dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
Sprint 'Surprised' By Opposition to T-Mobile Acquisition
by Karl Bode 12:21PM Monday Feb 10 2014
From the "that's not very surprising" department comes news that Sprint is reconsidering its acquisition of T-Mobile after running into significant opposition at both the Department of Justice and the FCC. According to the Wall Street Journal, Sprint Chairman Masayoshi Son and Chief Executive Dan Hesse "were surprised by the level of opposition and its very public nature." They shouldn't have been; T-Mobile's just starting to do interesting things on pricing, and just two years ago in fighting AT&T's acquisition of T-Mobile Sprint repeatedly proclaimed the market healthiest with four distinct wireless competitors. Should Son push forward anyway, the source says it may take "weeks or more to ponder strategy and perfect their regulatory arguments."

view:
topics flat nest 
brianiscool

join:2000-08-16
Miami, FL
kudos:1

Back off !

Sprint back off ! All you do is ruin cell phone networks.

Hypocrites

@comcast.net

Sprint is so hypocritical

How can Sprint be surprised that people would be upset by them buying T-Mobile?

They practically foamed at the mouth whining about AT&T getting TMO and exclaiming how 4 major cell vendors were needed.

Now that they want to buy them, they ACT SURPRISED that the same groups that supported them against AT&T would also be against their purchase of TMO.

Their hypocrisy will make those against their purchase even more determined this time.
TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH

Re: Sprint is so hypocritical

And after they cried that with AT&T they went and raised their OWN prices on their prepaid services.

Tsume
Premium
join:2004-02-23
Johnson City, TN
Reviews:
·Comcast
Sprint really should have waited a year or two. Sprint needs to prove that they are capable of managing their network first - in many areas, it is still spotty due to the unfinished upgrades. As a direct result of them saying they need 4 carriers to compete when AT&T tried to buy T-Mobile, they need to wait at least a year or two to prove that T-Mobile has not grown significantly enough and they need to merge to create a viable competitor to AT&T and Verizon. Otherwise it looks foolish for them to disregard their own advice only when it is convenient.

They are jumping the gun and are not ready for this, IMO. That's not to say a merger would be an unmitigated disaster. I'd have to imagine that T-Mobile's GSM network would remain largely untouched.
--
to whoever anonymously gave me premium membership... thanks!

jseymour

join:2009-12-11
Waterford, MI

2 recommendations

Why SoftBank's Sprint Should Not Acquire T-Mobile

If you still needed a reason as to why SoftBank's Sprint should not be allowed to acquire T-Mobile, here you go:

quote:
Sprint Chairman Masayoshi Son and Chief Executive Dan Hesse "were surprised by the level of opposition and its very public nature."

What astonishing cluelessness. Or disingenuousness. Either way: I don't want such as those running the wireless provider I use.

Jim

disingenuous

@comcast.net

Re: Why SoftBank's Sprint Should Not Acquire T-Mobile

said by jseymour:

What astonishing cluelessness. Or disingenuousness.

That second one is it. They are feigning surprise. They are too smart to be clueless about opposition.

WiFiguru
To infinity... and beyond
Premium
join:2005-06-21
Irvine, CA
Reviews:
·DSL EXTREME

Hah

They probably think that "money" talks here in the states. Surprisingly, this administration is not interested in mergers.

Maybe Sprint should focus on building up their network and buying spectrum versus buying out other competitors/decreasing competition.

NotComacast

@161.150.2.x

Re: Hah

This administration allowed Comacast to purchase NBC and thereby Universal Studios. I would say that AT&T didn't give Obumer a big enough bribe, er I mean, contribution. No corporation should be allowed to control more than a quarter of a limited market such as communication.
TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH

Re: Hah

That's different. They are not eliminating an option to choose from for communications.
xenophon

join:2007-09-17
Well they are building up coverage at a faster pace, now passing up Tmob LTE and catching up with ATT. But you need a Spark phone to take full advantage.

Just user reported here, but gives an indication how fast Sprint LTE is growing.
»sensorly.com/map/4G/US/USA/Sprin···10sprint

RARPSL

join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY

1 recommendation

Re: Hah

said by xenophon:

Well they are building up coverage at a faster pace, now passing up Tmob LTE and catching up with ATT.

That depends on how you define "building up coverage". If you mean how much of the US has Sprint LTE support that is different from how much of the coverage of Sprint (or T-Mobile) is LTE. Since Sprint has a larger cover area than T-Mobile does, that means that you can claim more coverage due to your wider coverage area. A more correct measure would be what percentage of the Sprint and T-Mobile foot print has LTE support. Also note that due to the roaming agreement with AT&T, any area that is NOT IN the T-Mobile footprint but is in the AT&T LTE footprint counts as T-Mobile LTE coverage.
xenophon

join:2007-09-17

Re: Hah

That's a good point however Sprint does ultimately cover more area with LTE than Tmob and is getting closer to ATT. But you have to have Spark phone to get most of it, whereas ATT/Tmob can rely on HSPA for backup.

buddahbless

join:2005-03-21
Premium
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US

Collaborate, no merger

I honestly can say this is not Sprints doing as much as it is Softbank that wants to acquire T mobile. I cant blame them TMO cellular technology is highly used worldwide where Sprint's is not, yet if Softbank wanted into the US market with that Technology they should have just gone after TMO in the first place and left Sprint alone. A smart man would try to form an alliance with A rival as the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Ask for government approval to share future tower builds where both share the cost of operating a tower and running the fiber to it yet keep there equipment at the tower separate and business separate as well.

In major metros TMO & Sprint are on there own and keep what they already have but in rural areas where ATT & VZW rain supreme and neither usually have coverage the two could shore up coverage to compete with the big guys and save on the cost of building out on there own. Of course both would have to agree to possibly throttling there rural customers as there sharing the pipe but throttled coverage is still better than no coverage at all. That would be more than enough to draw in the lower income rural users.

One of my favorite quotes... " In the long history of humankind (and animal kind too)
those who learned to collaborate and improvise most effectively have prevailed.
Charles Darwin

n2jtx

join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY

Re: Collaborate, no merger

Back when AT&T wanted to destroy T-Mobile, I thought this was a good idea too. Jointly develop and advanced network to improve their respective coverage. In this case, Sprint and T-Mobile could work on joint LTE network. They could share a single base station but restrict access to those frequencies assigned to them. Common backhaul and hardware would cut deployment costs significantly.

Frankly, Sprint should not be surprised at the blowback. They have a lousy network and the gall to charge a "Premium Data" fee for non-premium service. Plus some of their policies such as refusing to ever unlock a paid off iPhone does not win friends when you need them. They can pat themselves on the back thinking what a great company they are but you find out who your friends are when you need them. It certainly does not look like any customers are rushing to their defense, and I am certainly not, preferring to jump to T-Mobile when I can.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears.

IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman

join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
kudos:1

Re: Collaborate, no merger

Sprint will need to abide by an unlocking code of conduct by the end of 2014.
»www.engadget.com/2013/12/12/fcc-···locking/

n2jtx

join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY

1 recommendation

Re: Collaborate, no merger

said by IPPlanMan:

Sprint will need to abide by an unlocking code of conduct by the end of 2014.
»www.engadget.com/2013/12/12/fcc-···locking/

In theory. However on the Sprint corporate forums it was already being stated they have verbally told customers who have escalated unlock requests to Executive Services that they will wait until the last possible moment to implement it. That date will be the end of March 2015. It appears there is some confusion as to the actual start of the one-year timer with Sprint believing the agreement has not yet been ratified.

I have no idea other that what the chatter has been over at Sprint. My iPhone 4S is still locked and I doubt they will ever unlock it. Already people who have upgraded to newer iPhone's, or have left for another carrier, have been told they cannot even get an international unlock performed for their now deactivated iPhone because Sprint purged it from their database. I guess this is how you build good will with your customers.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears.

IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman

join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
kudos:1

Re: Collaborate, no merger

»www.ctia.org/resource-library/pr···-devices

Still no mention of unlocking in the bylaws. You're onto something.
»www.ctia.org/policy-initiatives/···-service

n2jtx

join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY

Re: Collaborate, no merger

said by IPPlanMan:

»www.ctia.org/resource-library/pr···-devices

Still no mention of unlocking in the bylaws. You're onto something.
»www.ctia.org/policy-initiatives/···-service

It is my understanding, perhaps incorrect, that the carriers themselves have to ratify what the CTIA has agreed with the FCC. That is supposed to happen in March which is where the March 2015 date comes from. I would imagine they could vote to reject parts of the proposal and send it back to the CTIA in which case the CTIA goes back to the FCC and tries again. I seriously doubt there will be any relief for locked Sprint devices before the middle of next year at the earliest (if ever). Sprint is being obstinate because they can. Their excuses for refusing to unlock iPhone's have been nothing but deceitful from claiming it cannot be done to their having a vested interest in maintaining control of the device.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears.

IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman

join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
kudos:1

Re: Collaborate, no merger

Good point. I find it interesting that there's been no update from CTIA since.
clone

join:2000-12-11
Portage, IN
I love using my GPP SIM in my Sprint iPhone 4S. There's a little part of me giving the middle finger to Sprint every time I use it!

bobjohnson
Premium
join:2007-02-03
Orlando, FL
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·T-Mobile US
I actually think that they have intentionally "broken" radio software with some crap. All the good GSM/CDMA phones that they have sold for years they have been unable to unlock. Even the hackers and real deal developers aren't able to "Fix" those phones.
TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·MegaPath
TMO and AT&T/Cingular used to have the shared network agreement together in some areas. But you don't need the gov't to approve that for you. Especially tower builds- heck, most of them now aren't even owned by the wireless carrier anymore anyway.

buddahbless

join:2005-03-21
Premium
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US

Re: Collaborate, no merger

First your right there USE TO BE a large shared network agreement between ATT/TMO however a few years ago that went the way of the dodo, 60-75% of the areas that I use to roam on ATT now just give me "emergency calls only". I don't plan on seeing that coming back since the failed buyout, Oops I mean merger. Also even when you do roam (one area I know in IL there is still An agreement in place )TMO is only allowed talk and txt no data service. You may want uncle same to rubber stamp an ok as to make sure there's no opposition from rivals later on down the line.

As for towers Its true A good amount of towers that cellular companies owned there sold to leasing companies and then rent back space on the tower. From what I'm told thats to lower the land lease cost and maintenance cost. In many areas its hard for a cellular company to get the owner of a lot to take a lower rent payment due to how agreements are written. However sell the site and the new owner can hash out a new agreement for a much lower rate and if the land owner refuses they threaten to take the tower down and there business elsewhere, that land owner then decides getting something is better than nothing especially since the tower is already there and accepts the offer. After that the cellular company releases the tower from the lease company. Thats just the way it goes.
briankwest

join:2014-01-14
Mcalester, OK
Reviews:
·Allegiance Commu..

You do know..New Sprint != Old Sprint

We are just now seeing the outcome of the changes Son has made and hopefully good things will continue to flow out of Sprint. They've had their hands full cleaning up the mess, cutting the fat and trying to get Sprint headed in the right direction. Hard to polish the turd Softbank was handed.

Nextel was a wrong move, but Sprint wouldn't have that 800mhz spectrum if they hadn't. WiMax at the time was the only viable 4G technology, Sprint had to deploy it or risk loosing the spectrum, again wouldn't have the 2.5ghz spectrum today if they hadn't deployed WiMax.

So many of the wrong moves put the New Sprint into a trajectory to change the game plan in the US.

As it stands I'm going to sit back and watch this unfold for another 6-8 months.

/b
TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH

Re: You do know..New Sprint != Old Sprint

Sprint never deployed WiMax- Clear did. What Sprint did under WiMax was only two maybe the cities as Xhom, Before anything went underway those were sold and the new clear was born.

But New Sprint or Old Sprint- Sprint is Sprint.
briankwest

join:2014-01-14
Mcalester, OK

Re: You do know..New Sprint != Old Sprint

Sprint is now under Japanese management, They are very hands on. I expect a lot of change in the management and expectations. Only time will tell. Mr. Son won't let them goof this one off.

/b
moonpuppy

join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
Considering I had Nextel when Sprint bought them, they destroyed customer service and pestered my with solicitation calls on my cell phones for months. Sprint sucks.

IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman

join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
kudos:1

Didn't work out so well for AT&T...

AT&T wound up funding and providing spectrum for T-Mobile's network to the tune of 4 Billion Dollars.

»www.theverge.com/2011/12/19/2647···er-plans

"The company will now pay a total of $4 billion to Deutsche Telekom as a breakup fee — $3 billion in cash plus about a billion in spectrum — and the two carriers will agree to a roaming deal which will allow devices for each network to work on the other (we've already heard some evidence of interoperability on the 1900MHz band)."
--
"We're going to start at one end of (Fallujah), and we're not going to stop until we get to the other. If there's anybody left when that happens, we're going to turn around and we're going to go back and finish it."
Lt. Col. Pete Newell: 1st Inf. US Army
decifal

join:2007-03-10
Bon Aqua, TN
kudos:1

I rather

I seriously rather T mobile not sell off, but if they must, i want it to be a lesser known provider that will actually compete and not be a secret fake company thats actually sponsored by verizon att or sprint just to end up selling out to one of the big guys that's obviously holding hands
jtel

join:2005-06-28
Bristol, RI
Reviews:
·Full Channel TV ..

Smart Alternative

Sprint/SoftBank can avoid the breakup fee and spend right now on speeding up their network rebuild. Throw an extra $10 billion on it and get Spark working 100% across their network by years end as opposed to the end of 2015.

If they are still bleeding by years end they risk becoming the 4th carrier rather than the 3rd.
xenophon

join:2007-09-17

Re: Smart Alternative

Softbank already in progress investing $16B to improve Sprint network. The network really is improving but you have to have a Spark phone to take full advantage of it. I don't know if throwing money can complete by end of year as there are many logistical issues - lead time for equipment and arranging enough backhaul to every site.

Tsume
Premium
join:2004-02-23
Johnson City, TN
Reviews:
·Comcast
If they did this and got their 800MHz rolling out, their network would be amazing. 1900MHz LTE only seems to work well in areas with extremely high tower density or where it is extremely flat with no obstacles. I think they need to wait a year or two before pursuing another carrier.
--
to whoever anonymously gave me premium membership... thanks!
xenophon

join:2007-09-17

Re: Smart Alternative

The problem is many who have 1900 only LTE phones may not know a Spark phone (to allow 800LTE) is needed and will leave because there appears to be no improvement when there really is.

Mr Guy

@charter.com

Ironically this hurts competition

If you don't allow Sprint and T-Mobile to merge you are guaranteeing in having 2 REAL nationwide carries and 2 quasi-nationwide carriers. When having 3 TRUE nationwide carriers would actually be best.

•••••••

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK

I am passively resisting the fact that you suck....

I'm on T-Mobile, and about Sprint, I don't give a ....