outsourced. All site upgrades and expansion stopped. people let go.

      No amount of breakup fee is worth loosing the momentum we have going now.

  • SimaMaethos

    I think there’s another possibility and one that would tie all of this together.

    Sprint is a very big company with a big landline business built from some of the Baby Bells.

    One possibility is that the wireless brands would be merged into the TMO operations, back office, and network teams, with existing TMO backend systems. This would live on as the TMO brand.

    The remaining landline business and other areas of Sprint could be reduced down to a modified Sprint brand. This would also keep the Sprint Cup sponsorship of NASCAR intact. Moreover, this part of the brand could be rejuvenated and start aggressively competing, or uncarrier-ing, in the cable space. There’s huge potential here to have this much vertical integration; strong landline and cable with a peerless wireless network on top of it (and using the infrastructure of the internet backhaul).

    Legere’s vision is big. It’s bigger than just being co-equal thirds of the wireless industry. Much bigger.

    This type of arrangement makes a lot of sense to me. It’s not too disruptive to either entity and both would be able to proceed relatively well through the regulatory hurdles. On the other hand, if Son is stupid — and he’s not — and he tries to merge not just the TMO brand into Sprint but also all of the back office teams — particularly the network team — and systems then he will wind up with something even more crippled than the Sprint team is right now.

    • Hessee

      Sprint spun off their wireline division ages ago. It was Embarq; now it is a part of CenturyLink. They’re pure wireless now.

      • SimaMaethos

        They only exited the local long-distance landline area. And who would want that garbage anyway? Sprint still retains one of the overlapping national internet backbones. The combination of national internet backbone to each community and cell tower and wireless from there to the home is the future I’m talking about.

      • bucdenny

        Sprint.net, not pure wireless and already pushing 400Gbps network. They need to make sure of it.
        http://newsroom.sprint.com/news-releases/sprint-reaches-new-milestones-for-network-speed.htm

  • erick

    Guys don’t be naive, Sprint is going nowhere. Softbank has the money to take Sprint where DT can’t or it’s not willing to take T Mobile. With the money they’re willing to pay for tmobile they could make a lot of damage in the next spectrum auction, and build a hell of a network in a short period of time, its just a shorter route to the end result by combining the two companies together. I’m all for the merger because at the end, Softbank won’t allow his almost $30B investment in sprint to go bad and eventually they will set his target on T-Mobile, Sprint by itself couldn’t do a lot of damage because of lack of capital but now they have plenty.

    • xmiro

      what money? $50+ billion in debt after the merger? And a damaged brand?

      • erick

        They would re-brand it any name, and the commercials would go something like this, “this Softbank USA or whatever name they come up with, Sprint it’s no more come try the new company, etc, etc” and like I said the $32B not being spent on T-Mobile will go to advertisements and network improvements in a relative short time they could have a much better network than T mobile. They do have the cash that Sprint could not afford to put on the improvements and at the same time pay the fixed expenses that come with running the network.

        • xmiro

          You know how much brand building costs nowadays?

          It takes 7-14 times for a single person to see a brand before they consider and trust it. A rebrand would cost north of $1 billion easily.

          Softbank doesn’t have $32 billion in the bank, they are borrowing that money from several banks and also giving Deutsche Telekom stock

        • Erick

          I know they don’t have $32B put away in a savings account. They also wouldn’t need anywhere near that amount to start and successfully run a branding campaign. Look at Geico, 10 or 15 years ago nobody new they existed, even though they’ve been around for about 70 years.
          That’s how they did it in Japan, here, they are trying to buy the subscribers base, not build it. It’s cheaper to build the customer base than to buy it, but also a longer process, they are more likely to succeed by buying TMO than by going head to head with the big two.

  • Aurizen

    I just want to know what spectrum they’re gonna use I hope its GSM, I dont want to get a new phone.

    • eanfoso

      they will, since Softbank could make little modification to its inventory it receives as a bulk in Asia and sell it in the US

    • monkeybutts

      by the time a merger finishes you’ll probably want to upgrade to a new phone anyways.

    • sushimane

      I wanna say they would take gsm over CDMA just think about it the other countries they all use gsm it would be more simple thinking. When people travel to america there’s only 2 carriers that they can use t-mobile or att that’s a business stand point.

  • vinnyjr

    My entire issue is Sprint is a CDMA Network while T-Mobile is a GSM. T-Mobile’s 3G data speeds which are super fast my 3G speeds hover around 12mb down and 3mb up, Sprint’s 3G service is under 1mb down and less down. These two networks just don’t gel together. I would hate to see all of Sprint’s customers dumped onto T-Mobile network while we wait for Sprint’s network to be overhauled. Sprint’s network hasn’t been getting any better for the longest time, this will ruin what we enjoy now, IMO the fastest data speeds in the US. I have several devices running on T-Mobile and I pay allot of money for that. I’m not so interested in price as much as I want the fast data speeds and great service. This will end, it would have to. Sprint’s pathetic network will ruin T-Mobile, no way around it. I like the idea of a GSM Network, just pop a different Carrier sim card in and you are all set. I have been to Ireland, England several times without any isues using a local sim card in my phone. This will end. I hate it allready.

    • eanfoso

      dude no, it’ll be just like when metro pcs was acquired, chill, nothing bad will happen, specially in the big metropolitan areas where T-Mobile has a lot of backhaul and the 20x20MHz spectrum

    • UMA_Fan

      The way I hope they do it is going forward once the company is combined all existing bands currently used for LTE are kept and built into radios for all new devices. All old Sprint LTE devices get software updated to support T-Mobile’s new VoLTE. Then as LTE coverage equals CDMA start decommissioning CDMA and everyone can still talk/text on their phones.

    • xmiro

      the CDMA network is going away, it will exist for a while but in an extremely reduced capacity. SoftBank’s customers in Japan are GSM so if the merger is approved what would happen is what happened after the MetroPCS merger – Sprint will start selling GSM phones, customers on Sprint who renew service will be on T-Mobile’s network etc

    • Fraydog

      Things are going to go to VoLTE with the US carriers anyway, GSM isn’t really a good term for what the modern T-Mobile networks are anyway. They’re a combination of UMTS/DC-HSPA+ and LTE. A better term for the GSM family of networks is 3GPP. You should use that instead. GSM itself is the obsolete version of 2G services that T-Mobile is moving away from. No one wants to be on EDGE – just look at T-Mobile rural areas if you need any proof of that.

      Now whether all this is interoperable is another topic of debate, but the CDMA nightmare is fortunately closing. Verizon can’t get off CDMA for VoLTE quick enough. Their legacy CDMA network blows like Sprint’s does, fortunately for their customers they don’t care because they have the fastest LTE in the nation for the premiums they pay. Sprint should probably move off CDMA even if their parent company doesn’t buy TMUS. Rebuilding the CDMA network in Network Vision failed.

  • DH

    IMO, the only way I see this successful is if the TMO brand and livery lives on. T-Mobile has in-arguably redefined their image, brand, and philosophy, and it works. In my interactions with customers who have Sprint, they hate it. No carrier is perfect, but they truly hate it. The Sprint Brand in my mind is weak, dated, and no curb appeal (not to mention god awful marketing, a Framily?!). In the chance this deal goes through, I can only hope TMUS carriers it all and keeps the radical focus on customer service, doing things differently, and not being afraid to challenge the “norms”. Should the deal go south, I hope TMUS gets some of the break up monies to really continue to expand network coverage. During the Humm regime when the announcement of an AT&T merger was made, almost all enhancements in the network came to a screeching halt. I feel this really cost TMO in the long haul as they had to play major catch up once the DOJ said no-no. I hope the same doesn’t happen when and if the big announcement is made.

  • Todd

    It could be that both rumors are true. Here’s my guess: The “company” will be run under the SoftBank name, and the “brand” would be T-Mobile. It could also include Sprint as well.

    You don’t always have to have the brand and the company name match, and a company can have multiple brand names. Why is everybody freaking out thinking that only one name and one brand will have to exist. It doesn’t, and frankly I’d be very surprised if they did kill of the Sprint name, since it still carries some clout (yes, a lot of people still like them.) Also, look at the success that TMUS is having with MetroPCS. Working great so far having more than one brand.

  • Willie D

    Nothing less than a complete merger denial is going to work for me. With that should come a treasure trove of PCS spectrum AND $2Billion fee.

    • Zacamandapio

      Wouldn’t that be something? 1900Mhz for T-mo’s expansion.
      Win win.

  • HildyJJ

    If you want a new name rumor, nobody’s using Bell Telephone anymore.

    I’m another vote for the regulators shutting this down.

  • Jay J. Blanco

    2 Billion please have the check ready when John comes! Lol

  • The Man

    Please Doj and FCC reject this. TMO is making prices competitive and changing the industry .. Sprint would ruin it. Please reject it and give TMO the $2B break up fee, that way they can use it to buy some of that 600Mhz spectrum ;)
    Please, don’t let Sprint buy TMO. Sprint is on its way down and TMO is on the rise .. why ruin a good thing in TMO? If you don’t reject the merger ATT & Verizon will gobble up all the 600Mhz spectrum and ruin it for everyone .. especially the customers.

    • Jesse James

      sigh, sprint is not tying to buy t-mobile. softbank is.

      • superg05

        tomato tomato ,

      • The Man

        Softbank owns sprint. Same thing basically. Anyways, SOFTBANK buying TMO would ruin things for customers.

    • Mark Barlog

      They cant gobble up the 600mhz spectrum. At least not unless they rewrite the rules again.

    • Matt Pankey

      Only if you say please.

  • TBN27

    Take the $2billion and buy a roaming partner or two to expand their native coverage.

  • GreatNews

    What a Win, Win satiation, but I would love to see the $2B win rather then the Marge…

  • Hurlamania

    Softbank usa will be the parent company, both sprint and t-mobile will continue to ne run separately. Just like everything everywhere in the uk. This is in hopes to get approval by still having 4 brands.

    • maximus1901

      Bs. If it’s the same company why the hell would fcc care about how many brands it has? That’s like counting virgin and boost as competitors to sprint.

      • Hurlamania

        Im telling you what was reported

  • Tony Chen

    say no to t mobile merger, get that $2 billion dollar ready sprint. Sprint network sucks.
    more money for t mobile, fcc will block the deal.

  • maximus1901

    First thing TMO-sprint will do is get rid of unlimited for new customers.

    • Jesse James

      this is based on…..?

      • maximus1901

        Logic. The alternative is att vzw which have very expensive, limited data plans.
        Why wouldn’t newco eliminate unlimited for new customers? TMO still has better non unlimited prices than other 3.
        4 carriers is what we need for true competition.

        If duopoly can attract customers with no unlimited then …

        • Jesse James

          or cheaper prices, unlimited data, and comparable network forces att and vzw to change. truth is we don’t know what the true motivations are in this except possibilities on both sides of the spectrum.

        • maximus1901

          Sons motivation is to make money. If he can do that by eliminating unlimited, raising prices then he’d be stupid not to.

          SoftBank doesn’t have unlimited data in japan even though they have 2.5 Tdd like sprint.
          And their prices are pretty bad compared to TMO.

          I’m a conservative, free market guy but I still don’t trust any CEO when they say that fewer competitors = lower prices. These CEOs wouldn’t have passed Econ 101 believing that and yet that’s what’s son is saying.

        • Jesse James

          in that same logic isn’t that what t-mobile would do anyway if they could even out the customer base and network? So the end result is the same, limited data and higher prices for Tmo USA customers?

        • maximus1901

          Yes TMO actually tried this before Legere arrived. Their unlimited plan wasn’t unlimited anymore …. Until they started losing customers so they brought back truly unlimited.
          And this happened while sprint still had unlimited!!!
          So there! If TMO tried this with 4 carriers don’t you think newco will try with just 3 carriers?
          TMO had to backtrack because of competition among the FOUR carriers.
          Check my post up top listing examples of 3-carrier markets and what happens.

    • Brian Miller

      Not likely. Sprint customers with unlimited data have the Sprint Unlimited Guarantee, which is in the contract they signed — Unlimited For Life on the Sprint network. Any successor company would have to honor that agreement.
      T-Mobile customers could see their “unlimited” data cut, but Sprint customers would be very difficult to downgrade in this way without a big lawsuit and lots of bad PR.

  • http://www.t-mobile.com Big-Myke Kanuri

    This is getting pretty old…QUICK! they better come on and make a decision on what they want to announce – and WHEN! June 18th, definitely has something to do with it. Glad the T-Mobile name will be staying, or yet another un-informed rumor.
    Remember the last time, when it was reported that SoftBank would be the name, it was a rumor from “an informed insider” – just like this one. LMAO! They sure have a lot of inside informers with different information.
    Sounds like Sprint informers, Because everytime Sprint did something, it was all on front street, 5 minutes after they left the board room. This way, Verizon used to eat their lunch all the time with their A+++ marketing.

    I for one and tired of all this speculation and will have no more of it. WHERE IS MY GALAXY NOTE 4?

    • maximus1901

      Why do you think the name matters? Legere’s job at TMO was to pump it up for a sale and he did it. Nice job.
      With his new boss being sonny boy, his task will be dictated by sonny boy which is to make money.

      Newco will have almost as many subs as vzw att so why would newco continue challenger pricing? Because sonny boy says he will?
      He’s not gonna put anything in writing sooo why would he be a super-maverick?

      • UMA_Fan

        You say this with such confidence. Did you read his offer letter or something?

  • Justin Merithew

    If a merger was to happen I’d approach it with an open mind. It could be a good thing. Yes, Sprint hasn’t handled mergers too well in the past, but the people that mismanaged things in the past aren’t running the show anymore. I was very hesitant to give T-Mobile another shot until Legere took over. Companies change.

    • maximus1901

      You want less competition?
      Checkout Canada’s cell prices with 3 carriers.
      Read about what happened recently in France when a fourth carrier emerged. Read the recent article that states Japan’s gov is pissed that with SoftBank, kddi, ntt docomo there’s not enough price competition.

      I’m flabbergasted that people on TMO and s4gru forums are supporting this merger.

      • Justin Merithew

        I’m not saying it’s a guaranteed solution, but with the current situation Sprint and T-Mobile will never be able to catch up to AT&T and Verizon. They have neither the spectrum or the capital to buy the spectrum they need. T-Mobile has made some pretty bold moves, but the big 2 have barely reacted, because they have such a large lead.

        If a carrier arose that had a similar customer base/spectrum holding, it could truly lead to lower prices in the US. On the flip side Softbank could use this to raise prices, but I don’t think the US cellphone market can get too much worse.

        • superg05

          drank the coolaid ic

        • Justin Merithew

          Nope, just using facts to form my own opinion, instead of letting an age old grudge against Sprint cloud my judgement.

      • UMA_Fan

        Those examples you bring up are completely different because the gap between T-Mobile vs Verizon or At&t on it’s own is more than DOUBLE the amount of customers. This is why there is no competitive pressure when Verizon or At&t make consumer unfriendly moves. It might tick some people off but they’re not in danger of losing meaningful marketshare EVER. T-Mobile can literally give away free tablet data but do they sell the most connected tablets in the US? Hardly. They sell the LEAST.

        With 90 million plus customers a combined T-Mobile/Sprint (Super T-Mobile) would have actual sway in the market. My gut personal feeling is T-Mobile plan pricing will go up long term. A little bit. But in turn, Verizon and At&t will be forced to bring their pricing down. Drastically. They will start ‘playing’ to be more consumer friendly. Right now with the way the market is Verizon/Att like the big gap between them and the other two but as soon as a third player emerges roughly the same size there likely will be immense market pressure to have the majority of US subscribers from the shareholders of each company.

        Without a merger of 3 & 4. 1 & 2 will ALWAYS be att/verizon interchangeably for the rest of our lifetimes.

        • maximus1901

          Why this obsession with making 3 equal competitors? 3 equal means they start to implicitly cooperate on prices. Having one that’s drastically smaller means it’ll always be the scrappy maverick but newco will be too close in size to duopoly and they’ll have incentive to start cooperating to preserve margins rather than competing.

          And if 3 equal size is so good then why do Canada’s prices suck? Or why did Frances prices suck before free mobile launched? I thought having 3 equal sized would lead to more competition, HMMMMMMM?

        • UMA_Fan

          They would still be 15 million short of at&t if combined. It’s harder for at&t and verizon to lower prices than a company that’s built with a lower cost structure that suddenly has 90 million customers. They would gun to be number one. I think at&t/verizon would be under more pressure than ever to lower prices to compete.

        • philyew

          At the point that the merger were to take place, the company’s cost structure would be far less efficient than either AT&T or Verizon. They would have to go through a period of rationalization to even arrive at an equal footing, let alone any significantly greater efficiency.

          How long has it taken for an efficiently handled network harmonization between TM and MetroPCS to progress? That involves a small number of subscribers and limited infrastructure compared with TM and Sprint.

          While there are many colocated cell sites, there are also many long term leasing commitments to honor for both companies – 8,000 with Crown Castle alone, for example.

          How many retail outlets are managed as TM or Sprint-branded stores by third parties? How different are the potential savings from those, compared with directly managed operations where the carrier bears the full burden of operating costs?

          We’re both speculating, but I think there will be more pressure on the merged entity to increase prices than there will be on AT&T or Verizon to reduce them.

          The weight of history, which has compelled this free market economy to legislate against highly concentrated markets, indicates that there is little reason to expect the consumer to win when competition is reduced in this way.

        • UMA_Fan

          To speculate even further VoLTE is a variable not present in mergers of the past. The easiest path I see for them is to build out sprint flavored LTE bands equal to the footprint of CDMA. Software update sprint phones to support tmobiles VoLTE that exists today. When enough people have upgraded to LTE phones then they can start decommissioninf CDMA.

        • Nearmsp

          Who told you being big is more stronger? Walmart has lost sales 5 quarters straight even while nimble grocers like Whole foods and Trader Joes have done much better.

        • Fabian Cortez

          It has more to do with sub-1 GHz spectrum versus customer base.

          Once Sprint and T-Mobile get their hands on some 600 MHz, it’ll be game over for AT&T and Verizon.

          That’s when the true price wars will come to this country.

        • Erick

          It’s all customer base, or economic scale, if T-M and Sprint get their hands on most of that spectrum, all they will accomplish is to cover the same territory as the other two, they still can only build the same quality network as the other two because of physics. So, you have the spectrum, now you need customers, what do you do? Lower your prices. What do the other two do? Match your prices. What did you gain? Nothing except for a couple 2 strong quarters, and a massive loss of profit.

          Remember that ATT & VZN have more o less the same fixed expense to cover as the TM and Sprint, and have more that double the customer base.

          Look at it this way, if all 4 carries have the same price for their service, a price were Sprint and TM have forced ATT’s & VZN’s hand to respond or loose subscribers, ATT & VZN would still be making more that double what the other two would.

        • Fabian Cortez

          Oh I see. Because when all four carriers cover everyone in every market and all have the same prices, nothing differentiates one from another.

          Things like unlimited data, no overages, no contracts, friendly network policies (bring any phone, free tethering, no device handicaps (blocking cell phone features such as download booster, no FaceTime over cellular, etc.)), 0% device financing, VoLTE with HD Voice, fastest LTE in the country, DC-HSDPA, Wi-Fi Calling, HD Voice over UMTS, unlimited stateside international texting, unlimited international data roaming and texting, and 4×2 MIMO LTE (eventually 4×4).

          Sure, when all four have the same price, no one will ever care about any of that. I mean as it stands, no one fears going over their shared data bucket [scam].

          P.S.: Everyone keeps chiding T-Mobile for their lack of turning a profit these past two quarters. Rather small losses too. Yet at the same time, everyone seems to ignore the rather large yellow elephant in room that hasn’t turned a profit since 2007. Yes, that would be Sprint and their over 1 billion net loss in certain quarters.

        • Erick

          All of those little nice things that you mentioned are good, even great, but have no impact in the decision making of the immense majority of wireless subscribers.
          Most people spend year-round at their city homes, except for a couple of week vacations a year if that, they don’t go over seas, they don’t have to have the latest phone every 6 months, they don’t need unlimited data, they don’t have a clue on what to do with a rooted phone, or unlocked boot loader.
          So, those things that you mentioned are nice for you or me, but most people only need to read emails, post pictures on Facebook or tweet something, make phone calls and send a few texts every now and then. For that immense majority of subscribers, any run of the mill wireless plan that it’s affordable to them, would suffice.

        • Fabian Cortez

          No. Overages.

        • Erick

          For most people, over use of data it’s not an issue, even those in TMO and Sprint rarely do more that 3 or 4gb of data a month, again, I’m talking about 90% of all wireless subscribers. So, again, that 10% of heavy data user will consider the unlimited plans as an important factor when deciding on wireless plan, the other 90% won’t mind the limited plans as long as it’s enough and affordable to them.
          I have 5 lines with TMO, I used an average of 3 to 4gb a month, my wife, kids, and mom, don’t use 3gb all together, so, if I get, let’s say, 15GB a month from ATT and pay a little more than TMO or Sprint, but their network it’s a lot better and I know that 15GB of data it’s more than plenty, what reason do I have to change?

        • Fabian Cortez

          For most people, over use of data it’s not an issue, even those in TMO and Sprint rarely do more that 3 or 4gb of data a month, again, I’m talking about 90% of all wireless subscribers. So, again, that 10% of heavy data user will consider the unlimited plans as an important factor when deciding on wireless plan, the other 90% won’t mind the limited plans as long as it’s enough and affordable to them.
          I have 5 lines with TMO, I used an average of 3 to 4gb a month, my wife, kids, and mom, don’t use 3gb all together, so, if I get, let’s say, 15GB a month from ATT and pay a little more than TMO or Sprint, but their network it’s a lot better and I know that 15GB of data it’s more than plenty, what reason do I have to change?

          I’m glad you represent the entire wireless subscriber base of the United States. I’m also glad that your children are so well behaved and don’t act like sub-25 year old children and make mistakes by going over data allotments.

          The big two have trained people into using as little data as possible while on their respective networks. People are fearful of going over their data allotment in a given month. Some are even fearful of using it unless it’s necessary, even though they pay for the data! The fear comes in the form of overage fees. The big push has always been Wi-Fi.

          This discussion is about four carriers with the same exact coverage. Please do not change the terms of the discussion in order to prove your non-point.

          My statements in my previous posts stand. It’s always about the worst case scenario, not the best or ideal.

      • xmiro

        most of the European Union countries have three mobile carriers. If our regulators did their job properly and weren’t so corrupt it wouldn’t be so bad to have three national carriers

        • maximus1901

          Not so sure of that:
          UK: 3, Telefonica, EE, Vodafone
          Germany: Telefonica, Vodafone, eplus, deutsche Telekom
          France: free mobile, sfr, Bouygues, orange
          Ireland: Vodafone, Telefonica, 3, eircom

          If 3 carriers is so good, why do Canada’s prices suck (with 3 carriers)?
          Verizon is better and that’s saying something.

        • Brian Miller

          Canada has 5 carriers, not three:

          Rogers; Bell; Telus; Videotron and WIND Mobile.

      • jeremyvbk

        And what competition is there here? I’m sorry but I’ve heard too many stories about people switching from ATT to Tmobile, and getting pissed because of lack of coverage. What is going on is not competition. With a 3rd large company, they have no need to raise prices, and won’t, because they’d have say 90million. They can keep unlimited, but still offer speeds possibly 2-3 times as fast as the big two. And with expansion of coverage, because they can just add sprint NV to Tmobile sites that are edge only, enabling 3 bands of LTE fairly quickly. That in itself if it were in a HSI lacking area already helped consumers get internet where they’d have little choice. As well as the plus of unlimited would force the big two to get their butts in gear, and have to offer something similar. The reason why a merger is needed is because to expand, they need the help of one another. Would you rather see one of the 3/4 wireless operators fail and the big two gobble the spectrum and customers, hence then killing the last competitor.

        • Wilfredo Martinez

          Why would one of the 4 wireless operators fail? That is just pure speculation. T-Mobile is doing fine, Sprint has the financial back power from Softbank. Both of them now have 600 MHZ spectrum reserved for them, please explain to me why would one of them fail. It makes no sense.

        • Erick

          Because of market share, if all 4 carriers have the same price, ATT and VZN would still make more than double what the others to would, and then nobody would have a reason to switch. And believe me, what TMUS it’s doing, admitted by themselves, it’s unsustainable. They lost $151M in the first quarter along, with this prices they are about breaking even to cover their fixed expenses, and definitely bleeding out money, because all the money they are throwing at the customers to bring them in.

        • Wilfredo Martinez

          All 4 carriers would never have the same price. Each one of them have an obligation with their shareholders so it is unlikely such a thing would ever happen. Also what T-Mobile is doing is stealing market share from its competitors and the method they are using is unsustainable but if they continue to grow and gain a significant amount of customers, the long term effects of that would go away in the future. They lost 151 million due to customers who switched using the “we’ll pay your ETFs” offer. That 151 million that they lost you don’t think they will gain it back with all those additional customers that they added? Of course they will, it is like making an investment and you lose money but then you gain it back after a period of time. Once Sprint and T-Mobile’s coverage improves and becomes as vast as AT&T’s and Verizon they will be able to gain and keep customers that switch to their network.

        • Erick

          No, they won’t keep them, as soon as ATT or VZN lower their prices a little bit, all those subscribers will go back to the better network. Most of the market share gains that TMO has had over the last year came from Sprint, and the moment Sprint does something as strong as TMO did, or close to it, a lot of them will switch back because they have no reason to stay. No contract to keep them in check. No financial repercussions. I left Sprint because there was nothing for me to loose, TMO paid my ETF’s, and if Sprint come up with a lower plan and paying off my new phones from TMO, I’ll do exactly the same, I’ll go back, there’s nothing tying me up to TMO.

        • Erick

          That was a hypothetical example, the big 2 don’t need the same price, they only need to stay in touch, most people will pay a little extra for the better network.

        • jeremyvbk

          Tmobile and sprint are still losing money. No company can stay alive when losing money. Even with deep pockets of Softbank, and there is no room for Sprint or Tmobile to gain subscribers because the big two can throw as much money as they want practically to keep customers. Why these pay etc offers are short term. Tmobile and sprint can’t afford to keep that offer permanent, because the money they make on the customers is lower per customer than ATT. It will be merger or die for one company.

        • Wilfredo Martinez

          You don’t quite understand how companies work, T-Mobile and Sprint will both be investigated by the FCC and the DOJ to determine if it is true that one of them will fail if they even use that as an argument for the justification of this merger… Yes they are losing money for now, but that is their own fault as they don’t even have any low spectrum frequency bands, (Sprint holds some low band spectrum but not enough to even count it as such) and they have less coverage than AT&T and Verizon. Also you must recognize that AT&T and Verizon are top brand companies, that have an obligation to pay back dividends to their shareholders they aren’t just going to “throw as much money as they want practically to keep customers” as you stated. AT&T and Verizon would most likely use some other tactic to try to keep their customers, but in the end customers will get fed up with them and switch to T-Mobile or Sprint it is only a matter of time. Once the coverage becomes even when the 600 MHZ spectrum is auctioned and deployed, fierce competition will increase from all 4 carriers. T-Mobile would go after AT&T and Sprint after Verizon or vice versa. These companies aren’t going to die if they do not merge, the odds of that are huge.

        • Erick

          Man, stop it with the spectrum crap, all that does it’s make them equal in spectrum holdings, not better than them. You would still have to build your infrastructure at a cost of billions of dollars, and then somehow, give the customers a reason to switch. And no, price alone it’s not going to do it, because the big 2 can also lower their prices and keep people from leaving.

        • jeremyvbk

          The reason they don’t have low band spectrum is because the big two. Sprint will get the majority of the 600 if it comes next year. Softbank will be able to put more money than Tmobile. Plus the regionals will get more, and sprint will be able to use that spectrum thanks to CCA. Then that leaves Tmobile in the dust. Low band spectrum isn’t everything. The cost to deploy 600(spectrum auction, and deployment of equipment) will kill Tmobile. Softbank can absorb that cost due to their wide range of investments. DT won’t want to spend that extra money with out return. Softbank can.

      • Fabian Cortez

        Not to mention Canada’s 3 year cell phone contracts…

      • Brian Miller

        Canada does not have three carriers — it has five (one more than the USA).
        The situation with Canada is simple — it’s a geographically massive country with a very small population. It’s relatively easy to cover a small country with a large population, like Japan or a typical EU state. Large, relatively empty countries like the USA or Canada are a bigger challenge.
        You can pursue a “cover most of the population” strategy like T-Mobile or Sprint, which reduces cost but results in big holes in rural areas, or you can try to blanket the country ala Verizon and AT&T, which increases cost per customer (and that’s high even with 310 million Americans).
        Both have their issues, and in Canada, the three largest carriers have to spread out “national” coverage across just 32 million Canadians.

    • Nearmsp

      Show me one market in the world where reducing the competitors led to higher revenue for everyone?

      • Justin Merithew

        I never said it would lead to higher revenue for all companies, that’s pretty unrealistic. If handled correctly though it could bring down costs for people on all carriers. That has happened in other countries. The cost of delivering cellphone service are lower than ever, yet consumers are paying more than ever. This is because Verizon and AT&T see no need to truly compete, and if any smaller carrier tried to start a price war they would run the risk of bankrupting themselves. The US really does need another large carrier to shake things up.

        • Nearmsp

          That is wrong. Both AT&T and Verizon are having to respond to T-mobile and so is Sprint! So your theory falls flat.

        • Justin Merithew

          Are they price matching T-Mo? No. Because they’re not a serious threat the big two completely ignored the “End overages” petition that had over 100k signatures. They’re not feeling the Heat because T-Mo is so far behind.

        • Nearmsp

          You are clearly do not know what AT&T is doing nor any current customer. I agree Verizon is still doing a wait and watch but each quarter their EPS is showing up the damage from competition. VZ stock is down 2.8% over last 12 months, when S&P is up 22%. AT&T is down 0.2% for last 12 months. So again, your beliefs fall flat and hard when compared with the facts.

        • Justin Merithew

          The most recent study I’ve found was from January, so numbers may have changed slightly then for point number 1.

          1.Average cost per AT&T subscriber: $141
          Average cost per T-Mobile subscriber: $120

          2. T-Mobile offers unlimited data plans to new and existing customers.
          AT&T has unlimited data plans… but only for those lucky enough to be grandfathered.

          3. T-Mobile throttles people who go over their data caps.
          AT&T charges overages to those who go over their data caps.

          Those are facts as well, and they show a very big difference in AT&T and T-Mobile.

  • ca1984

    What do you think would happen to the employees? Say On the sales side?

    • schweddyballs

      Nothing. The combined business will still need all the current employees plus more.

      • Matt Pankey

        So the Sprint store two doors down from the T-Mobile store will stay open?

        • ChitChatCat

          And no.

        • Matt Pankey

          Exactly.

        • ChitChatCat

          Although that doesn’t necesarily mean there will be massive layoffs. The workforces can be combined to a point. You’ll have double the customer base to serve at that store. Natural attrition will get rid of some. But I imagine that some fat will be cut. And you won’t need two sets of managers.

      • hooah

        Please show me ONE merger where this has been the case.

        • UMA_Fan

          Well very few mergers in the past double their customer base like this would. Just logistically speaking if T-Mobile were to reach 90 million customers on their own they would hire more sales/care staff to support them anyway.

      • izick

        Capitalistic unnatural selection.

      • Nearmsp

        LOL. No bank will give a line of credit if you are not going to gain any financial benefits from a merger. Sprint has never made a profit in 7 years. Why would its owners want to take out more loans unless it can make profit by gaining economies of scale. Job cuts lead to productivity gains and hence the mergers work out.

      • kalel33

        LOL, that’s funny. T-mobile was firing people left and right by changing the metrics only a few could hit. During the AT&T attempt, the call center I was in went from over 600 reps to 170 reps in less than 6 months.

      • Moses JC

        Seems unlikely.

    • xmiro

      Most likely stores close to each other will be closed, customer support and network people will be laid off. I bed the HQ will be in Bellevue where T-Mobile is now. Masayoshi Son won’t be traveling to middle of nowhere Kansas you can be sure of that.

      • Glen Barrett

        He already bought the company; and he did it with the intention to purchase T-Mobile.

    • Nearmsp

      remember mergers are done for 2 reasons, to kill competition and to gain benefits of scale by reducing manpower. So yes, many sales job will be lost for sure.

  • superg05

    its a trap

  • superg05

    if this happens say goodbye to guaranteed 600 mhz reserve do this clusterfrack after the auction

    • UMA_Fan

      Not if Softbank plans to bid big. They have the capital to bid on par with Verizon/Att

      • superg05

        i said guaranteed there was going to be a reserve for smaller carriers that Verizon and AT&T could not touch guaranteed like a fix point in time. If acquired they will no longer qualify for this reserve and the combined company will have to divest spectrum = get rid off a certain amount. sprint has the largest reserve in the US there just losers, you don’t know how much they will have to give up so projection charts of current mean nothing

        not to mention softbank will raise the prices as soon as they can and collude with the other big two in price fixing, not to mention since the sprint acquisition there drowning in debt , they had to go to multiple banks to finance this deal that I’m sure had heft interest and add 20 billion to purchase T-mobile plus its current debt that and there you go

        • izick

          The real question is: What have periods done to you that you dislike them so much?

        • TechHog

          Depends on their gender.

        • Aaron Davis

          The merger won’t happen until after the auction, even if the deal is approved much sooner than that.
          There are also certain post-auction rules that they have to follow (mostly to keep verizon and at&t from acquiring all the small winners), so it will be a few months after the auction at the very earliest before the merger can actually happen.

  • xmiro

    I wish everyone would stop talking about the 600mhz auction as a given because it’s not. There are TV station owners who are unhappy with the software the FCC chose to use for interference and coverage modeling to simulate station re-packing.

    Also, there are only about 5-7 teams who work TV towers, and TV station equipment only works with a given frequency so if a TV station has to move frequencies it has to change antennas, transmitters, studio equipment and so on.

    The current estimate is 4-5 years working non-stop without vacation to climb TV towers and add/remove antennas. So even if the 600Mhz auction goes through it would be years before the spectrum becomes available to use by the carriers

    Not to mention the potential lawsuits that may ensue if the transition doesn’t go as planned and stations are affected

    • Stefan Naumowicz

      Edit

    • maximus1901

      I’d like a source for that 4-5 year estimate.

      • xmiro

        hardycarey(.)com/report-presents-most-honest-tv-spectrum-repacking-picture-yet/

        FCC independent report points to some stations taking 12 months to as much as 5 years to move

        tvnewscheck(.)com/article/75650/fcc-repack-sked-troubles-stations-vendors

        mentions TV technology vendors could take 7 years ramp up to full capacity

        tvtechnology(.)com/regulatory/0113/spectrum-repacking/225749

        commlawblog(.)com/2014/03/articles/broadcast/tv-repacking-update-widelitys-price-list-and-itinerary-for-the-road-ahead/

        talks about as few as 5 TV tower crews being available, and shortage of helicopters who are busy during the fire season

    • Fooser

      I highly doubt your statements. But – 4 to 5 years if Sprint was running the program. Under T-Mobile we’re talking 10 months tops! :)

      • xmiro

        read Broadcasting and Cable and see for yourself what the NAB and station owners say publicly and privately.

        Many station owners will resist the move if it affects the station’s signal and coverage.

  • UMA_Fan

    Are there truly anti trust grounds for the DOJ to sue on though? I think there would have to be a market where sprint/tmo combined would have the majority of marketshare. Legally speaking that’s the only thing the government has the power to do is sue on the grounds of anti trust.

    • izick

      I’m interested in this argument.

      • UMA_Fan

        Right the government can not directly ‘block’ mergers between two firms. The only thing they CAN do is sue on the grounds that the merger violates anti trust laws. The DOJ would have to be sure they would have a case to make in court before moving to block it.

        • Romdude

          How were they able to block the AT&T and t-mobile merger? How were the circumstances different? And no, there is no sarcasm here, I just want to know.

        • UMA_Fan

          Fort

        • UMA_Fan

          First the DOJ sued to block it. They scheduled a court date for the following year which was early 2013. At&t was prepared to go to court because it was the burden of the DOJ to the prove the merger harmed competition. Closer to the court date and after a few preliminary hearings the FCC signaled against it as well and then at&t backed out. For all we know at&t could have won that court case but it is unlikely.

          The key difference with sprint/Tmobile is that combined they are still not bigger than either at&t or Verizon.

    • Jeremiah McCurry

      The FCC would have more grounds to object than the DOJ.

  • Nearmsp

    So, Soft bank is continuing to use the media to make leaks and keep the merger topic live. With an election coming up this year, I would love to see any political hacks sitting on the FCC to stick their corrupt heads out and rubber stamp any deal and certify that a merger will not reduce choice or competition for the US consumer. Stop discussing this until we have formal buy out proposal on the table. No point in endless speculation.

    • Mschmal

      Agreed, I’m still trying to decide about how I feel about a T-Mobile/Sprint merger. While I was completely against a merger with AT&T, T-mobile seems starved for spectrum if it wants to really grow to a true nationwide carrier. Sprint has no path forward. Without this merger I don’t see Sprint surviving. So in the sense that a combined company would be at least similar in size to Verizon and AT&T it could over time increase competition.

  • Opiu

    So softbanks basically paying DT for enough ownership to kill Sprint and move everything under tmobile?

    • xmiro

      According to the rumor yes

      • CJ

        Dose that mean they keey gsm

  • Erick

    Guys, stop dreaming about T-Mob getting the $2B, DT it’s selling it’s own shares to SoftBank, DT will get the break up fee. DT isn’t selling T-Mob to Sprint or anyone else for that matter. Again, so that you understand how this works. DT owns 67% of TMUS, the other 33% of TMUS it’s owned by different investors, since it’s a publicly traded company. If DT finds someone that desperately wants to buy their shares and negotiates that if they can’t buy it for whatever reason they’ll pay them a fee, Why would anyone of the other 33% investors get any money from DT’s own negotiated break up fee. If the deal doesn’t happen all you have it’s the hope that DT may want to put the money back in TMUS, but that it’s along shot, they’re facing big competitive pressure in Europe, and that’s where they will end up putting most of this money anyway.

    Imagine you own two houses, one you love, the other you just have because you can, someone tells you that they desperately want the second house, and it’s so desperate that they are willing to overpay for it, and even give some money, even if turns out they end up not buying it..

    To you it’s a win-win situation, whether you sale it or not, but if you don’t sale it, you probably invest the money in the house that you actually use, or love, or like, or whatever the reason is for preferring the other house.

    • Aaron Davis

      DT technically got the break-up fee from at&t too, but they still put most of it back into t-mobile USA.

      • Fabian Cortez

        You know, you don’t really have to feed the trolls.

      • Third_Eye

        IIRC, only the spectrum was transferred to TMO US. Which is totally useless for DT in Germany. Not the cash component of the breakup fee.

        I am more in line with Erick here.

      • Erick

        Hey, I’m a TMO customer, so I rather see that money put back in the network, but like I said, that is just my hope. The reality could be, and most likely will be that DT pockets the cash, or most of it, and TMUS get any spectrum gains. ATT paid something like a $4B fee, but about a third of that was all that TMUS saw. The spectrum that ATT gave them was valued at about $950M or so, and that my friend, that’s all the benefits that TMO got out of it. So, if this time there’s no spectrum swap, TMO could end up with nothing out this ordeal.

  • http://knightofscorpio.tumblr.com/ DtheArtist

    I don’t know if you take tips or rumors or whatever, but Phonearena has been running a story that part of or the whole move of Uncarrier 5.0 will be for T-Mobile to include (remove) taxes inside of their plans. http://www.phonearena.com/news/T-Mobiles-UN-carrier-5.0–simplified-rate-set-up-prices-will-include-taxes_id57150

  • charlieboy808

    Here’s an even bigger question, what happens to NASCAR if Sprint goes away? It was Nextel. T-Mobile lost the whole NBA deal they had, would it be good if they picked up another sport? LOL All this talk about money, what about good ol’ NASCAR?

    • TMOTECH

      T-Mobile is the exclusive sponsor for MLB. so….

      • charlieboy808

        LOL I’m looking at it like this, does NASCAR lose it’s branding or does T-Mobile pick up the bill? I think T-Mobile made a bid for MLB to be the “Exclusive Sponsor,” but in this case it’s literally the “Sprint Cup Series.” The way it’s branded doesn’t seem worded like it’s the exclusive sponsor but more the brand of NASCAR. It isn’t “Presented by Sprint,” it is, “NASCAR – Sprint Cup Series.” People take this sport way to seriously and I can see the community going nuts to change their Sprint Tattoos to a Magenta T-Mobile logo HAHA “WHAT THE HELL? THE LOGO IS PINK NOW?!” (in the worst hick accent I can think of) :-P Just poking fun because I can being a NASCAR fan.

  • ace

    No, not “win win.” $2b wouldn’t even come close to covering the financial damage and customer loss of an impending acquisition for 18 months
    .

  • Guest

    2 Billion to TMO or DT? The former is preferable to the latter.

  • Noel

    Sprint/SoftBank just hand over the $2B now and save us all the trouble of the fight that is to come. As stated during the failed attempt by At&t…the DOJ, FCC and a HUGE contingent of the masses want the BIG FOUR NETWORKS to stay in place, which is very important for competition that goes to benefit the consumers.

    In my view Sprint should better spend all those Billions to upgrade their Network and wage a price war but without Tmobile. Sprint and Tmobile separately can wage a price war against the other two members of the BIG FOUR.

    Just leave Tmobile alone…they are doing so so much to disrupt the US cellular market and the consumer on all four Networks benefits directly or indirectly.

    • Drew

      This merger here will be blocked regardless. Leave us the hell alone right nows Softbank!! :) :D

  • notyourbusiness

    If the merger goes through and T-Mobile stays exactly the same save for gaining millions of more customers, then fine. But if Softbank raises prices and screws with the network, then it’s goodbye for me. I’ll be happier if it doesn’t go through and T-Mo gets that $2 billion.

  • Drew

    This merger is Getting Blocked as we speak people. Screw Softbank/ Sprint. T-Mobile US rules all carriers. :)