Justice Department will reportedly sue to block T-Mobile-Sprint merger if Dish deal isn’t done next week

claure-legere-tmobile-sprint-merger

There’s been a lot of back and forth, will-they-or-won’t-they lately with T-Mobile, Sprint, and Dish Network’s negotiations related to the T-Mo-Sprint merger, but according to a new report, we may finally, finally be close to a resolution.

The Department of Justice will sue to block T-Mobile and Sprint’s merger if T-Mo, Sprint, Dish, and T-Mobile parent company Deutsche Telekom don’t reach an agreement on their deal by next week. That’s according to CNBC, citing “people familiar with the negotiations”.

It’s said that there’s one major sticking point that’s holding up T-Mobile, Sprint, and Dish’s deal. Deutsche Telekom is concerned that if they allow Dish to use the new T-Mobile’s network while Dish builds out its own network, a cable company could come along and buy Dish and then use the T-Mobile network. DT wants Dish to be cut off from the T-Mobile network if it’s bought by a cable company, but the DOJ is reportedly unwilling to allow that.

This issue is reportedly the one thing that’s holding up a deal between T-Mobile, Sprint, and Dish. DT is said to be fine with Dish using T-Mobile’s network without restraint for three years while Dish builds out its own network.

Despite DT’s concerns about a Dish buying bought by a cable company, there is optimism that DT and T-Mobile will eventually agree to allow for cable company to buy Dish and continue using T-Mo’s network for a period of time.

Rumors have said that the DOJ wants a competitive fourth U.S. carrier before it’ll approve T-Mobile and Sprint’s merger. Dish has emerged as the most likely candidate to buy assets from T-Mo and Sprint, including Boost Mobile and spectrum, because Dish already has a sizable collection of spectrum of its own. Considering how far along T-Mobile and Sprint’s merger is, it does seem like DT and T-Mo would eventually agree to a deal with Dish to push the merger even close to the finish line, but we’ll have to wait until next week to find out.

Source: CNBC

Tags: , , , ,

  • Hurlamania

    Why don’t they put in a clause that dish can’t sell to anyone else for 5 years or more

    • Ummon

      Maybe YOU should be the lawyer.

    • Brian Engert

      DT wants Dish to be cut off from the T-Mobile network if it’s bought by a cable company, but the DOJ is reportedly unwilling to allow that.

      • Clifton K. Morris

        DT is a Monopoly with a presence across most of Europe (36 countries total). Most of their subsidiaries are 100% German owned.

        It’s possible that they doesn’t understand US competition or the US laws designed to promote competition. They likely see this as a way to reduce handset subsidies.

        • Fabian Cortez

          DT is a Monopoly with a presence across most of Europe (36 countries total). Most of their subsidiaries are 100% German owned.

          It’s possible that they doesn’t understand US competition or the US laws designed to promote competition. They likely see this as a way to reduce handset ubsidies.

          Ridiculous.

          They’ve been operating as T-Mobile USA since 2002. To suggest they don’t “understand US competitionor the US laws designed to promote competition” is an outright lie. And even if they didn’t, they have high-paid counsel for that.

          Apparently $70 million worth based upon your claim above.

    • JStatt

      The DOJ doesn’t want any restrictions like that. From their perspective if a competitive fourth carrier emerges from this than they got what they wanted.

  • Jason Caprio

    If this merger fails, what would stop T-Mobile and Sprint from doing what Bell and Telus do in Canada? 100% reciprocal roaming agreements which essentially share all towers between the 2 carriers to expand coverage.

    • Sharti24

      Not a bad idea and that would definitely benefit the customer, But how would that benefit tmobile/sprint as a business?

      • Jason Caprio

        It would increase coverage for both carriers making them more competitive with AT&T/Verizon. However, for business, not so sure.

        • Sharti24

          I think that is the big benefit of this merger for Tmobile customers. More spectrum and Sprints towers. If it falls through i’d love for that to happen. Kinda like how tmobile has the roaming agreement in place with USCC

        • Robert Roll

          except T-Mobile dose not roam on every US Cellular tower i live in a US Cellular Market and some areas i roam on them and others i cant connect to there towers

        • Sharti24

          How’s tmobile’s signal in those USCC areas when it doesnt roam?

      • Jim Mill

        The only way to do a true 5G network is to combine their spectrum AT&t and Verizon and made it so hard to get the spectrum that anybody needs to compete with 5G but the combination of the two would allow this and would also cars AT&t and Verizon to lower their prices cuz T-Mobile and Sprint going to be competitive

        • Huh?

        • Jim Mill

          Just curious why you said huh 5G is so expensive Verizon and AT&t own so much spectrum so when you combine the two T-Mobile and Sprint they’ll be able to compete together they also plan on keeping prices low which will make it harder on Verizon and AT&t I believe they’ll be more competitive as one company this is my personal belief not a argument with you

        • No I really didn’t understand your original post. There were no periods or commas. No punctuation whatsoever. And some of the words didn’t belong in the sentences so the complete thought was very hard to follow. Your second post was a little better but still had no punctuation so it was also hard to follow. It makes it hard to formulate any kind of response when you don’t know what you’re responding to.

    • Fabian Cortez

      If this merger fails, what would stop T-Mobile and Sprint from doing what Bell and Telus do in Canada? 100% reciprocal roaming agreements which essentially share all towers between the 2 carriers to expand coverage.

      What stops Sprint and T-Mobile from doing it right not and without the merger? Absolutely nothing.

      As I’ve mentioned numerous times on here, this merger is designed to fatter a few’s wallets, under the guise of rainbows, 5G, and more jobs.

      • In all fairness, isn’t that the point of EVERY merger?

        You save money, you grow larger, you get a fatter wallet. Standard business procedure.

        • Fabian Cortez

          In all fairness, isn’t that the point of EVERY merger?

          You save money, you grow larger, you get a fatter wallet. Standard business procedure.

          Exactly… when it comes to mergers.

          A merger isn’t needed to address Jason Caprio’s suggestion, which I’m sure you’re aware of.

    • vrm

      They have said that they will do that in case of merger failure. t-mobile will lease spectrum from sprint. But for that to succeed, sprint must remain an independent co and be financially viable in its own right which at this time is difficult. They are losing money and giving away free service. When verizon retires CDMA, it will be even more difficult. To switch sprint entirely to t-mobile network, they may incur huge charges for device swapping and that may be the only way to survive if they pull off. They lease t-mobile all their spectrum in return for unrestricted roaming, essentially turning sprint into an MVNO which would then destroy the 4th carrier.

    • Mike Smith

      What would stop it is their networks aren’t compatible. The plan is to completely shut down the Sprint network and migrate everyone to T-Mobile and then refarm the Sprint spectrum into T-Mobile.

  • No pressure guys and girls. No pressure.

  • Jim Mill

    Stinking government. Sorry you guys in Washington you think you’re smarter than the rest of us. This is a good deal ,Its smart deal it should go through.

  • vrm

    If google buys dish and then offers 50% discount to ALL t-mobile customers to switch, what stops the customers from going, seeing as they will be on the same network but pay 1/2 the price ? Then google can scoop up t-mobile for scraps.

    • Robert Roll

      except after 3 years when the roaming agreement comes to and end

  • Robert Roll

    why not just put a provision or clause in the terms that if dish sells out to Google or some other operator they can throttle them down to 1.5mbps and de prioritize there traffic behind everyone else.

    • JStatt

      DOJ doesn’t want that and would block the deal. Thats the entire point of the hold up.

  • riverhorse

    Assuming this is not more fake news, it’s a perfect example of how post-Nixon so many more government entities are now supposedly independent. So now we get these shitfa pies where one agencydept opposes another, any agency underling feels free to contradict the appointed head andor executive order. And woe to the President for axing any malfeasant.
    We elect a President for nothing- can appoint officials who then are free to disobey, can set agency directives and goals that don’t need to be obeyed.
    Congress as well has too much power beyond what the Constitution’s framers intended. And this is why the populace often reelects a bad President- W & Obama for example- it sees how a President gets attackedobstructeddelayed at every turn, so confusedly & charitably tries to level the playing field.
    We’ve become a farcical combo Oz & Disneyland.

    • Fabian Cortez

      Assuming this is not more fake news, it’s a perfect example of how post-Nixon so many more government entities are now supposedly independent. So now we get these shitfa pies where one agencydept opposes another, any agency underling feels free to contradict the appointed head andor executive order. And woe to the President for axing any malfeasant.
      We elect a President for nothing- can appoint officials who then are free to disobey, can set agency directives and goals that don’t need to be obeyed.
      Congress as well has too much power beyond what the Constitution’s framers intended. And this is why the populace often reelects a bad President- W & Obama for example- it sees how a President gets attackedobstructeddelayed at every turn, so confusedly & charitably tries to level the playing field.
      We’ve become a farcical combo Oz & Disneyland

      Please take your hyperpartisan politics somewhere else.

      Rules and regulations exist for a reason. Runaway capitalism is never in the interest of the consumer.

      See AT&T prior to 1984.

      • riverhorse

        Partisan of what? I’m not related to Alexandria, and I blasted both parties.

        Nice government work you celebrate- AT&T and the Baby Bells still rule and had most of us on incompatible Cellular standards for eons.
        Nice government work re cable TV monopolies and quashing municipal internet.

        Nice government work re simultaneously quashing the fruits of runaway capitalism and infringing on personal liberties: sports betting, private encryption, crypto currency, cash controls and civil cash forfeiture during traffic stops, etc. (Go try to purchase a postal money order of $3,500 to pay your mortgage and tell us what you had to go through. Or if you sent your employee to deposit that cash into your businesspersonal account what they had to go through).

        Only the envious and unsuccessful clamor for more rules and regulations.

        Runaway government interference is never in the interest of the consumer, no matter which party.

        • Fabian Cortez

          Partisan of what? I’m not related to Alexandria, and I blasted both parties.

          Nice government work you celebrate- AT&T and the Baby Bells still rule and had most of us on incompatible Cellular standards for eons.
          Nice government work re cable TV monopolies and quashing municipal internet.

          Nice government work re simultaneously quashing the fruits of runaway capitalism and infringing on personal liberties: sports betting, private encryption, crypto currency, cash controls and civil cash forfeiture during traffic stops, etc. (Go try to purchase a postal money order of $3,500 to pay your mortgage and tell us what you had to go through. Or if you sent your employee to deposit that cash into your businesspersonal account what they had to go through).

          Only the envious and unsuccessful clamor for more rules and regulations.

          Runaway government interference is never in the interest of the consumer, no matter which party.

          Like I said, please take your hyperpartisan politics somewhere else.

        • riverhorse

          I may need some help for that– can you obtain me residence to your land of origin?

  • Eric A

    Dish has T-Mobile over a barrel on this. T-Mobile is desperate to close this so they can no longer in a position to dictate terms to Dish because Dish can just abandon the negotiation since I don’t see them being very serious on starting a fourth service provider. They just want to get a package from T-Mobile that they can unload on Google, Amazon or someone else (along with the spectrum they’re not using but paid for). T-Mobile is going to have to give away the farm for this deal to close.

    • Fabian Cortez

      Dish has T-Mobile over a barrel on this. T-Mobile is desperate to close this so they can no longer in a position to dictate terms to Dish because Dish can just abandon the negotiation since I don’t see them being very serious on starting a fourth service provider. They just want to get a package from T-Mobile that they can unload on Google, Amazon or someone else (along with the spectrum they’re not using but paid for). T-Mobile is going to have to give away the farm for this deal to close.

      I mentioned this in a previous article.

      Dish is totally in control here.

    • Clifton K. Morris

      Dish, Sprint, and T-Mobile are not in any position to dictate any terms.

      The DoJ uses the Herfindahl–Hirschman Index to determine market concentration. The market concentration of a combined Sprint/T-Mobile merger scored above 1200, which categorized it as “presumptively illegal” anyway.

      However, to get the HHI score lower, DoJ asked if Sprint and TMO would be willing to shed assets, to which the companies agreed to dedicate time.

      I have to laugh when I read that Dish is somehow in charge. As of today they are the only interested party in acquiring the assets and customers.

      If you have a few billion in the bank, and can draw up a better offer, you’d be welcome to the table too. To show companies they’re serious, T-Mobile retained Goldman Sachs advice for $70M to assist with the sale.

      I’m surprised AT&T and Verizon aren’t interested in acquiring customers or adding spectrum assets to their portfolio.

      • Fabian Cortez

        I have to laugh when I read that Dish is somehow in charge. As of today they are the only interested party in acquiring the assets and customers.

        If Dish doesn’t get what they want, this deal is a bust.

        Dish holds the cards.

        To show companies they’re serious, T-Mobile retained Goldman Sachs advice for $70M to assist with the sale.

        Do you have a source for this $70 million retainer?

        • SirStephenH

          “If Dish doesn’t get what they want, this deal is a bust.

          Dish holds the cards.”

          If Dish doesn’t get what it wants then it’s going to end up losing its spectrum. Dish needs this more than T-Mobile and Sprint.

  • Magnetic

    There’s not a competitive fourth carrier now!