SoftBank USA moniker chosen for merged T-Mobile, Sprint carrier?

softbank usa

Over the weekend, further rumors were published detailing virtually all the speculation we’d already heard last week. Deutsche Telekom has agreed a deal with SoftBank to sell its majority stake in T-Mobile US. As part of the deal, DT – it’s rumored – will have a 15-20 percent share in the new, merged company.

One thing we’ve never been sure of is what would happen with the company name. Clearly, it was never going to be a hideous Frankenstein job combining parts of the two different monikers. As much as I like the sound of T-Mint (makes me thirsty for herbal tea), I always assumed that one of the names would prevail, and the other would die. In my Magenta-colored brain, clearly T-Mobile was the best choice of the two. Its brand has become the cool kid of all the carriers, and is making moves that the other major network operators can only poorly imitate. But, that’s not going to happen either. At least, that’s what YouTube channel, TK Tech News claims.

The channel’s sources – who seemingly know the ins and outs of the deal – claim that the company will take on the parent company’s name. SoftBank will buy T-Mobile, and merge it with Sprint to create its own US presence – SoftBank USA. If true, it would see the brand we know and love disappearing, presumably along with the Magenta livery. On the plus side, John Legere is heavily touted as being the number 1 choice for the CEO role of this new company. News we’ve heard repeated many times in the past.

But before we get ahead of ourselves, and cry ourselves to sleep at the disappearance of our favorite brand, there’s still the hurdle that is the Department of Justice. It could still seek to block this merger on anti-competitive grounds. Something – we know – it has done in the past when AT&T tried to buy out the company in 2011. That said, it is worth noting that this isn’t exactly the same. If AT&T had been successful, it would have created a huge monopolizing carrier. It would have – at the time – been the only major GSM network operator, with both VZW and Sprint using CDMA. It would also have made the distance between the #1 and #3 carrier even greater, making the market much less competitive.

This time out, it’s very different. And that’s perhaps why the DoJ won’t be as strong in its actions. If Sprint and T-Mobile do join forces, in terms of subscriber bases, it’d create a carrier that virtually equals both AT&T and Verizon. There would be three fairly evenly matched carriers. And that’s good for competition.

As much as we hate hearing about it, it very much sounds like this deal is happening. For those of you dead against the idea, there’s still the regulatory bodies to hope on. FCC and DoJ disapproval has been noted in the past, and shouldn’t be ignored. But for the mean time, it’s hard to carry on as if nothing’s going on. Because, clearly, something is.

What are your predictions for this proposed merger? Do you think SoftBank will get its way and push the deal through? Or will the regulatory hurdles trip the Japanese carrier up?

Source: YouTube

Tags: , , ,

  • Eric Hare


  • Whiskers

    I hope it fails.

    • dtam

      …and t-mobile get some good breakup perks

  • Anonymouse

    don’t tread on me!

  • Mschmal

    Sprint is stuck because CDMA is a dead end and Sprint doesn’t have cash to get out of its current death spiral. T-Mobile is stuck because T-Mobile will never be able to acquire enough spectrum to have a truly national network.

    Just this weekend I drove from NJ near Philly to my parents in Northern Fairfield County, CT. On I684 in West Chester Cty around New Bedford, my signal dropped back to 2G. All through the I84-I684 interchange I was on 2G. 4G came back in Danbury from exit 3ish to about exit 8. My parents home in a valley in Brookfield couldn’t even get signal.

    This drive was through affluent pretty densely populated burbs. If T-Mobile can’t supply more 4G coverage they really can’t compete.

    • Willie D

      T-Mobile acquired enough AWS spectrum for a national network, including Alaska, Montana, North and South Dakota, Wyoming, rural areas of Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas, and Colorado, but wont roll out as other carriers, like Verizon and local incumbent carriers retain most of the customers – these are legacy areas, few customers, but have older networks that were in place back when wireless was rolling out, before T-Mobile entered the field. Seeing as it would cost more to deploy, for little return, driving up prices for other customers to subsidize coverage not needed (the needs of many prevail over the needs of a few kinda idea), T-Mobile decided NOT to deploy, and rely on roaming, for the few roamers that need it. Buying spectrum in these areas is an investment for that “one day” scenario, but also to sell off to other carriers, in those areas, who need it, in turn giving T-Mo cash for more premium spectrum in auctions, that may prove more cost efficient to deploy..Im talking 600Mhz and 700Mhz now costing less to deploy in these areas, making it more cost efficient for T-Mobile to finally expand.

  • brsmith68

    As much as you would like to see this as a positive merger with 3 major players. Softbank has not done a good job with Sprint. They continue to lose customers even with their “FRAMILY” plans. It looks like Sprint and HTC have the same marketing firm.

    • mjfadaway

      Softbank hasn’t even owned Sprint for a year. You can’t just buy a company and change them overnight. It’s just not possible. With that said, I have seen some improvements and yes I am a Sprint customer.

      What’s gonna happen is this merger will go through and Legere will get all of the credit for the new amazing company.

      • Willie D

        Actually, MetroPCS did a reverse merger with T-Mobile and within 6 months, LTE rolled out at a breakneck pace, the networks both were integrated in many areas, and the migration process was going smoothly, also lets not forget that they changed their rate plan to a more simple structure, and gained about a million users in the first 6 months alone. So yes, a year can actually do wonders, T-Mobile is proof of this, and by Softbank’s own statement they claimed they could turn Sprint around quickly, now we are being told, the tried and true lie that Sprint and Co. like to continuously feed its customer base, “It will take time, be patient” – but in honesty, how much more do we need to be patient?

      • Adrayven

        When John took over T-Mobile, changes happened in management and in support/service immediately.. like 1 month in we were feeling it.. SoftBank has had a year and nothing has changed?? Please.. At least a management shakeup.. but not even that..

        SoftBank has kept Sprint business as usual.. and thats bad.. It’s like they bought it with no intention but to get into the market.. then immediately realized Sprint was a bad idea and started moves on T-Mobile..

        It’s almost as if SoftBank just wants to buy into the market with little – to – no idea on WHAT they want to do..

  • Matt

    ‘Soft’ and ‘bank’, two words I find very unappealing in context of a telecom/mobile service provider.

    • Willie D

      Let alone the term “bank” with the American public is upsetting as the bank situation is one reason people are still struggling, years after the Great Recession ended.

      • MadJoe

        Would you mind letting the economy know that the Great Recession is over? It apparently didn’t get the memo.

        • Willie D

          The economy is fine, stocks are higher today than history. It isnt the “economy” that is the issue, it is the businesses that want an extremely large savings account versus hiring people to drive a stronger economy, in turn, making their own companies by far more valuable, in a second turn, padding that savings account more and faster than not.

  • princedannyb

    Ewww… Softbank doesn’t even sound like a celll phone carrier name. That is so laim. I do have an open mind to a merger, but seriously, they need a better name. Smh

    • Matt

      From a marketing point of view ‘soft’ and ‘bank’ are missing the target totally, even if more services of cable or satellite might be added later on. Performance and true value of services matter more in the end, but why not keep a brand that gained momentum?

      • princedannyb

        Exactly! I don’t know what they are thinking.

  • Willie D

    If Softbank won’t keep the T-Mobile name (which is a more trusted name than Sprint at this point), and the Sprint name is dying (thank God), then why not use a name that not many really knew, but is perfect for the new rate plans, and service – CLEAR. Sprint owns that trademark and name, it was used briefly to tout 4G plans for home and mobile use, no reason to see why it couldn’t be put into play for a new carrier.

    • thepanttherlady

      Unfortunately, CLEAR doesn’t bring about warm fuzzy feelings either. Ever read the complaints about them online? And yes, I was a customer once. Bad decision.

      • Willie D

        Nationally, Clear was not a well known brand. It was known in very few markets, where as many knew Clearwire, including California markets where Clearwire was more known than the Clear brand. It is like saying “Which was lesser of the two evils, AT&T Wireless or Cingular” and they rebranded AT&T Mobility. Untrusted company with many issues, that now is one of the best wireless companies around. If Softbank wants to use a name they already own, Clear is the name to do it with, its the least damaged name of Nextel, Sprint, Clearwire and Clear…. just saying.

      • Paul

        I can produce users that want to see CLEAR burn to the ground.

    • Adrayven

      They don’t want T-Mobile likely because if they do keep it, customers will expect to keep the no-contract / non-subsidized model.. My guess.. they are going to go with the old model and go backwards.. 2 steps forward 5 steps back! YAY!

      • Willie D

        When Softbank took over Vodafone Japan, thats exactly what they did with the iPhone exclusive, locked people in long contracts, and higher rates, simply because people wanted an iPhone. With Sprint, and T-Mobile they want to kill off the most cost inefficient things, International Text and Data, JUMP upgrades, simple EIP plans, unlimited data, pretty much anything.

      • northrode

        Exactly my thought. Which is why, when I read this headline, my first thought was that I need to bail on T-Mobile. It just seems that, if this is true, SoftBank wants to put as much space between them and the T-Mobile (and the expectations that come with the brand).

        That being said, they can do better than Softbank. How about SoftMobile?

    • izick

      Don’t forget the names that T-Mobile owns from their past acquisitions and transitions such as Voice Stream (antiquated since so few people talk anymore) and SunCom (The “Worryless Wireless” carrier that Harry Connick Jr. was their spokesperson and jingle singer).

  • kev2684

    this merger should not happen. SoftBank is about to throttle sprint unlimited data users using more than 5GB/mo. T-Mo has the most data heavy users out of the big 4. if this is how SBUSA will handle the combined company, god help us.

    • TechHog

      You’re kidding me…. This deal is going to cost the combined company 10-20 million subscribers and will make the duopoly stronger, and nobody will see it until it’s too late.

    • jeremyvbk

      False top 5% does not mean 5GB that was an example number. And only applies to strained sites. And don’t give a reply saying sprint sucks, all sites are slow response because I’ve never hit below 5Mbps, which is actually more than plenty for Mobile communication. Learn before you speak

  • No Merger!

    Cam, did you seriously say that having one less carrier is good for competition? Care to justify that sentiment?

    • Adrayven

      The new FCC head would likely agree, sadly.. He was head of the Cable and Wireless’s largest lobbyist arm.. It’s like having cable and wireless industries now self regulating..

      Probably why SoftBank is a little more gutsy with this move..

      Just look at what the FCC is doing with Net Neutrality… 2 lane Internet.. those companies who who can pay, and the have not’s..

      See John Oliver’s rant on the subject here:

      or just go here and post your objection here..

      Hopefully we’ll get the same ability to comment our opinion on this merger as we are on the Net Neutrality bill.. don’t know if it will help though…

    • Willie D

      I think he is speaking from experience in the UK, where there was O2, Vodafone, T-Mobile, Orange and Three. 5 national networks, roughly the same coverage, with a few differences in different places, there was little competing against them. Now T-Mobile and Orange merge into EE and there is more competition. Though I would be hard pressed to believe it was solely because of a merger, or because technology caught up and the first to deploy 4G that works, nationally, gets the prize and others try their best to compete against it, or deploy faster networks in order to gain customers, is now somehow seen as competing. Fact of the matter is, the USA is not the UK, and having only 3 carriers here simply does not work, and leads to too much collusion in majority of the nation, instead, keeping 4, one of them extremely disruptive, another colluding while competing is actually giving customers a choice.

    • Guest
  • trife

    It’s clear that a merger is in the future, whether it be with Sprint or whomever else. DT wants out. And eventually the DOJ and FCC will approve a merger. I’d rather get this over with ASAP so I can decide if I want to jump ship or not.

    As far as the name goes, I couldn’t care less what the company is called. Just provide me great coverage and affordable service. Heck, a name change may be good because even despite TMO’s recent success, they’re still looked at by many people as the carrier with bad coverage that’s for poor people and folks with bad credit. Obviously I don’t think this, but many do.

    It sucks to see TMO go, but it’s going to happen eventually, folks. Time to accept that fact and move past it, as sad as that is to say.

  • TechHog

    It’s all over. Uncarrier is dead. Simple choice is dead. Unlimited high-speed data is dead. Our GSM network is dead. The wireless industry is dead.

    • warpwiz

      I thought TMo would be gobbled up by Ma Bell, but it didn’t happen. But one thing I would do. After 16 years (yes, 16) with TMo I would move on if they don’t continue with GSM. It would mean signing up with Ma Bell. But I’m not paying for something as worthless as CDMA. My employer gives me a phone with Verizon, so I know of what I speak.

    • ChitChatCat

      My puppy is dead. Capitalism is dead. My Xbox is dead. ALL THE THINGS HAVE DIED.

      • TechHog

        Yup. There’s only one thing left to do…

  • Maximus

    How about S-Mobile…

    • vrm

      sounds about right – $h1t-mobile.

  • mark

    T-mobile is going to be the name for regular folk and Nextel will be for business accounts more sprint name tho..

    • Paul

      That’s not a bad approach; keeping personal and business operations separate!

  • mreveryphone

    I say we go back to the good ole days and name it Cellular One. As far as plans, keep the jump program, and in framily, cause I would love to reduce my bill instead of getting a one time $25 referral card, and keep unlimited data. As far as network; use the funds to build out a strong Verizon like network, I mean you have to give credit to them, their network is pretty stellar, and you might have a winning formula. I’m just trying to be optimistic if this thing comes into fruition…

  • Michael

    I’m a T-Mobile business care employee. I wanted to quickly give my feedback in regards to the sprint t-mobile merger.

    I would be lying if I said I wasn’t at least slightly worried, but I am more in favor of the merger than against it. I love working for T-Mobile but there are times that even I have to admit to customers that our coverage isn’t as good as ATT or Verizon’s. John and his team are doing wonders, I live in a remote town and we finally got 4G LTE as of YESTERDAY.

    But.. we’ll run out again like we did before. If we take sprint and repurpose all of that spectrum though? it will be a huge different and a game changer.

    I work for a great company, I want to work for the best. If John is in charge, I believe it. He makes his presence known to all employess of T-mobile and I would rally behind him in a heartbeat. If he’s cool with the merger, then so am I.

    • Michael

      Difference* sorry.

    • Paul

      A great piece of input, thanks for sharing.

    • brian90

      The price would still go up for Tmo users. It is not good for competition. AT&T “competes” with Verizon but it doesn’t help lower either of their prices. Sprint actually charges about $10 less than AT&T for Sprints terrible data network! How will this drive prices down when Sprint seems to think $10 off is great for their much inferior network?

    • Owuttt

      Business care!! Why do you guys close so early compared to the retail support line :(

    • warpwiz

      I hope you can remain a positive TMo employee once the beancounters start slashing employee headcount as “redundant.” You’ll recall TMo started this even before the ATT merger had been denied. It’s all about the money.

    • josephsinger

      Sprint is not known for great coverage.

  • Jerry S.

    Yes the T-mobile name has had a bad reputation for years, but that shouldn’t mean let it go. The reputation is improving and it spreads by word of mouth and advertising. If you get rid of the name then you’re going backwards with all the work they’re doing. I say use the T-mobile name and make virgin mobile and boost mobile combine and use them to make a new Sprint. Then they can take MetroPCS and combine it with T-mobile Pre-paid lines and call it MetroPCS or put them with the new Sprint. I see this as a way to save both brands and clear up some of all the names they have for pre-paid and post-paid. If Softbank really wants a presence then T-mobile has a card they sell for bank which can now be Softbank USA. What I would like to see is how they handle migrating customers over to one network presumably T-mobile’s because with MetroPCS they immediately started selling phones to work on T-mobile network to MetroPCS customers, but there is a lot more customers this time. I’m interested to see their plan to do this and not cause congestion on the network.

  • wsj

    That sounds like here comes Softbank brand of LTE. “Free” international was great while it lasts.

    • jeremyvbk

      Apart of the deal will include international Roaming deals.

  • Jay J. Blanco

    Such a lame name. lol T-Mobile is better

  • Deadeye37

    1) Softbank is a horrible name in the US. It works in Japan since English isn’t their primary language, but here that name sounds like some Japanese company with an English name that makes no sense (since that’s exactly what it is). No cool factor.

    2) If Sprint & T-mobile merge, then they will have to pick a network technology that both will use. Most likely, that will be GSM, which means that Verizon will become the sole provider of CDMA – which means that they basically monopolize that type of network.

    • othercents

      Why would they use GSM if Softbank uses CDMA?

      • PHL

        Because it doesn’t matter what Softbank uses in Japan. Two different markets entirely. In fact, as I understand it, even GSM is a dead-end technology that will eventually be replaced with pure LTE networks.

        • Chocowest

          What you said is incorrect. GSM is not a dead end technology. It’s actuslly the prevailing one. LTE and GSM go hand in hand. Thats why Verizon and Sprint now use Sim cards in their LTE equipped

        • Michael Johnson

          Lol… LTE is GSM-based. I don’t think its a dead end.

        • jeremyvbk

          Not really just because it is associated 3GPP does not mean it is GSM based. It has more properties to that of W-CDMA. MIMO is the biggest. The 4g(lte) and 3g components of 3GPP are not part of the ETSI GSM standard.

      • Austin

        Actually, SoftBank uses GSM (HSPA) in Japan. They were the exclusive iPhone carrier until the iPhone 4S came out. KDDI is the CDMA carrier there.

  • Alex Zapata

    That’s a big fat NOPE

  • susank

    Western Europe is the size of the United States. Count how many cell phone companies and options Europeans have. Just the UK (England) has 5 phone carriers. The ENTIRE country of the United Kingdom is the size of the state of Oregon.

    Why would only three carriers be good for the huge United States?

    • compsciphd

      presumambly you want to be able to use your cell phone nationally without roaming charges? it’s expensive to have a national presence and hence larger countries are going to have less choices. china also only has 3

    • othercents

      There won’t only be 3 carriers. There are still multiple other regional choices. Plus the density of population in UK makes it easier on the carriers vs the US. Your talking 80mil subscribers in the UK vs 400mil subscribers across the US.

      • wank_tank

        There a are only 300 million citizens in the US moron

        • FU Johnnie Traitor boy

          plus 30 million illegal aliens

        • ChitChatCat

          Well, there were 308.7 million in the 2010 census. But, forgetting that, a lot of people have more one that one phone. A lot of people also have a tablet or hotspot. There are also tons of machines that have cellular connections. Each of those counts as a “subscriber” in cell phone jargon.

    • BlackJu

      Because lobbyists said so. By the people, for the people, right? Yeah, not so much.

      • josephsinger

        Not by the people BUY the people!

    • Cam Bunton

      UK doesn’t have 4 carriers. T-Mobile and Orange aren’t separate companies anymore. They’ve just kept the brands to help with the transition. Networks, technologies, customer service, everything is done under the EE band.

      Three – historically – never secured rights to its own 2G/EDGE/GPRS networks and had to piggy-back off another network. It has go its own 3G, but will be sharing infrastructure with EE for 4G. So, I’m always hesitant to count it as its own carrier.

      Add that to the dozens of MVNOs, and you get a hot mess of carriers on offer. Most MVNOs, but only 3 I would consider fully-fledged, independent carriers. But, that hot mess does make for a very competitive market, which is quite awesome.

      Like you say though, USA is much larger, and that’s precisely why you only have a few national carriers. The cost of rolling out enough infrastructure across suck a large landmass is astronomical. Only those with the funds can achieve it, and even T-Mobile – as one of the big 4 – is struggling to get LTE everywhere.

      We have so many in the UK precisely because it is a smaller country.

  • Aurizen

    Softbank is a bad name of choice just because of the world bank and people who haven’t heard will think its a money grubbing bank.

  • Tmosince2003

    This has to be a fake, temp or parent company name. Because ‘soft’ and ‘bank’ are just not words anyone in marketing would spend money trying to advertise in the US.

    • PHL

      Probably true. There’s a lot of time and effort that goes into selecting a brand name, not the least of which is properly researching trademark issues. Many names that a company would want to use are already reserved by other companies. In the meantime, Softbank USA is as good a name as any other.

  • Edgar

    So the guy who said that he could turn around Sprint quickly and failed becoming a lair, now wants to convince the FCC and DJO that the merge is necessary to compete and turn around the company?

    I don’t see how can we believe this guy, since he lied to them the first time.

  • Paul Garrison


    • Edgar

      Why would you think that?

    • josephsinger

      Why must you shout?

  • Nick Gonzalez

    Murica Mobile

  • Fritz

    I really hope this buyout thing is just news outlets stringing us along for the ride. This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Why would DT want to pass over control/ sell TMO. Especially when the brand/company is in the middle of a huge turn around? Are they trying to hurt consumer confidence? Leave TMO alone, let the company be.

    • JoelWRX

      Sadly, DT has been trying to sell tmo USA for a LONG time. Mainly because they have a lot of money tied up in TMO USA and need some of it to become competative in EU market

  • BlackJu

    Can WalMart just buy both of them and merge with Carls Jr and the federal government so we can just get this over with?

    • ChitChatCat

      I’d love a Carl’s Jr to be inside every T-Mobile. Om nom nom.

  • Nearmsp

    This merger has a long way to go. Every T-mobile customer who does not want the merger to go ahead must post on public forums and write to their reps and senators. John Legere benefits personally from the merger and he is a compromised proponent. I would ask people to remember what AT&T said when they wanted to buy out T-mobile. They said T-mobile has a bleak future and it would eventually liquidate because as the smallest of the 4 national carriers it was at risk of going broke. What happened? AT&T is losing market share to T-mobile. Sprint is bleeding badly. By Sprint buying T-mobile, they will be able to reduce competition. Sprint has not made any profit in 7 years. Unless there is a whole sale change of top management nothing will change at Sprint. Buying T-mobile is the quickest and laziest approach to making Sprint profitable. FCC, Department of Justice MUST put an end to this I do not care if some political hacks sitting on the FCC are willing to pimp for Soft bank. DOJ needs to step in and kill this. I for one, will be posting non stop against this merger to shame all regulatory bodies that might want to go with their political masters. Every T-mobile customer must do likewise to put a stop to this madness. If Soft bank is not able to withstand the heat in the kitchen sell out to anyone who wants to buy Sprint. But do not try to kill competition by buying it out. I am sure AT&T and Verizon would relish Sprint buying T-mobile so it back to good old days.

    • Bilesha Welton

      I’ll be posting against it right there with you! We need to get Fight for the Future and other organizations involved if a merger is announced.

      • thepanttherlady

        I’m with you. Just waiting for someone to start a petition….

        • envious684

          Do you have a twitter ?


    Softbank is a really bad name in English. I think a little market testing will show that. They do need to pick a new name because of the negative feelings for both T-Mobile and Sprint are widely held.

    • Mike

      AGREED! Softbank is a horrid name. Sprint has a tarnished brand name. T-mobile less so and the changes in the last year so it to be a revived name. But why would a new owner want to pay royalties to DT to continue to use the name…that doesn’t make sense.

      • kalel33

        Voicestream was a reputable name when T-mobile came in too, but they wanted their own name.

      • UMA_Fan

        Well if DT is holding 20% of the company there’s no royalties to be paid.

        • Mike

          I don’t believe that to be true. DT would sell the remaining ownership it has in TMUS and therefore have no ownership interest. The remaining ownership is floating among public markets (NYSE or NASDAQ). I’m pretty certain that even in the current structure, TMUS pays DT a royalty for the tradename and associated logos/colors.

  • guest

    it would be nice on John to put that 1 billion for some crazy givaaway haha.He is crazy enough.Well i guess he will get some spectrum of course. Dont know why everybody thinks there would be a merger.Kind of sorry for Son, the guy did some bad decisions lately- buying sprint only becouse of their spectrum holdings.Go to softbank website.This cant give us innovation here in USA.The innovation looks it comes straight from tmo usa.The real reasson for the buyout is to eliminate t mobile not for “price war”.

  • JAY

    I have a T-Mobile store directly across from a Sprint store. How would this play out?! Both owners cannot get stiffed out of their investment so they would have to decide on something fair. At the same time we cannot be across the street from each other selling the same product.

    • Mike

      Unfortunately someone could get stiffed. What do the terms of the contract with the carrier say? I’m certain there is a clause that considers something like this and someone will be out.

    • Cam Bunton

      Sadly, if any merger does go through, you can bet that’ll mean lots of lay-offs in many sectors. I can’t imagine they’d keep both stores in that situation.

      When Orange and T-Mobile merged in the UK, most towns lost one of the stores, and staff moved across to the joint “EE” stores. In my city, it was my old T-Mobile store that shut down – because it was the smallest of the two stores. Much sadness ensued.

  • Rick Rudge

    Anything with the word “Bank” in it isn’t going to be popular here in the States. My guess is that it’s going to be called Sprint. :-) Big surprise there.

  • redman12

    Keep the T-Mobile brand and John Legere’s army then I will support this merger. Otherwise hell no.

  • rUbEn

    “SprinT-Mobile” would work… Or maybe S-Mobile….. But I like the first one better

  • steveb944

    I’ve been part of this since the Voicestream days, so name change is not an issue. Only time will tell what happens.

  • djclove007

    Hey cam u should do a poll who’s going to keep with the merger or change carriers if it passed

  • SEBA

    From what I understand Softbank goal is to target faster home Internet and in order to do that they need T-mobile.

  • omnirep

    I call B.S. on this report. Not that I don’t think that there will be an attempt to merge. Listen to this YouTube and read his blog. Lots of inaccuracies for example he mentions that the buyout price is now $36 per share not $32. It was reported that it was $40 per share and a $32b deal.

  • Dakota

    As a result of blocking the ATT merger, Tmobile started the Uncarrier movement, which has forced change across the industry. The government proved that having 4 carriers would force competition. Don’t see why they wouldn’t block it again even if this is #3 & 4.

  • notyourbusiness

    Softbank USA? Sounds absolutely horrible and not even like a wireless carrier anymore. Give me a break. That horrid name alone is enough to send me scurrying off to find a new, albeit prepaid, carrier.

    • casualsuede

      Verizon sounds like a Wireless Carrier? Or METROPCS, Cricket or Boost, or Virgin?

      • Baz

        Actually, yes. They all have Wireless-sounding names (Metro PCS, Boost, ATT, Cricket can all have positive connotations for cellular quality. Softbank at least sounds like a bank.

        • casualsuede

          Uh no they dont (crickets and metro denote cellular quality as does virgin?). You are grapsing at straws. For a while on chatboards many ppl thought verizon made little sense as a wireless company name, yet NOW its synonymous with what wireless means. As was the name Cingular. Softbank sounds more like a tech company rather the obvious thinking of banking (only to one with absolute no imagination who needs the name of thing in its name to describe what it does would think that). In 5 years, softbank will be as synonymous with wireless as tmobile or sprint ever was.

    • josephsinger

      Oh puhleez. You really think that the name of a company is going to be a deciding factor in which mobile company you choose. I mean really. People didn’t have any problem going with a goofy name like Verizon or cingular and they sold service. I never heard anyone complain about a company name to keep them from buying service from that company. I don’t think anyone really cares what a company is called as long as it isn’t the basis of a derogatory name.

      • notyourbusiness

        This is a comment section, and I gave my opinion. Oh puhleez to you for having a problem with that fact. The difference between the carriers you mentioned and this is that Softbank sounds like the name of a bank or at the very least, some sort of financial institution. If you want to give your money to said organization, then so be it, but the average consumer is going to be left with a bad taste in his/her mouth. It’s called marketing. Also, Verizon is actually Verizon Wireless when talking about the wireless carrier, so at least there’s that.

        Are you going around replying like that to everyone here who has an issue with the Softbank USA name?

  • D Velasquez

    I have been saying this since Softbank put the eyes on T-Mobile that either one of the companies or the merged one WILL BE renamed SoftBank, and as much as many of you Magenta fans (myself included) want to keep the T-Mobile brand it wont happen, the Japanese market is saturated and carriers are not getting the same amount of profits they got many years ago like when DoCoMo was the first carrier to provide 3G services in the world with FOMA, or when Softbank acquired Vodafone K.K. or when the iPhone was introduced. The 3 main carriers in Japan are desperately looking for ways to expand their revenue or why do you think we have here in the US mvno like DoCoMo USA, KDDI mobile and now (if possible) Softbank USA? again I can say I am happy with this IF Softbank decides to also bring their devices here, I am fed up with galaxy bandaids lg and htc phones.
    If Softbank decides to market their devices here and top of that bring the white plan which in a way is a little bit similar with the unlimited plan in T-Mobile then I can see the uncarrier movement continuing, for Softbank to not mess this up they will have to keep also the already laid out uncarrier phases from T-Mobile.
    a good thing I see yes but the FCC and DOJ have the last word….

    • Habbit

      Japanese-made smartphones are the worst pieces of garbage I have ever had the displeasure of placing into my palms. The only ones worth anything (Xperia) are already available in the States. Everyone who thinks this is great news has never lived here and dealt with how horiffically idiotic the cell phone careers are, this news does not excite me at all.

      • D Velasquez

        worst piece of garbage ? interesting, I had a bunch of “Japanese made” phones in my room and honestly their build quality are way better than your galaxy, even my N-02a which is y backup phone have an interesting build quality. I could agree with you the careers are horrible in the pricing part specially DoCoMo which is like att and Verizon combined when I comes to pricing but Softbank has done pretty good with the white plan and if anything you can’t say there are no options in japan, there is also emobile and willcom…

      • josephsinger

        I’m not sure why you think that if a Japanese company takes over a company they are going to insist that everyone buy Japanese phones.

  • Todd_the_Hunn

    If the FCC allows this merger I would wonder if there should be an FCC . The networks overlap . The carrot on this merger seems to be that Softbank would lay fiber optic cable . Dan Hesse already said that wouldn’t happen . Softbank has been taking a bath on Sprint . I get why they would want to take over the value carrier . It will be interesting to see how this plays out .

    I have always enjoyed merger news but man it is just over the top right now . Look at these food companies . I think in about a year I am going to hold up a ham , look at the price , and just start projectile vomiting .

  • Bull Winkle

    T-Mobile is the only carrier serving up competition. By purchasing it, Sprint eliminates competition.

    • Jesse James

      wrong. By purchasing T-mobile they can create a company that can stand toe to toe with verizon and att. No matter what Tmo does they won’t be a real competitor until they fix the holes in their coverage and make the nationwide network coverage comparable to att and verizon.

      • DONT DO IT!!!

        wrong. they are a competitor. most of us live in areas with excellent coverage. I don’t need coverage in south Dakota. you don’t need to cover every square inch to compete.

      • Logan S

        Too much koolaid?

      • Bull Winkle

        Either scenario is a possibility. Right now, T-Mo is siphoning customers from other carriers. AT&T and Verizon are big enough not to feel much. Sprint, on the other hand, isn’t. Other carriers have already starting following T-Mo’s pricing ideas. Before too many more of those ideas are adopted, Sprint an acquire T-Mo & return the industry to what it was: A de facto cartel of (near) price fixing.

      • josephsinger

        You are deluded if you think the combined company can best Verizon or AT&T. They both had almost a ten year advantage over Sprint and T-Mobile. They also had to deal with NIMBY long before either Sprint or T-Mobile. Even combined they wouldn’t have nearly the same amount of subscribers as either T or VZW. And if we lose a carrier it will mean less competition and more than likely higher prices for the end user.

        • Jon

          I beg to differ as things are now one of the two in third in third or fourth would definitely fail. When you combine the two they would provide competition to the top two carriers they wouldn’t per se dethrone them but they would put pressure on them due to having more resources spectrum customer base and etc. If done correctly in time yes they most certainly could pose a threat to the big two. Nothing happens overnight and it would take a lot of time winning over customers convincing them to stay, offering sweet deals to reassure that they’re in good hands. There would be a lot of unaswered questions that the public would have so it would have to be all laid out on the table no games no smoke and mirrors.

        • josephsinger

          The new company would just be like a gnat bothering campers at a picnic but wouldn’t be of any real consequence. The combined company would not be any threat to the dominance of T or VZW. You evidently do not think that competition is good for the customer, eh?

        • Jon

          Competition… that’s dying in the US. The big companies are swallowing up all the little ones or merging. I don’t even need to mention them your most likely aware of it. I say agree to disagree there’s really only one way to find out.

        • josephsinger

          Ah, this is supposed to be a good thing, eh?

        • Jon

          It is what it is. Good and bad depending on how you look at it. Business is business that is how I see it. Just sit back and watch it play out.

        • josephsinger

          Sorry, I’m not about to “sit back” and let the system fzck me over. I’m gonna bitch like hell. Anyone who just sits back and “lets it happen” deserves what they get (and it won’t be nice either.)

        • Jon

          Cause a ruckus I’ll be doing the opposite. This isn’t like the AT&T deal so there’s a possibility it may come to fruition. As I said time will tell no skin off my back if happens or not.

        • josephsinger

          It is “skin off your back” if you end up paying more for service because there is less competition. I’m at a loss why you think less competition is better for the customer.

        • Jon

          I don’t see it that way. No. 3 and 4 alone isn’t real competition. I believe combine them and that would be better. Yes there would most likely be jobs lost but it’s uncertain if prices would rise. I would prefer a more robust network that doesn’t charge sky high prices like Verizon and AT&T. Sprint would end up as scaps for the vultures as things are going. T-Mobile is scrappy but they could really use a cash infusion which DT isn’t doing. There are pro’s and cons but I don’t see it as a bad thing.

        • josephsinger

          No disrespect meant but I think you are being a little naïve.

        • PMB01

          No disrespect meant but I think you have no clue what you’re talking about.

        • Kevin Trammell

          Because in the long run sprint or tmobile or both will fail and then you will be stuck with just att or verizon… then they will charge whatever they want for service…… kinda like your electric company.. they charge whatever they want knowing you cant go anywhere…and combining those2 companies isnt losing competition. .. you have the big 3, metropcs, straight talk, family mobile, boost, cricket, us cellular, met 10, virgin mobile, trac phone, h20, and many others, those all run on the big networks. …. so you still have plenty of choices

  • jeremyvbk

    In this market one of the 3rd/4th companies will fail. The US needs at least 3 true national coverage companies. Sprint is closest to that on LTE. So my question is, say sprint fails. Guess who will buy their spectrum/assets. ATT and Verizon, then there goes Tmobile. Same thing goes if Tmobile fails. There needs to be a stronger third. Spectrum wise they would divest some. Some would go to Dish, and hopefully to the regional carriers. Maybe after a sprint/Tmobile deal, the regional carrier could combine and create a new 4th.

  • envious684

    Double posted for some reason

  • Brandon

    I’m fine with it as long as John still stays the CEO. They need the extra money to make their networks more uniform and to compete with the big dogs. If this actually does happen, will Softbank USA be a CDMA carrier, a GSM carrier, a hybrid of both, or maybe they’ll be the prime mover behind VoLTE and leave those in the dust?

    • casualsuede

      I think they will most likely move to become a GSM based carrier, then on to VoLTE. Going from CDMA to GSM is easier than creating one national network using all that different Spectrum and Band Classes. The country of Canada went from 60% CDMA to 100% GSM in a year or less (2 out of 3 major carriers turned to GSM at the same time).

      • Brandon

        I just want everyone to ditch GSM and CDMA completely and make everything LTE, no more multiple radios or poor signal strength, everything is compatible with everything else.

        • Joelwrx

          LTE is a GSM technology…

        • Brandon

          I know that, it’s based off of GSM, what I meant was get rid of the whole cell/data separation where you have separate radios for each and just have everything use LTE. Phone calls and text messages still use the old GSM technology.

  • xmiro

    it’s all true because some guy in a YouTube video says it is :)

  • bronxboi

    Look people, he is spending billions of his money (Son), he can call the company whatever he wants. If you are only a customer, while important, you do not own the company.

    • xmiro

      Wrong. Son is borrowing billions to buy T-mobile

      • bronxboi

        So when you finance a vehicle, should everyone else have input into what you buy, no, because you are ultimately responsible for repayment. Same principal.

  • envious684

    I think its a bit to early to be basing your decisions on rumors, I think people should wait for the official details so we know what actually is going to happen and what they plan on doing, no point in making a fuss over rumors.
    This is a bit reassuring
    Here’s what a combined t mobile and sprint would look like in terms of spectrum

  • haru280
  • Jesse James

    They should change the name, The names Sprint and T-Mobile have long be associated with second rate wireless carriers.

    • josephsinger

      I beg your pardon, but T-Mobile is one of the biggest mobile operators in the *world*. Not only are they the biggest operator in Germany, but they have several operations elsewhere in Europe. I’m not sure where you’re getting “second rate.” You likely think Vodafone is a second rate carrier as well, eh? Or maybe you’ve never heard of Vodafone. You seem to think that mobile telephony is only the USA.

  • Patrick

    Not entirely relevant, but could someone elaborate on how the new CDMA and GSM carrier would combine networks?

    • Willie D

      Sprint Network Vision base stations can support multiple technologies, you can run them side by side, sharing spectrum. However, it would be smarter to deploy HSPA+ as all CDMA carriers worldwide have adopted it in the path for LTE unlike Verizon, Sprint and USCC.

  • EmeryE100

    No more changes in the name! I started with ‘Aerial’ way back when. Then VoiceStream bought Aerial and Omnipoint, so we became ‘VoiceStream’. The DT bought Voicestream and we became ‘T-Mobile’. Enough is Enough!

    • Michael

      PowerTel was good too before Voice stream purchased it.

  • SteveD

    The elephant in the room that I haven’t seen discussed is what happens to companies that are acquired by Sprint..
    They take the customers.. They take the spectrum.. They decom the equipment and fire the employees. That’s not something I’m looking forward to going through again.

  • Michael

    It should be noted that yes most of those here hate or depise sprint for one reason or another. Sprint that was once , the same company that bought Nextel , Is no longer that same company. And actually I had a very pleasant experience with sprint for the last two years before switching to T-Mobile. My only complaint with sprint was switching to T-mobile saved me fifteen dollars a month. if the two companys combined I truly believe that once the technical issues of sprints cdma network vs T-mobiles gsm network were worked out I think It would result in much better LTE coverage which we all really do want.

    • achusaysblessyou

      I think the CDMA + GSM network issues will be resolved relatively easy. Since LTE is a GSM technology and Sprint’s CDMA network is only being used for voice, once they implement VoLTE, they should be able to switch their networks to use the same bands. That’s my take on it, but as always, the devil’s in the details.

  • ChitChatCat

    Just because the corporate entity is called “Softbank USA” doesn’t mean that the Sprint or T-Mobile brands will die. Perhaps, eventually. See: EE in the UK.

    • UMA_Fan

      Good point. The Softbank brand may appear on the back end. Sort of like a Rim/Blackberry situation.

  • Derrick McClean

    This petition sums up my thoughts, having a merger would not improve network quality much for either carrier. Much of the network overlaps with each other, Sprint only has coverage in a small amount of the US where T-Mobile doesn’t, and vice-versa.

    A merger/buy-out would only cause a monopoly of either CDMA or GSM, as Sprint+T-Mobile would have to become one or the other, leaving the 3rd carrier to become the monopoly. It would also cause a ton of job loss. (ie, if Sprint+T-Mobile becomes CDMA, AT&T will be the GSM monopoly, if they become GSM, Verizon will become the CDMA monopoly.)

    Sign this petition please!

    • PMB01

      That’s not really true. They’d have to leverage both GSM and CDMA for awhile to accommodate each of their customers on older devices (kind of like the Sprint/Nextel merger). They’d set a date and notify customers on old devices to upgrade by then or not have service. Everyone is moving to LTE and VoLTE is starting to spread, which will eventually make the 3G GSM/CDMA networks unnecessary. While it might not be the case right now, GSM and CDMA will be a thing of the past in the US in but a few years (at least for the Big 4). By that time, VoLTE will be widespread enough to make having a GSM or CDMA monopoly irrelevant.

      I do hope they continue expanding the coverage area, regardless of what happens.

    • casualsuede

      GSM/CDMA is so 2009. Like PMB01 says, VoLTE is the where it’s at. The bigger problem is that they have so much disparate bands (600 Mhz, 850, 1700 1900, 2100, 2500). Let’s see if SprinTMo can patchwork their network up and have devices that will support it all.

  • superg05

    Why do you keep saying it is good for competition you sound like a corporate plant less competition is never going to be good for the consumer especially not in the US not even in your far away country of England we already pay more per capita then most western countries for everything

  • Jon

    I’ve said this before but this needs to happen. If T-Mobile is to be purchased it should be by another cellular company, not Dish, not Comcast or whoever else. Verizon and AT&T are pulling in the big bucks leaving Sprint and T-Mobile to fight for table scraps. There’s really only so much growth before either Sprint or T-Mobile would hit a wall. It would just be customers jumping from one company to another. Verizon and AT&T have unlimited funds it seems and like to hog up spectrum and resources leaving little for anyone else. A combined Sprint and T-Mobile should become a force to be reckoned with, just get rid of Hesse and his clowns and put Legere and his crew in there to fix the mess that Sprint has become. If done right it would give Verizon and AT&T sleep apnea. They wouldn’t sleep right knowing there’s another heavy hitter in town.

  • Sun-Ying Wong

    I am all for T-Mobile and Sprint turning into SoftBank USA….

  • IamDefiler


    • DurteeDee

      NexTmobile the best name they are not using


    Tmobile is smart! This is all a song and dance for Tmobile! They’re drawing sprint in just like they did ATT! They knew all along the DOJ would never approve of the merger! They did it because of the capital and bandwidth they would gain when the DOJ denied the merger fearing a monopoly.This allowed them to gobble up Metro PCS and take over their airwaves rollout the LTE and buy up $2billion in airwaves from Verizon. I believe they are calling the same play again! It was 4th and long before with ATT and they hit the Hail Mary, I think they are doing the same here. By ATT paying them out the $2bilion they increased their the business value exponentially and they are doing it again! If worse come to worse they sell the company they don’t want. But if they hit the bomb again they move into position to compete on a national level with Verizon and ATT for real! And they had to do nothing but stand back at watch ATT and Sprint shoot themselves in the head like stupids!

    • bronxboi

      You may have a surprise in store for you. The likelihood has actually increased and I am sure Son has some solution to the fourth carrier problem.


        Think your in for a surprise! Cause Son has already done a preliminary run at Tmobile and the DOJ in not so many words said no, it’s not gonna happen! We will see! Like I said if it doesn’t work out Tmobile goes to Sprint and DT gets rid of a company that it doesn’t want but doubled it in value in one years time or Sprint gets denied and now Tmobile nailed the the hail Mary again and is poised to become the number two carrier when it has more capital and can steal more clients with the uncarrier model! Let it marinate!

    • casualsuede

      ATT didn’t pay out $2Billion, they paid out $6 Billion.

  • Chris

    This name wouldn’t surprise me at all. The CEO of Softbank wanted a presence in the US, which is part of the reason he purchase Sprint. Now he has an excuse to rename the company and really get a foothold in the US.

  • Commob

    I personally like Sprintmo.