Page 2 of 72 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 52 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 1073

Thread: The final obstacle to the T-Mobile/Sprint Merger Begins Tomorrow

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    1,982
    Carrier(s)
    TMobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Its rumored T-Mobile may be willing to settle and allow unionization.

    I guess T-Mobile must really really want this deal to go through

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    14,871
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by hofonewb9 View Post
    It's not up to the court to determine what Sprint does post merger if not allowed. That's not what's on trial.
    Sure it is. The states are saying that an independent Sprint is necessary to provide "competition" and lower prices for minorities and low income customers.

    An independent Sprint's ability to do that can certainly be presented by the companies. Actually it already is:

    See below from today's testimony:

    "Examination of the first witness on Monday, Sprint Chief Marketing Officer Roger Solé, also suggested that the companies will try to prove that Sprint's future may be unclear without the merger.

    Solé testified that the company has lost post-paid customers (the most valuable type of telecom customer) over the past two years. When federal prosecutors pointed out that the total number of lines on Sprint's network has been nearly steady, Solé said that number has been buoyed by new connected devices from existing customers, like smartwatches, but they don't generate as much revenue as new cell phone customers. He also argued that Sprint lacks the resources to be a meaningful competitor in 5G.


    https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/09/tech/...ial/index.html

    Another interesting point from the article:

    The opening of the trial on Monday indicated just how much of a battle the two sides have been gearing up for. US District Court Judge Victor Marrero criticized both sides for the huge number of witnesses that have been called to testify during the trial: three to speak about the potential business plan of the merged company, 13 to speak about competition in the industry, 14 to speak about marketing and two to speak about network technology, among many others.

    "You're suggesting that the judge needs to get hit over the head (with information from the witnesses," Marrero said. "I don't need 13 witnesses to tell me about competition in the industry."

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    513
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jet1000 View Post
    Sure it is. The states are saying that an independent Sprint is necessary to provide "competition" and lower prices for minorities and low income customers.

    An independent Sprint's ability to do that can certainly be presented by the companies. Actually it already is:

    See below from today's testimony:

    "Examination of the first witness on Monday, Sprint Chief Marketing Officer Roger Solé, also suggested that the companies will try to prove that Sprint's future may be unclear without the merger.

    Solé testified that the company has lost post-paid customers (the most valuable type of telecom customer) over the past two years. When federal prosecutors pointed out that the total number of lines on Sprint's network has been nearly steady, Solé said that number has been buoyed by new connected devices from existing customers, like smartwatches, but they don't generate as much revenue as new cell phone customers. He also argued that Sprint lacks the resources to be a meaningful competitor in 5G.


    https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/09/tech/...ial/index.html

    Another interesting point from the article:

    The opening of the trial on Monday indicated just how much of a battle the two sides have been gearing up for. US District Court Judge Victor Marrero criticized both sides for the huge number of witnesses that have been called to testify during the trial: three to speak about the potential business plan of the merged company, 13 to speak about competition in the industry, 14 to speak about marketing and two to speak about network technology, among many others.

    "You're suggesting that the judge needs to get hit over the head (with information from the witnesses," Marrero said. "I don't need 13 witnesses to tell me about competition in the industry."
    No it's not. Unless you have any instances of the failed entity defense working in an anti trust suit.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    5,529
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by L33 View Post
    With what money?
    With part of their $27B on hand (Reuters). And Japan will not let Softbank fail. For Japan Softbank is too big to fail.

    The most common disagreement I've encountered with this pov is that it doesn't make financial sense.

    And most people can't wrap their heads around is that I agree that it does not make financial sense.

    To put it in western terms this nonsensical approach is driven by national pride & individual egos.
    If my actions include deeds of philanthropy in charity and acts of loving kindness I am living in my Faith.

    Red Pocket (AT&T) UTnT 5GB exp 09.27.20
    Red Pocket (AT&T) UTnT 1GB exp 02.12.20
    T-Mobile Gold Rewards $10yr exp 01.11.21
    Tello x2 (Sprint) $5 1-use/3mo no exp by 04.11.20

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    477
    Feedback Score
    0
    a few things

    1. i do not think Sprint will do well by them selves. I am sure they try very hard but they are just not doing well.
    2. They are great in the fact they are a low cost option and over all i think they are pretty good
    3. as it is now all of the carriers are more or less the same price minus sprint kidk starter deal


    I can not tell if in the long run this will be a good thing or not. However they both seem too have what the other needs. Sprint has spectrum and t-mobile has marketing. The debt sprint has is the thing that really makes me afraid. It is alot of it.

    Either way it will be good to have an answer on this. We have had too wait a very long time and it has been a roller coaster ride. I have followed all of the updates and it is never changing.

    I trust t-mobile to do a good and make pricing fair for everyone. On the other hand the Charley guy i am not too sure of.

    One thing i love about sprint is all of the partner coverage they have. This makes sprint's network alot more covered than what would other wise be the case.

    Sent from my LM-G820 using Tapatalk

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    477
    Feedback Score
    0
    Sprint has not been profitable before this year since 2006. They are going too be hard pressed too make it on there own.

    Sent from my LM-G820 using Tapatalk

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    477
    Feedback Score
    0
    i think Charley is going to make them drop this case. I just have a feeling it will not go threw. It has been one problem after another for the last year or so. I think t-mobile has offered everything they can but it will not be enuff.

    Sent from my LM-G820 using Tapatalk

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    1,971
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by hofonewb9 View Post
    You are trying to make a personal argument out of something the court will not rule on.
    How am I making tis personal? My argument that Sprint can not survive on it's own isn't any more illegitimate than the AGs saying Dish won't keep it's promises.

    It's not up to the court to determine what Sprint does post merger if not allowed
    If the states arguments are the merger shouldn't be allowed because it's going form 4 carriers to 3 carriers and that means higher prices and lost jobs. But not allowing the merger means sprint goes bell up and therefor it means going from 4 carriers to 3 carriers and higher prices and lost jobs. Then the AGs argument is moot. The same result happens. The AGs argument only has merit if it can prove not allowing the merger prevents this from happening and it certainly does not. And if Sprint goes belly up you won't have dish there are a backup, because they for sure won't be going forward with any plans without this merger.

    If the AGs win and the Sprint clusterf--k inevitably happens, I wonder if they will admit they were wrong? I doubt it. If the AGs win T-Mobile needs to still peruse a lease/buyout of Dish 600 MHz spectrum and also strike a lease/buyout deal of 600 MHz owned by Comcast. Also Dish's AWS-3 and AWS-4 spectrum.

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    513
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hagar View Post
    How am I making tis personal? My argument that Sprint can not survive on it's own isn't any more illegitimate than the AGs saying Dish won't keep it's promises.



    If the states arguments are the merger shouldn't be allowed because it's going form 4 carriers to 3 carriers and that means higher prices and lost jobs. But not allowing the merger means sprint goes bell up and therefor it means going from 4 carriers to 3 carriers and higher prices and lost jobs. Then the AGs argument is moot. The same result happens. The AGs argument only has merit if it can prove not allowing the merger prevents this from happening and it certainly does not. And if Sprint goes belly up you won't have dish there are a backup, because they for sure won't be going forward with any plans without this merger.

    If the AGs win and the Sprint clusterf--k inevitably happens, I wonder if they will admit they were wrong? I doubt it. If the AGs win T-Mobile needs to still peruse a lease/buyout of Dish 600 MHz spectrum and also strike a lease/buyout deal of 600 MHz owned by Comcast. Also Dish's AWS-3 and AWS-4 spectrum.
    The court will look at what they are competing for now. It's not up to the court to predict the future. Unless you can find any other instance of the failed entity defense actually working in an anti trust lawsuit. I personally do not disagree with you, Sprint is a complete mess, but, the court isn't going to let them make the excuse of being broke as their reason for a merger. It has never worked before.

    The states will argue that dish isn't there for a backup even with the merger. They released their whole redacted complaint they filed in court. It is public record.
    Last edited by hofonewb9; 12-10-2019 at 08:19 AM.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    SE Wisconsin
    Posts
    189
    Device(s)
    Looking for new one
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by hofonewb9 View Post
    The court will look at what they are competing for now. It's not up to the court to predict the future. Unless you can find any other instance of the failed entity defense actually working in an anti trust lawsuit. I personally do not disagree with you, Sprint is a complete mess, but, the court isn't going to let them make the excuse of being broke as their reason for a merger. It has never worked before.

    The states will argue that dish isn't there for a backup even with the merger. They released their whole redacted complaint they filed in court. It is public record.
    It also isn't in the courts purview to determine if Dish/Charlie is capable or incapable of running a wireless carrier. If they allow one argument and not the other, then the judge isn't being impartial.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    513
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by n33d0n3 View Post
    It also isn't in the courts purview to determine if Dish/Charlie is capable or incapable of running a wireless carrier. If they allow one argument and not the other, then the judge isn't being impartial.
    The deal TMobile made to gain DOJ approval was to set Dish up as viable competition in the industry. So, dish's past dealing in the wireless world are fair game. Dish's finances won't be a deciding factor, their past dealings with the FCC and basically spectrum squatting for years, very well could be.

    I'm not sure even how much TMobile will push the failing Sprint as part of their defense, none of their recent public statements about the trial mention this, and it has seemed to shifted towards 5G and rural coverage.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    142
    Feedback Score
    0
    The failed entity defense came fully to life and fully functional in the financial crisis of 2008-2009, a.k.a. "Too Big To Fail". The definition of which was written by Ben Bernanke, then Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    513
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Greenmule View Post
    The failed entity defense came fully to life and fully functional in the financial crisis of 2008-2009, a.k.a. "Too Big To Fail". The definition of which was written by Ben Bernanke, then Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board.
    Yes, but when has it actually worked in a horizontal merger court case. The thing is not a lot of these make court. There was one, I wanna say last year, maybe the year before, it was 2 disposal companies trying to merge and states sued to stop it. The companies tried to use the failed entity defense and they lost. It's a defense that rarely, if ever, works in this type of trial. If they use it, and it works, hey more power to them. That's what they pay a legal team for and if it worked they picked the right defense, there just doesn't seem to be a precedent of it actually working though.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    8,925
    Carrier(s)
    TMobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    I'm ready for it to be over one way or another at this point

    Sent from my VS880 using HoFo mobile app

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    513
    Feedback Score
    0
    https://www.phonearena.com/news/t-mo...wsuit_id121017

    Probably the biggest thing from the first day. People will feel about it how they do, my take is, of course it was a Sprint exec....lol the level of incompetence there never ceases to amaze me.

Page 2 of 72 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 52 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 16
    Last Post: 08-06-2019, 12:38 AM
  2. Replies: 48
    Last Post: 02-26-2019, 10:29 AM
  3. Replies: 25
    Last Post: 03-25-2008, 08:36 AM
  4. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-21-2003, 09:31 PM
  5. finally, i got the real answers to the a530
    By Vyruz Reaper in forum Verizon Wireless
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 04-29-2003, 12:49 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks