Back to Article

  • chizow - Monday, December 19, 2011 - link

    T-Mobile and Sprint may not be able to survive much longer anyways; their inability to compete is nothing new even when market share wasn't so clearly skewed towards Verizon/AT&T. Their inability to compete is why they're in this predicament of being gobbled up to begin with.

    All the DOJ and FCC accomplished here was squashing any hopes for T-Mobile shareholders to maximize their holdings, as the only direction for them now is down. Sprint may be right behind them.

    Big winner in all of this is Verizon. They remain the market leader and are now looking at an AT&T that's $4B lighter in the pockets with undoubtedly battered spirits over this failed deal.
  • JHBoricua - Monday, December 19, 2011 - link

    Seems to me that their ability to compete is what made AT&T want to spend 39 Billion to buy TMobile rather than invest 3.9 Billion in their own network to reach Verizon-like coverage. This merger was going to make things worse for the US consumer. The FCC and DOJ got it right.

    F^ck the TMO shareholders.
  • chizow - Tuesday, December 20, 2011 - link

    I agree it would've made things worst in the short-term, but it just postpones the inevitable. Sprint and TMO aren't going to be around much longer, and if they are, they'll be even less of a concern than they are now. Same result, just longer route to get there. Reply
  • drwho9437 - Tuesday, December 20, 2011 - link

    If Sprint and TMO go cease to exist, anti-trust will simply break up AT&T and VZ... I would think. It pretty much is already a cartel and phone service unlike TV has a history of government anti-trust action. Reply
  • Targon - Tuesday, December 20, 2011 - link

    You clearly do not understand some of the problems that AT&T has had when it comes to building new cell phone towers. The LOCAL governments generally block the building of new towers, which means that building new towers in many towns just isn't an option. It has nothing to do with how much money is being spent, and is more about being blocked by idiots who want cell phone coverage, yet don't want to even allow a new tower to be built. Reply
  • T2k - Monday, December 19, 2011 - link

    " Their inability to compete is why they're in this predicament of being gobbled up to begin with."

    Ahahaha, what an utter BS - their frequencies and TMO's ]very competitive prices and features and EXCELLENT HSPA+ SPEEDS what made them a takeover target.

    Stop spreading the ignorant astroturfer/ATT bullshit here, pls.
  • Penti - Monday, December 19, 2011 - link

    The government still hasn't supplied them with any 4G spectrum though. Their long term survival depends on that. It does hurt them that their always late in the game off getting useful spectrum licenses. Reply
  • DanNeely - Monday, December 19, 2011 - link

    That's because Deutsche Telekom had already decided they wanted out of the US market and declined to bid during the 700mhz auction. They'll be getting 10mhz from ATT as part of the breakup; but that's still only half of what ATT/VZW are using for their initial LTE deployments; so without major roaming from ATT or being able to use their 3bn windfall to buy spectrum from someone else they're still in major trouble. Reply
  • Penti - Tuesday, December 20, 2011 - link

    It's the damn governments job to reauction and make sure they have spectrum to use if they actually wants them to be a "disruptive force". Takes billions in loans too and DT don't really want to make up for the shortfall. T-mobile has already before the buyout plans asked the FCC/government to reauction the D-block (2x5MHz). AT&T rejected that it would be offered T-mobile, it was back in 2008 the auction occurred just two years after t-mobile had gained their pricey 3G-bands in a extra auction to make that happen. Sure they did try to get a hold of it through a new auction that never took place. They won't get anything now. Should get some cash though. But the D-block is still off limits. AT&T wants it for themselves too. Reply
  • chizow - Tuesday, December 20, 2011 - link

    Nonsense, this deal isn't about any of TMO's technologies, there's nothing they have that 40B couldn't buy, a price tag clearly inflated by any reasonable valuations.

    This deal was about:

    1) grabbing TMO's market share to make AT&T #1
    2) reducing competition
    3) ???
    4) profit (longterm)

    If TMO was actually competitive, they would be doing the acquiring rather than being the target for takeover. The only reason this deal even had a chance was because TMO was already struggling and had such a small % of the market.

    Now the only card left to play in the deck is Sprint/TMO merger, how good does that sound? lol.
  • danjw - Monday, December 19, 2011 - link

    Bah, T-Mobile is owned by Deutsche Telekom AG. So there is only one T-Mobile share holder. Now Deutsche Telekom AG shareholders may not be happy, but what does that have to do with competition in the US mobile phone service market? T-Mobile is struggling because Deutsche Telekom AG, doesn't want to put anymore money into it. But with the AT&T roaming agreement and this money, they may be able to improve their service enough to compete. That assumes that Deutsche Telekom AG, doesn't decide to keep the money.
  • danjw - Monday, December 19, 2011 - link

    One more thought, AT&T messed this up when they were caught lying to congress. They probably lost lots of supporters there. They told them that they needed the bandwidth to speedup their LTE roll out. But, then it came out they were slowing it down to justify the deal. Reply
  • Wolfpup - Thursday, December 22, 2011 - link

    Sprint and T-Mobile seem to be competing fine.

    Neither is small, and I have no idea why people keep leaving Sprint out of Verizon/AT&T comparisons, when Verizon's only got like a third more subscribers.

    I don't even know if that counts Boost and Virgin or not, because if it doesn't Sprint might be about the same size.
  • Wolfpup - Thursday, December 22, 2011 - link

    Oh, and at least where I am, Sprint's coverage is way better than AT&Ts, though U.S. Cellular which is fifth place has far better coverage than anyone else. Reply
  • gevorg - Monday, December 19, 2011 - link

    That $4 billion recompense could have been used to improve AT&T's 3G/LTE infrastructure. Reply
  • DigitalFreak - Monday, December 19, 2011 - link

    Hence the reason this was never about "the network". It's always been about removing a competitor from the market. Reply
  • Andrew.a.cunningham - Monday, December 19, 2011 - link

    By the same token, AT&T now has $35 billion it can use to improve its network now that it isn't buying T-Mobile. :-) Reply
  • Hrel - Monday, December 19, 2011 - link

    Wow, I thought this would be one of the first comments. But hopefully Sprint and Tmobile will now merge or at least build a partnership; that way they could actually compete with Verizon/ATT. Sprint's prices (specifically Virgin Mobile which is the same thing) make ATT/Verizon look downright criminal. Then you consider the 19/month wifi oriented mobile carrier, I forget the name of right now.

    If the third and fourth place mobile carriers merged they'd gain a larger customer base, stronger network, more spectrum. I see this as the only logical next step. Most importantly I want to see strong competition in the market to drive down these INSANE 100+/month cell phone bills. I don't care how much you surf the internet, text or call people. Anything over 50/month per person is absolute ROBERY!!!!
  • claytontullos - Tuesday, December 20, 2011 - link

    Sprint and Tmobile have incompatible technologies.

    Verizon and Sprint have similar tech.
    ATT and Tmobile have similar tech.
  • dcollins - Tuesday, December 20, 2011 - link

    Everyone but Sprint is moving to LTE and even Sprint is headed there in the long term. Reply
  • 'nar - Tuesday, December 20, 2011 - link

    yes, but you have Long Term Evolution(LTE) GSM, and you have LTE CDMA. Both are, yet neither actually are, 4th Generation(4G). There are some improvements, yes, but they certainly are not the next full generation of wireless technology. that is still a ways off. Most of those terms are just marketing drivel now. Reply
  • Black1969ta - Tuesday, December 20, 2011 - link

    LTE has nothing to do with GSM or CDMA, all American LTE networks are in the 700 MHz Spectrum. If Memory serves right LTE is based on TDMA, like GSM, but each carrier will use the same frequencies and technology. IMHO, This will open the door to make Cellular service a commodity, like electricity distribution. Meaning that when a phone comes out it will work on any carriers service and all carriers will be able to roam on all the other carrier's Towers (not that agreements will necessarily be made, but they could.)

    If I remember right there is a secondary frequency for LTE that has shorter range but better (building) penetration, that will be used in Urban environments, but all LTE networks will essentially be the same.
  • foodchem - Tuesday, December 20, 2011 - link

    This article is too hard for me to read. My website is can someone tell me whether the website is right? Reply
  • xavisancho - Tuesday, December 20, 2011 - link

    xaavi sancho es un hijo de puta. Reply
  • xavisancho - Tuesday, December 20, 2011 - link

    sancho tio em caus com el putu cul enserio todio Reply
  • code65536 - Tuesday, December 20, 2011 - link

    T-Mobile's has the best pricing of any of the carriers. And on top of that, they are the only ones to offer non-subsidized plans like what the rest of the world uses (where you pay for the service and pay for the phone separately instead of having the two lumped together in an opaque pricing structure).

    So as a T-Mobile customer, I am immensely relieved that this takeover has been scuttled.
  • Zap - Thursday, December 22, 2011 - link

    That's not true. Pretty much all companies (yes even AT&T and Verizon) have non-subsidized plans. Most of them are the pre-paid style like Net10 & TracFone does that you just buy talk minutes, but some (Boost Mobile & Virgin Mobile) offer unlimited plans with data and even smart phones. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now