6 ms·

AT&T withdraws T-Mobile takeover application from FCC

122 points by barredo 15y ago

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
daimyoyo 15y ago
I wonder how T-Mobile will fare now that the sale seems all but off? The breakup fee and spectrum allotment should be a great opportunity for them to build their network, and aquire customers. Who knows? Maybe they'll use the spectrum to standardize their MMS protocall(which I believe to be a major reason they don't have the iPhone yet).
- jarek 15y ago
  I do not believe there is an AWS-compatible version of the iPhone, which would be a more fundamental issue than MMS protocols.
- Symmetry 15y ago
  Yeah, I switched to T-Mobile recently because it seems like they're the least evil of the big four by a fair margin. They even let you get around the subsidized phone lock-in thing by charging people without a contract less on their monthly bill.
jcc80 15y ago
This is so awesome!!! I love it! My apologies to the community for little substance here, but having a choice between just AT&T & Verizon would be terrible for us consumers long-term. My sister's BF just got a T-Mobile phone and I was just explaining tonight how I hoped this would not go through.
- winter_blue 15y ago
  Did you mean having a choice or not having a choice?
  - megamark16 15y ago
    He meant only having a choice between those two big carriers.
- zitterbewegung 15y ago
  Did you forget about Sprint? If AT&T and Verizon merged wouldn't you have Sprint to choose from?
  - fossuser 15y ago
    Sprint doesn't give you a less expensive no contract deal if you bring your own phone that you bought at full price.
fpgeek 15y ago
This is a big deal for US mobile customers that travel internationally. While there has been some movement on the CDMA/GSM "world phone" front, having two native GSM carriers still makes a big difference.
va_coder 15y ago
Would this have happened to ATT under a different administration?
- danssig 15y ago
  Of course. You're not under the impression that Obama is more for the people than Bush was, are you? [1] [1] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/07/bank-earnings-obama_n_1079482.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/07/bank-earnings-obama...
  - icebraining 15y ago
    "For the people" is frankly a bullshit metric. Different presidents can and will act differently even if they're both on the same "for the people" level. Even with a completely cynical view, they'll at least have a different set of lobbyists who they're loyal to.
    - danssig 15y ago
      But doesn't that make the initial "observation" nonsensical? What could be meant by "would this have gotten by in another administration" other than, "wow, we're so blessed to have these guys" yet it's just cherry picking (same as I did, but for the opposite point-of-view).
      - icebraining 15y ago
        We (well, you) may very well be "blessed" to have that administration in terms of the choice of the FCC commissioners. That GP was making an overreaching observation is an unfounded assumption.
      - va_coder 15y ago
        >>"wow, we're so blessed to have these guys" Don't put words in my mouth. I asked a simple question.
        15y ago
megamark16 15y ago
Oh thank goodness. I'm a happy (and life long) T-Mobile customer, and I really didn't want to become an AT&T customer. T-Mobile has the best customer service of just about any company out there, and I feel that they really help to level the playing field a little here in the US, even if they are only a small segment of the market.
mdasen 15y ago
This is a bit of a curious move. Why would AT&T voluntarily withdraw their application and possibly trigger the brake-up fee rather than waiting for the government's decision? The only explanation I can come up with is that they're going to re-file and withdrawing the application and re-filing will delay any decision (perhaps to a point where T-Mobile looks like it is declining and not providing competition or something). Frankly, the $39B buy of T-Mobile was a deal seemingly too-good-to-be-true for T-Mobile. T-Mobile has struggled to put up customer additions in a market increasingly dominated by AT&T and Verizon. While T-Mobile has remained profitable, it's possible that they're starting down the path Sprint hit several years ago that left them unprofitable. T-Mobile was considering a merger with Sprint that probably would have left DT as a minority shareholder in an unprofitable, 3rd-place wireless carrier and then AT&T comes along and offers $39B. At the time of the offer, Sprint had a market-cap of about $13B, debt of about $14.5B and cash-on-hand of about $4B, valuing the business at about $23.5B. That makes the $39B offered for T-Mobile a lot more than a good purchase price for Sprint and Sprint is a larger wireless carrier. With that said, it's genuinely possible that AT&T is stringing T-Mobile along. $39B is probably over T-Mobile's value (based on 2011 earnings, it would be about 44x earnings), but it might be worth it for AT&T to have nearly 140MHz in spectrum, plenty of new cell sites, and plenty of new customers. AT&T has a history of integrating purchased networks well (compared to, say, Sprint who still hasn't dealt with the two networks from its Nextel purchase). By contrast, getting a minority share in a new Sprint would probably be worth a lot less, might see the new carrier running four separate networks (CDMA/EV-DO, GSM/UMTS/HSPA, iDEN, and LTE), and might still see poor customer numbers and profits. It would also be an odd position to be in. Would the new Sprint sell CDMA as its flagship product or HSPA+? Would they try and maintain both networks for the next decade as they try to fit LTE in somewhere? AT&T's offer is that promise from a business partner that you're going to get a windfall if you just hang in there. "Yeah, we know we pulled the app from the FCC, but if you just hang in there and work with us, you'll get that windfall. C'mon, just a little longer." While I don't like the prospect of having only three national wireless companies, I'm not sure T-Mobile staying is a lynchpin for competition. T-Mobile's customer numbers have gotten less rosy and the continued lack of an iPhone is only going to hurt them more. From my perspective, we need a cap on spectrum below 1GHz. Low-frequency spectrum travels significantly further in real-world conditions than high-frequency spectrum. For example, to cover 1,000sq mi can be done with one cell site with 700MHz spectrum. By contrast, at 1900MHz it would take 4 sites, and at 2.4GHz it would take 10. While cell networks need to split cells in urban areas as their customer base grows, low-frequency spectrum offers the broad coverage that customers demand as well as offering the ability to build out a network with decent coverage before one has many customers (somewhat solving the chicken and the egg problem of building a network). Without low-frequency spectrum, new carriers face the daunting task of building considerably more cell sites when they don't even have customers yet. Likewise, limiting holdings below 1GHz would provide a guarantee of competition. If a carrier could only own 25MHz below 1GHz, we'd be guaranteed to have at least 4 carriers - and those carriers could be more genuinely competitive. Imagine if the 700MHz auction couldn't be participated in by Verizon or AT&T. T-Mobile might have picked up spectrum there, same for MetroPCS or Leap Wireless (or new entrants). We could have seen increased competition driven by ownership of spectrum that made rolling out a wireless network with decent coverage much easier.
sourc3 15y ago
I am very happy to read this. I have been a T-Mobile customer (from the early days of VoiceStream) and they have never given me any problems. In fact, they let me replace an eBay bought phone with a new Tmobile one just because I had the handset protection plan (from years ago). This is a company that provides comparably good service to both Sprint and Att and charges 3/4 of the price. For $50 a month I am getting the unlimited 3G/Talk/Text with them, which is unheard of for ATT. Happy with my Windows Phone 7 and Tmobile :)
- pacomerh 15y ago
  Same here, I get full everything for an affordable rate, good signal and by far the free tethering is one of the things that I appreciate the most.
- Nrsolis 15y ago
  Honestly, the service I got from T-Mobile was beyond awesome when I was using a Blackberry. The stores had knowledgable people, the rates were very reasonable, and I never had a problem getting support from their 800-number when there was a problem. I'm glad to see T-Mobile at least appear to stay independent for now. The USA is a very big country and letting one carrier dominate the GSM marketplace is just a terrible idea.

122 points by barredo 15y ago

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

I wonder how T-Mobile will fare now that the sale seems all but off? The breakup fee and spectrum allotment should be a great opportunity for them to build their network, and aquire customers. Who knows? Maybe they'll use the spectrum to standardize their MMS protocall(which I believe to be a major reason they don't have the iPhone yet).

jarek 15y ago
I do not believe there is an AWS-compatible version of the iPhone, which would be a more fundamental issue than MMS protocols.
Symmetry 15y ago
Yeah, I switched to T-Mobile recently because it seems like they're the least evil of the big four by a fair margin. They even let you get around the subsidized phone lock-in thing by charging people without a contract less on their monthly bill.

jcc80 15y ago

This is so awesome!!! I love it! My apologies to the community for little substance here, but having a choice between just AT&T & Verizon would be terrible for us consumers long-term. My sister's BF just got a T-Mobile phone and I was just explaining tonight how I hoped this would not go through.

winter_blue 15y ago
Did you mean having a choice or not having a choice?
- megamark16 15y ago
  He meant only having a choice between those two big carriers.
zitterbewegung 15y ago
Did you forget about Sprint? If AT&T and Verizon merged wouldn't you have Sprint to choose from?
- fossuser 15y ago
  Sprint doesn't give you a less expensive no contract deal if you bring your own phone that you bought at full price.

fpgeek 15y ago

This is a big deal for US mobile customers that travel internationally. While there has been some movement on the CDMA/GSM "world phone" front, having two native GSM carriers still makes a big difference.

va_coder 15y ago

Would this have happened to ATT under a different administration?

danssig 15y ago
Of course. You're not under the impression that Obama is more for the people than Bush was, are you? [1] [1] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/07/bank-earnings-obama_n_1079482.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/07/bank-earnings-obama...
- icebraining 15y ago
  "For the people" is frankly a bullshit metric. Different presidents can and will act differently even if they're both on the same "for the people" level. Even with a completely cynical view, they'll at least have a different set of lobbyists who they're loyal to.
  - danssig 15y ago
    But doesn't that make the initial "observation" nonsensical? What could be meant by "would this have gotten by in another administration" other than, "wow, we're so blessed to have these guys" yet it's just cherry picking (same as I did, but for the opposite point-of-view).
    - icebraining 15y ago
      We (well, you) may very well be "blessed" to have that administration in terms of the choice of the FCC commissioners. That GP was making an overreaching observation is an unfounded assumption.
    - va_coder 15y ago
      >>"wow, we're so blessed to have these guys" Don't put words in my mouth. I asked a simple question.
      - 15y ago

megamark16 15y ago

Oh thank goodness. I'm a happy (and life long) T-Mobile customer, and I really didn't want to become an AT&T customer. T-Mobile has the best customer service of just about any company out there, and I feel that they really help to level the playing field a little here in the US, even if they are only a small segment of the market.

mdasen 15y ago

This is a bit of a curious move. Why would AT&T voluntarily withdraw their application and possibly trigger the brake-up fee rather than waiting for the government's decision? The only explanation I can come up with is that they're going to re-file and withdrawing the application and re-filing will delay any decision (perhaps to a point where T-Mobile looks like it is declining and not providing competition or something). Frankly, the $39B buy of T-Mobile was a deal seemingly too-good-to-be-true for T-Mobile. T-Mobile has struggled to put up customer additions in a market increasingly dominated by AT&T and Verizon. While T-Mobile has remained profitable, it's possible that they're starting down the path Sprint hit several years ago that left them unprofitable. T-Mobile was considering a merger with Sprint that probably would have left DT as a minority shareholder in an unprofitable, 3rd-place wireless carrier and then AT&T comes along and offers $39B. At the time of the offer, Sprint had a market-cap of about $13B, debt of about $14.5B and cash-on-hand of about $4B, valuing the business at about $23.5B. That makes the $39B offered for T-Mobile a lot more than a good purchase price for Sprint and Sprint is a larger wireless carrier. With that said, it's genuinely possible that AT&T is stringing T-Mobile along. $39B is probably over T-Mobile's value (based on 2011 earnings, it would be about 44x earnings), but it might be worth it for AT&T to have nearly 140MHz in spectrum, plenty of new cell sites, and plenty of new customers. AT&T has a history of integrating purchased networks well (compared to, say, Sprint who still hasn't dealt with the two networks from its Nextel purchase). By contrast, getting a minority share in a new Sprint would probably be worth a lot less, might see the new carrier running four separate networks (CDMA/EV-DO, GSM/UMTS/HSPA, iDEN, and LTE), and might still see poor customer numbers and profits. It would also be an odd position to be in. Would the new Sprint sell CDMA as its flagship product or HSPA+? Would they try and maintain both networks for the next decade as they try to fit LTE in somewhere? AT&T's offer is that promise from a business partner that you're going to get a windfall if you just hang in there. "Yeah, we know we pulled the app from the FCC, but if you just hang in there and work with us, you'll get that windfall. C'mon, just a little longer." While I don't like the prospect of having only three national wireless companies, I'm not sure T-Mobile staying is a lynchpin for competition. T-Mobile's customer numbers have gotten less rosy and the continued lack of an iPhone is only going to hurt them more. From my perspective, we need a cap on spectrum below 1GHz. Low-frequency spectrum travels significantly further in real-world conditions than high-frequency spectrum. For example, to cover 1,000sq mi can be done with one cell site with 700MHz spectrum. By contrast, at 1900MHz it would take 4 sites, and at 2.4GHz it would take 10. While cell networks need to split cells in urban areas as their customer base grows, low-frequency spectrum offers the broad coverage that customers demand as well as offering the ability to build out a network with decent coverage before one has many customers (somewhat solving the chicken and the egg problem of building a network). Without low-frequency spectrum, new carriers face the daunting task of building considerably more cell sites when they don't even have customers yet. Likewise, limiting holdings below 1GHz would provide a guarantee of competition. If a carrier could only own 25MHz below 1GHz, we'd be guaranteed to have at least 4 carriers - and those carriers could be more genuinely competitive. Imagine if the 700MHz auction couldn't be participated in by Verizon or AT&T. T-Mobile might have picked up spectrum there, same for MetroPCS or Leap Wireless (or new entrants). We could have seen increased competition driven by ownership of spectrum that made rolling out a wireless network with decent coverage much easier.

sourc3 15y ago

I am very happy to read this. I have been a T-Mobile customer (from the early days of VoiceStream) and they have never given me any problems. In fact, they let me replace an eBay bought phone with a new Tmobile one just because I had the handset protection plan (from years ago). This is a company that provides comparably good service to both Sprint and Att and charges 3/4 of the price. For $50 a month I am getting the unlimited 3G/Talk/Text with them, which is unheard of for ATT. Happy with my Windows Phone 7 and Tmobile :)

pacomerh 15y ago
Same here, I get full everything for an affordable rate, good signal and by far the free tethering is one of the things that I appreciate the most.
Nrsolis 15y ago
Honestly, the service I got from T-Mobile was beyond awesome when I was using a Blackberry. The stores had knowledgable people, the rates were very reasonable, and I never had a problem getting support from their 800-number when there was a problem. I'm glad to see T-Mobile at least appear to stay independent for now. The USA is a very big country and letting one carrier dominate the GSM marketplace is just a terrible idea.