T-Mobile CEO John Legere reportedly being eyed by WeWork as its new leader

johnlegerebingeonmusicfreedom

John Legere is well-known for helping to make T-Mobile into a more competitive carrier in the U.S. market, and now a new report says that another company is eyeing Legere to help it turn things around.

WeWork parent company We Co. is in talks with John Legere to become its new CEO. That’s according to sources speaking to the Wall Street Journal, who say that We Co. is hoping to get a new CEO to join as soon as January.

Today’s report cautions that there’s no guarantee that Legere will jump to We Work or that the company won’t go after a different person for its CEO position.

WeWork has had a tumultuous past few months. The company was planning to go public earlier this year, but recently has encountered issues including some involving former CEO and founder Adam Neumann. He left back in September and SoftBank has since agreed to take a majority stake in WeWork. That’s notable because Marcelo Claure, COO of SoftBank Group, has since become executive board chairman.

Claure is a former CEO and current executive chairman at Sprint and was a major part of the proposed merger of T-Mobile and Sprint. Now tasked with fixing WeWork, it sounds like he’s trying to get John Legere to jump ship and do for WeWork what Legere did for T-Mobile several years ago.

 

UPDATE: The New York Times is also reporting that WeWork is in talks with Legere about becoming its new CEO, saying that he’s one of “several candidates” that WeWork is considering for the position.

Sources: Wall Street Journal, The New York Times

Tags: , , ,

  • Truthonitsway

    Midas Lageree an amazing marketing wizard. Outstanding accomplishments with TMUS wireless & more a dominator.
    Big bird, top dog and smart roosters will revive WeWork a trinity!

  • Mike McDonald

    Take a quick at how the stock has taken a nearly 2% hit following this news.

    • Jose Mendoza

      They’re salivating over discontinuing uncarrier moves lol

  • Nate

    I sure hope he doesn’t bail on us.

  • vrm

    May be a ploy to get rid of Legere. Seems like a power play by soft bank implants in the merged co.

  • Chanki Lee

    if jhon leaves i leave too.

  • Nearmsp

    So all those T-mobile customers who were cheering the merger of T-mobile and Sprint based on the current CEO Legere (no doubt excellent CEO) can expect to see the service quality and prices go in the opposite direction. Mergers between large corporations leads to less competition, job losses and higher prices. Today NY times has an article showing Americans pay the highest cable bill and wireless phone bill in the developed world due to a highly concentrated market. Comcast/Verizon etc. It amazes me to see comments supporting even more mergers with a hope of better days. Yes, better days for shareholders and executives. Job losses for workers and higher prices for customers. Econ 101.

    • Erik

      Now with that being said, say that the merge doesn’t happen. Now Sprint just keeps losing and losing every quarter. To where they could actually call it quits. Now if that were to happen, now even MORE jobs are lost. And definitely one less carrier .

      Question is…..what is better? To have the merge happen, and more jobs will be kept, with more to be available. Also another service provider is created, which creates more jobs.

      Or the merge doesn’t happen, Sprint goes bankrupt, all jobs lost, loss of a competitor and no other services provider created.

      • Nearmsp

        AT&T made the same spurious argument that T-mobile would go under if they did not buy T-mobile. Look what happened. Sprint needs a better management. If the merger does not go ahead, the share price falls any number of foreign companies including Orange, Vodaphone would not mind buying up Sprint and turning it around. Buyers emerge at the right price. It is a fantasy fear to think a European or Asian wireless company would not swoop down and buy an undervalued asset.

        • Robert Roll

          AT&T and T-Mobile also had a breakup clause where AT&T had to pay T-mobile a cash sum and spectrum if the merger failed and it did.. they in turned took that spectrum and money and invested in there infrastructure leading to what we have today. there is no such clause with Sprint and T-Mobile should the merger fail.

        • dcmanryan

          You’re exactly correct. Every T-Mobile customer should thank AT&T for the $$$$ and spectrum. T-Mobile would be nowhere near where they are if that didn’t happen. They also learned from AT&T’s mistake and didn’t offer Sprint the same deal.

        • Fabian Cortez

          You’re exactly correct. Every T-Mobile customer should thank AT&T for the $$$$ and spectrum. T-Mobile would be nowhere near where they are if that didn’t happen. They also learned from AT&T’s mistake and didn’t offer Sprint the same deal.

          This is false.

          AT&T sent $0 to T-Mobile. That money went to Deutsche Telekom. Likiewise, Deutsche Telekom sent $0 to T-Mobile. The LTE rollout was funded through the synergies created due to the merger between T-Mobile and MetroPCS.

          The unused AWS spectrum went to T-Mobile but was hardly the game changer. T-Mobile already had a good amount of AWS spectrum that they purchased and received PCS and AWS spectrum from the MetroPCS merger.

          T-Mobile’s success post failed AT&T merger came from a management change. Most notably John Legere.

        • Fabian Cortez

          AT&T and T-Mobile also had a breakup clause where AT&T had to pay T-mobile a cash sum and spectrum if the merger failed and it did.. they in turned took that spectrum and money and invested in there infrastructure leading to what we have today. there is no such clause with Sprint and T-Mobile should the merger fail.

          This isn’t true.

          The money went straight to Deutsche Telekom. The unused AWS spectrum obviously went to T-Mobile.

          The LTE rollout was funded through the synergies created due to the merger between T-Mobile and MetroPCS. T-Mobile received zero monies from Deutsche Telekom.

        • Francisco Peña

          as Robert points out ATT and TMo had the breakup fee that allowed Tmo to surge ahead of Sprint, who was firmly in 3rd. Without that, we’d have 3 carrier. Without this merger, we will end up having 3 carrier. Sprint is losing money, losing subscribers, and when its time to sell off their assets, who do you think has the deep pockets to buy those? That’s right… ATT and Verizon.

        • Fabian Cortez

          as Robert points out ATT and TMo had the breakup fee that allowed Tmo to surge ahead of Sprint, who was firmly in 3rd. Without that, we’d have 3 carrier. Without this merger, we will end up having 3 carrier. Sprint is losing money, losing subscribers, and when its time to sell off their assets, who do you think has the deep pockets to buy those? That’s right… ATT and Verizon.

          This isn’t true.

          The breakup fee went to Deutsche Telekom and not T-Mobile. Only the unused AWS spectrum went to T-Mobile and the LTE rollout was funded through the synergies created by the merger between T-Mobile and MetroPCS.

        • Francisco Peña

          the breakup agreement included the fee and airways, yes. If you want to be nitpicky that X got this, and Y got this, go ahead. Ultimately, the breakup “clause” benefited TMo, and allowed them to surge ahead of Sprint. Sprint has no “clause” (that would go to Sprint or Softbank), so they won’ tbe helped at all if this fails. Sprint will continue the death spiral and then we will have 3. 2 large, and one smaller, who will only compete on price. I’d rather have 3 larger ones.

        • Fabian Cortez

          the breakup agreement included the fee and airways, yes. If you want to be nitpicky that X got this, and Y got this, go ahead. Ultimately, the breakup “clause” benefited TMo, and allowed them to surge ahead of Sprint. Sprint has no “clause” (that would go to Sprint or Softbank), so they won’ tbe helped at all if this fails. Sprint will continue the death spiral and then we will have 3. 2 large, and one smaller, who will only compete on price. I’d rather have 3 larger ones.

          You stated “as Robert points out ATT and TMo had the breakup fee that allowed Tmo to surge ahead of Sprint,” which isn’t true.

          No breakup fee went to T-Mobile to allow them to “surge ahead of Sprint.” T-Mobile’s financials prove this as that money is never reflected anywhere. Deutsche Telekom used the money it acquired from AT&T to pay down its debt, which was one of the main reasons for selling T-Mobile to AT&T.

          T-Mobile actually surged ahead of Sprint via a merger with MetroPCS and organic growth of a minimum of 1 million new subscribers each quarter since Q1 2013 by changing the industry through John Legere’s vision.

          Any other version of this would be classified as fiction.

          Sprint has no “clause” (that would go to Sprint or Softbank), so they won’ tbe helped at all if this fails. Sprint will continue the death spiral and then we will have 3.

          Sprint has the backing (83% ownership) of the 36th largest public company in the world and the second largest publicly traded company in Japan: SoftBank. With revenue of $84.125 billion (2018), net income of $11.307 billion (2018), and assets of $286.637 billion (2018). Sprint will be fine.

        • Francisco Peña

          If you want to nitpick the “fee” go ahead, and go reply to Robert. And as if Sprint being fine, they suffered 396,000 total wireless losses on 9/30/19. Prior quarter they lost 175,000.

        • marque2

          TMobile wasn’t loosing money at the time. Sprint actually showed a loss during a strong expansion. Plus you are making that up.

        • Fabian Cortez

          TMobile wasn’t loosing money at the time. Sprint actually showed a loss during a strong expansion. Plus you are making that up.

          But they were losing customers. That eventually would become unsustainable, especially considering the fact that they had no iPhone, not path/plan to LTE, and a limited 3G/HSPA network running on AWS (mid band).

          So, while they were not in as much of a dire strait at Sprint is today, it wouldn’t have been any better moving forward. Plus, Sprint has some valuable assets, arguably much more than what T-Mobile had in 2011-2012.

        • riverhorse

          Depends on who makes a claim, to judge its potential truthfulness.
          Or just because one monopolistic AT&T lies…
          Or just because Vesco / Icahn lied, doesn’t mean Buffet does too…

    • Francisco Peña

      False. Your local and state government not allowing competition in to lower prices. We here in my area can get 2 different cable providers. Both are always offering deals, either low prices, or $200 visa cards, paying $500 off your contract, no contracts, 200MBps speeds, and now one upped it to 500MBps speeds. You can get a double bundle for $79-89, and most times, triple bundles for $99-120. Both companies are growing, and I personally, play the switching game each year to take advantage of the deals.

      If you only have one company, its because your government doesn’t allow another company in to provide a choice.

      • Adam

        Yes, your personal experience represents the US as a whole, because everyone in the US lives in your town. There are no laws in my town preventing competition, but the houses are too far apart to make any new wired internet service profitable.

        • marque2

          I think of several ways for you to get internet anyway. And that is also your problem if you choose to live in the boonies. I wouldn’t force a company to string a cable up mount McKinley at great loss just for your personal convenience.

    • riverhorse

      Econ 101 for Socialists and Progressives. With a good measure of negative lies and false future projections mixed in.
      If folks put in a fraction of the time and effort spent posting and activating with these envious / liberal / conspiracist fallacies, on improving their character and professional skills– they would switch their thinking to the right. As their first order of business, once the fruits of hard labor pay off, would be to protect their assets from Leftist parasites coveting a piece of their newly baked pie.

      The 10th Commandment (Thou shalt not covet your neighbour’s beh-err ass, nor his wife, nor his goods, etc.) and The Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard (Matthew 20:1-16) should be mandatory teaching in all schools.

      Take the con out of the envious Leftist Economics being taught at today’s liberal schools by the professor offspring of yesterday’s lazy hippies.

      • Mike Smith

        Let’s keep silly superstition out of schools.

      • MMA Prints

        @acquavallo:disqus, You added nothing to the conversation, provided 0 argument, and still have no credibility. I have no idea if you agree or not.

        Now let’s talk like intelligent adults, not like delusional boomers.

        @nearmsp:disqus, Customers in the U.S. will still have three main wireless carriers, and countless regional carriers. There are a hundred MVNOs, but they don’t really count.

        For cable television, cable internet, electric, gas heating, garbage disposal, and other services, most of us don’t have much, or any choice. I think most would agree that an electric/gas heating provider is more important than a cell provider.

        There might be some overlap for some positions and stores in retail, but as the business grows, you need the same number of employees to service customers in most other areas in the business if T-Mobile wants nearly 100% 5G coverage.

        • Red

          “Now let’s talk like intelligent adults, not like delusional boomers.” Is this an example of intelligent adult speech?

        • riverhorse

          ??

        • Francisco Peña

          “Now let’s talk like intelligent adults, not like delusional boomers.”

          As William Shatner said on being called a boomer, “I feel it’s like one of those childish insults in fandom that seem to affect the delicate types to the point they meltdown & go over the rest of our heads as something ridiculous. If the person posting it thinks they are making a dig; they are the fools.”

          not sure why folks like to use the lefty talking points to slam down others. calling someone a delusional boomer while stating to talk like intelligent adults, is awfully close to being a delusional boomer yourself, and far from being an intelligent adult.

      • Adam

        The natural/organic state for any business if left free to make it’s decision is monopoly. No business prefers a competitive environment. This is why antitrust laws exist. While you can theorize about a pure libertarian society, in reality, no one wants to live where all businesses are monopolies. The most profitable wireless company would be if T-Mobile, AT&T, and Verizon all merged. Then as each smaller carrier gets big enough to take customers, they get boughtout.

        • marque2

          Monopolies are unstable without goverment support. Think about the cable and landline companies and why you don’t have choice. In a free market if a monopolist sets prices too high an innovator almost always comes along to create a workaround or better idea.

        • Adam

          And after the “better idea”, the companies would merge. Once again, creating a monopoly. This is because the total profit of the merged company would be greater than the profit of each individually.

        • marque2

          It really doesn’t happen that way. Monopolies are inherently unstable and fall apart on their own. It is only with goverment interference that monopolies can exist. Think about the monopolies in your life – cable, power, land line – all goverment sanctioned.

        • Adam

          If you believe this, you must have never purchased diamonds.

        • marque2

          And you are apparently unaware how governments have been propping diamonds up for their own purposes – and are of course unaware of recent troubles in the industry. They are falling just like OPEC

        • Francisco Peña

          that is also competition. If you don’t do well, you don’t survive. You say each company wants to be a monopoly, and say they would all merge. Yes and no, because if A wants to take over B, and B wants to take over A or C, etc.. both companies will do what they can to be larger than the other. Its not like one is sitting back and saying “Come eat me up.” No, they are say, “How do we get bigger to take over the other guy.” VZW uses their network in advertising. TMo uses their pricing, Sprint uses their 2% fantasy.

          Each one wants to be bigger than the next.

        • Adam

          The only reason these companies compete is because they are not allowed to merge. A company’s goal is to maximize profit, not size. By merging, a company can sell less at a higher margin, making more profit.

  • Francisco Peña

    TMobile or a shared office company. hmmm.. I’d say no in a heart beat.

  • AA-Ron

    I sure hope he doesn’t leave, he’s one one of the main reasons I’m such a huge tmobile fan.

  • Acdc1a

    It would take a ton of money for John to consider it…and there’s a huge risk of failure…

  • Mike Smith

    Marcelo Claure claimed Sprint would have the best network. He failed and gets put in charge of WeWork and tries to hire John? The real question is what good is Marcelo Claure good for and why does SoftBank keep him around?

  • Fan_Atl77

    In earnest, at least for me, the Great Customer care and service, are the reasons I stayed with Tmobile, And I hope that never changes, irrespective of the leadership at the Top!