8 ms·
T-Mobile seals merger deal with Sprint
- ac29 8y agoInteresting implications for Google Fi if this goes through, since T-mobile and Sprint are their 2 main providers.
- stu2010 8y agoGoogle could have ended up paying for some of the R&D needed for phones to work on both existing networks at the same time.
- cptskippy 8y agoThe technology has always been there, Google just paid T-Mobile and Sprint enough to convince them to set it up.
- amluto 8y agoAs far as I can tell, Google’s technology is a giant hack, and I doubt a merged Sprint/TMO would want to use it.
- cptskippy 8y agoI haven't looked into how Find works but a roaming profile on one carrier and clever APN configs seem like they'd get the job done.
- phamilton 8y agoThe seamless phone call handoff is the tricky part. As I understand it, Google Fi does the equivalent of a remote screen session. The call is originated from a google server and the phone connects and reconnects to that server.
- cptskippy 8y agoT-Mobile has been evaluating and deploying that technology since early 2006, I would be surprised if Google developed this technology themselves. I was part of an early Beta for T-Mobile using Nokia flip phones that would work over a regular WiFi router. Part of the testing involved originating calls on WiFi and then transitioning to Cellular and vice versa.
- neolefty 8y agoAny insight about whether it will survive, and effect on rates?
- xienze 8y agoIt’ll be interesting to see how this works out. They’re combining a fast GSM network with an abysmal CDMA one. The customer experience is going to be rather inconsistent I would think.
- toomuchtodo 8y agoThey will most likely dump what remains of the CDMA network, absorb Sprint's spectrum (pending anti-trust/regulatory certification; luckily, in this environment, I don't think they'll be forced to divest spectrum to AT&T or Verizon), and offer 5G nationwide to compete against wired broadband providers (with the mobile comms market saturated, growth opportunities are needed to stoke growth). It's a good deal now that Softbank gave up on keeping control of the combined org and is satisfied with a minority stake. Citations: https://www.reddit.com/r/tmobile/comments/5usle9/exclusive_softbank_willing_to_cede_control_of/ https://www.reddit.com/r/tmobile/comments/5usle9/exclusive_s... https://allfor5g.com/ https://allfor5g.com/ (combined Sprint/TMO 5G info microsite) Disclosure: T-Mobile customer for 18+ years, no other relation
- Aloha 8y agoThe modern Sprint network is nowhere near as awful as you think - Sprint falls down in the same place T-Mobile does - in coverage. Sprint does beat T-Mobile in densification in some markets. Sprint and T-Mobile are now mostly LTE carriers with each of them having a certain (small) percentage of their spectrum allocated for either GSM or CDMA carriers. This slide deck makes it clear that their plans are to rapidly refarm the CDMA only subs to VoLTE as soon as possible. https://allfor5g.com/content/uploads/2018/04/CREATING-ROBUST-COMPETITION-IN-THE-5G-ERA.pdf https://allfor5g.com/content/uploads/2018/04/CREATING-ROBUST...
- shmerl 8y agoReally nasty development. And current handicapped anti-trust regulation would do nothing to stop it.
- Robotbeat 8y agoDon't know why you were down-voted. Consolidation in the (relatively expensive) US mobile market is likely to hurt consumers, especially as T-Mobile has been the cheaper option for most people. And it's no secret that US anti-trust regulation is limp-wristed nowadays. EDIT: I'm down-voted as well? Are my observations incorrect?
- bestnameever 8y agoSprint has been cheaper than Tmobile AFAIK but your point remains.
- shmerl 8y agoI guess there are some monopoly proponents here.
- scarface74 8y agoT-mobile and Sprint combined still won't have the power of AT&T and Verizon. Sprint has been struggling for years. I'm not sure how much longer it would last as an independent entity.
- shmerl 8y agoIt will reduce overall competition, thus harming their own users. Instead of competing and building out their networks, they'll start raising prices. It's a very clear case that should be forbidden by anti-trust. But as I said, current anti-trust regulation is toothless and does almost nothing to prevent such market degradation.
- scarface74 8y ago
- IBM 8y agoThis deal should be blocked unless they're forced to divest spectrum to someone like Comcast or Charter. Comcast and Charter already have a partnership for wireless and are doing MVNOs, so they might be interested in it. Competition has been working well with 4 players in wireless, and prices have come down.
- SeoxyS 8y agoThere is no world in which the government should be able to force a private company to give something hugely valuable to, of all possible options, Comcast (one of the worst companies in America).
- mrkurt 8y agoMergers are costly to society because they concentrate power. The government should _absolutely_ prevent mergers that concentrate power, or otherwise redistribute that power. I'd rather them just block these things like they did up until the early 2000s ... but it's not unreasonable for them to break up the government granted monopoly on spectrums if they do allow mergers.
- koolba 8y agoOne could argue that a stronger combined company could better take on AT&T and Verizon. It’s not simply “mergers are bad for customers”.
- sjm-lbm 8y agoYeah, this merger (for whatever reason) reminds me a lot of the US Air/American Airlines merger of a few years ago. On the one hand, going from 4 to 3 'major' players seems an obvious loss for consumers. On the other hand, unless these two combine, I don't really see either of them able to really challenge AT&T/Verizon long term, which means that a merger to create three large players is better for consumers than a series of events that ultimately ends with two major players - and that seems like a fairly realistic outcome in this space.
- klondike_ 8y agoAs a Sprint customer, I think this deal will be good for competition in the wireless market. Both Sprint and T-Mobile struggle to compete with AT&T and Verizon in coverage, so hopefully the merger will allow T-Mobile to invest in greater coverage and speed.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- joe_the_user 8y agoI switched from Sprint to T-mobile a while back. My impression of Sprint then was they were essentially milking their customers for whatever they could get while offering inferior service - requiring the renewal of their lousy contracts to continue at any one point and naturally having an inferior collection of phones you could only use with them, having goofy conditions for getting a replacement phone etc. T-mobile's sell was offering no-contract service and having a network that you could buy broadly available GSM phones for (where with Sprint, you to switch carriers, you had to throw your phone away). I really hope the merger will be more a mass transfer of Sprint customers to T-Mobile (and the existing T-mobile approach) but it could well involve the opposite; A big accumulation of customers could wind-up be squeezed for all they have as the combined effort is run into the ground. (that is a strategy that yield cash for investors, it's not more "irrational" than spending a bunch for growth, indeed, "build monopoly with low margins, exploit monopoly with high margins, little service and little capital investment" is natural for many companies and industries.) I mean, keep in mind the two carriers have incompatible networks, incompatible phones and so-forth so soon or later, there will have to be a "reconning" where one ex-carrier's phones become useless, yay!.
- adventured 8y agoFortunately T-Mobile isn't a position to milk customers here. They'll get destroyed by AT&T and Verizon rapidly if they attempt to go that direction (I think they know they'll still have to run uphill). T-Mobile + Sprint has no monopoly position at all that they can stand upon: both AT&T and Verizon have national coverage, vast resources, massive businesses with very large income streams. I'd argue quite the opposite, for the next five years at least they'll have to work twice as hard after merging with Sprint, to make sure they don't implode. Sprint is carrying a giant debt bomb around its neck and has negative $24 billion in net tangible assets and $32 billion in long-term debt. Sprint has basically done nothing but lose money perpetually. T-Mobile only recently got to a position of passable financial footing. Before that they bled red ink perpetually as well. It's a small miracle they weren't crushed by the duopoly. Their considerably negative balance sheet still shows the scars of that. Combined the two will have $44 billion in long-term debt, with only T-Mobile's modest recent profit credibility to support it. They're likely to lose money, or close to it, initially as a combined entity until the Sprint side of the business is cleaned up. Mistreating customers and abandoning what has worked so well for T-Mobile, would likely result in a financial disaster for the merged entity. On the flip side, if they just do the obvious thing and keep doing what worked so well for T-Mobile - a few years out they've got a hundred billion in sales, a hundred billion dollar plus market cap, and $6 billion in annual net income, with the scale and resources to legitimately stand toe to toe with AT&T and Verizon.
- jzymbaluk 8y agoI'll be happy if John Legere stays on as CEO. I was working at a T-Mobile technical support call center when he came on, and it was really amazing how quickly and effectively he turned the company around after becoming an independent company
- selectodude 8y agoThe merger is T-Mobile taking over Sprint, so the entire Sprint brass would take their millions and go home.
- noobermin 8y agoNot happy for the merger, but kind of happy with Legere. I am a t-mobile customer and I noticed a definite shift in the quality of customer service from the late 00's to the mid 10's too, it's interesting you're basically giving me independent verification of that fact. I still am not happy with consolidation of the telecom industry as much as Legere is a good fellow.
- tzs 8y agoUsing the HHI [1], this would be classified as a highly concentrated industry, and the proposed merger increases the concentration quit a bit. I'd expect this to have a rough road with antitrust regulators. [1] https://www.justice.gov/atr/herfindahl-hirschman-index https://www.justice.gov/atr/herfindahl-hirschman-index
- wmf 8y agoNah, they're creating jobs.
- swyx 8y agogo one step further. TMUS and S' lawyers must have anticipated this, and went ahead with it anyway. What gives?
- selectodude 8y agoThere’s probably no breakup fee because it’s not a hostile takeover and they’re not “political enemies” of the Trump admin so the chances that it’s able to go through right now is the best it will likely ever be. I think this is as much of a “throw shit at the wall and see what sticks” merger, but for the comapnies it makes perfect sense and it’s worth a shot.
- ryao 8y agoI hate to say anything political, but President Trump and John Legere are enemies: https://mashable.com/2015/11/16/trump-legere-twitter-fight/ https://mashable.com/2015/11/16/trump-legere-twitter-fight/
- civilitty 8y agoThey will have already gained a bonus and moved on to the next client.
- rizwank 8y agoMassive synergies. And a small 3 and 4 versus behemoth 1 and 2 isn’t real competition. It’s hard to imagine a merger that would make more money.
- c22 8y agoI was on Nextel which I adored until they merged with Sprint and a dark pattern in their technical support flow tricked me into relinquishing a favorable data plan I had grandfathered in. I switched to T-mobile to get away from Sprint, so this news was somewhat concerning, but it sounds like they're keeping Legere on as CEO and hopefully retaining a fair amount of T-mobiles culture, so I'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt.
- giancarlostoro 8y agoYeah it's Sprint the one being bought out and taken over by the looks of it. Sprint has been improving their network recently, so you'll wind up with nice technology and strong leadership. Hopefully it kind of goes through and doesn't get screwed up.
- perseusprime11 8y agoIf there was one CEO who worked really hard in the industry, it is John Legere. From one man marketing to creating a cult around him, he worked his ass off to get T-Mobile to where it is today. I wish more CEOs are like him- in the front lines, working hard and setting a great example for their employees.
- tbrock 8y agoIt would have made much more sense for T-Mobile to merge with AT&T given the GSM heritage of both wireless networks. This is one situation where the sum of the whole is probably less than the parts. Bleh!
- rizwank 8y agoGSM and CDMA are almost dead. It’s all LTE now. V and S phones all have SIM cards now. Most carriers have run down their 2G fallback networks and taken that low band spectrum for LTE with VoLTE. Pre-LTE devices will suffer, but those guys would suffer in quality either way. -source: run a large MVNO.
- tbrock 8y agoSure but network is not always LTE even with current phones. The thing I always hated about Verizon and Sprint is dropping to 1x. We have modern phones for Christ sake! On T-Mobile or ATT you will drop to HSDPA if no LTE is available which is more than acceptable. 1x is equivalent to “don’t bother”
- cjmoran 8y agoAny prediction on what this merger might mean for a T-Mobile MVNO customer like myself? (MintSIM)
- cliftonkmorris 8y agoMergers like these will enable the company to renegotiate all contracts, including lease agreements for larger assets like cellular infrastructure (towers). Given this, it's highly likely that all the MVNO businesses like MintSIM, BoostMobile, Virgin will also be reviewed. Remember- MVNOs exist solely to sell excess capacity, and the contracted rate for service is often renewed ever 3-5 years. This merger provides an opportunity to accelerate that review.
- rayuela 8y agoThis is bullshit. The last thing we need is more consolidation in the telecom market.
- bandito11 8y agoThis can only be good for TMobile clients like myself. Hopefully now they become a real opponent to Veshitzon and ATT.
- foobaw 8y agoThis is great news for OEMs - one less carrier to work on. Sprint was a pain to work with - their network requirements were the worst and they had horrible bloatware no one used that required to be extensively tested.
- halfnibble 8y agoI don't know how this helps T-Mobile be more competitive. Sprint uses an incompatible network, has a horrible brand, and its customers hate their carrier. Seems to me like this would slow down a 5G network implementation.
- cryptonector 8y agoEasy: T-Mobile will probably take Sprint's customers, transition them to GSM/LTE phones, and then throw away Sprint's network. I figure that takes about 2 years to make happen. Why should this have any effect on the new entity's investment on its (T-Mobile's) network?
- intrasight 8y agoI use Ting on both T-Mobile and Sprint. I assume this will just improve the underlying network.