Jump to content
Nextel49

[Discontinued] Sprint Tmobile merger Disc.

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Tengen31 said:

I would much rather Sprint/dish. TMobile is fine. Sprint needs upgrades going faster.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 

For Sprint customers, getting Dish would certainly be very helpful. Sprint could use more mid-band spectrum for where band 41 doesn't reach.

As a T-Mobile customer, I'd like for T-Mobile to get Dish for the same reason to aid T-Mobile, but also for the added 600mhz spectrum Dish got.

I know some here may view this differently, but I suspect if T-Mobile and Sprint do merge, they'll try getting Dish as a way to add video competition against AT&T, where it may not be Legere so much involved in that decision, but possibly Masayoshi Son and Softbank's interest in going for a Dish combo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dro1984 said:

Deutsche Telekom Said to visit SoftBank, Son,  this weekend in Japan to discuss Merger.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/03/sprint-t-mobile-talks-continue-deutsche-telekom-to-visit-softbank-this-weekend-sources-say.html

My view on this is that its sounding more likely that this merger is going to happen, between that CNBC article and the article I posted here yesterday from TmoNews about how DT/T-Mobile were still making new updates to their offer for Softbank.

The deal is too good for either company to pass up, and I believe they both realize this, which is why they still are trying for it. Now if it doesn't happen, what I believe could be the next most likely outcome spanning a few years or so, is that we might see more consolidation among  cable companies, as I've written about before here on S4GRU many times. This needs to happen in order for cable to have success buying and integrating wireless carriers for nationwide bundling opportunities, etc.

One possible thing is there could become two cable companies both nationwide that agree or are ordered by regulatory authorities under conditions for the mergers to take place, is they split cable lines nationwide for consumer choice across the country. It may even be three or four or more cable companies doing this, but its my opinion that there will be no more than three wireless carriers, two of which being owned by cable, while AT&T remains the third, non-cable option.

My thought is that Comcast will get Verizon, as speculated online by many news sites and blogs, but then Verizon may get Sprint and some point for the spectrum. T-Mobile may get Dish, then possibly be bought by another national cable company, or else be approached again by AT&T for the spectrum, in order to compete with the Comcast/Verizon combination. Generally speaking, these outcomes would be much worse for consumers than having Sprint and T-Mobile merge, so really those who are concerned about decreased competition ought to at least welcome this current merger possibility in some degree as means of preventing a worse outcome later on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Sprint-Charter-in-Merger-Talks-140639

 

Charter back in it. I see the problem with this is that Rutledge and Malone will want control over Sprint and will put Masa in the back seat. When Masa meets with them, that will be the air let out of the Charter/Sprint balloon.

 

Also, cable and wireless tech isn't exactly complimentary at this point, though Sprint could push Charter off QAM to IP for wired video, they might also need a better DVR because Charter's current DVR sucks compared to Dish' s Hopper, DirecTV's Genie, or Comcast's X1. Even my local cable company has a whole home DVR. Charter got rid of theirs! It isn't like a combined Sprint and Charter will be able to bully people into getting wireless like Charter does with cable and Rogers can do with cable and wireless up in the frozen North. Rogers has one less national competitor for one. Only way Masa can replicate that is for DT to take over Sprint and with Masa playing backseat driver while Legere and Hottges trying to negotiate something with Comcast or Charter.

 

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fraydog said:

https://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Sprint-Charter-in-Merger-Talks-140639

 

Charter back in it. I see the problem with this is that Rutledge and Malone will want control over Sprint and will put Masa in the back seat. When Masa meets with them, that will be the air let out of the Charter/Sprint balloon.

 

Also, cable and wireless tech isn't exactly complimentary at this point, though Sprint could push Charter off QAM to IP for wired video, they might also need a better DVR because Charter's current DVR sucks compared to Dish' s Hopper, DirecTV's Genie, or Comcast's X1. Even my local cable company has a whole home DVR. Charter got rid of theirs! It isn't like a combined Sprint and Charter will be able to bully people into getting wireless like Charter does with cable and Rogers can do with cable and wireless up in the frozen North. Rogers has one less national competitor for one. Only way Masa can replicate that is for DT to take over Sprint and with Masa playing backseat driver while Legere and Hottges trying to negotiate something with Comcast or Charter.

 

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

Great post, Fraydog

Right now is absolutely not the time for cable to get involved with wireless mergers, with the possible exception of Comcast/Verizon. Besides the points you made, which were very good, I also cannot stress how bad a situation would be were you have a cable company which mostly is just regional, selling a national wireless service, but putting bundles for that service with cable that only is available in areas where their cable service is shared.

I am a very anti-discrimination person, as I have a deep dislike for anything unfair to someone or a group of people, which I know especially from being severely inflicted by physical disability and how society is, etc. Customers are literally disabled (though certainly not in the same sense as actual physical disability), but monetarily, market-based disability based simply on where they live and which services they have access to. This is a big part why I advocate for service industry mergers, so that there is greater equal access to what people have around elsewhere in the country. People should not be so limited based on where they chose to live, or literally have to reside somewhere based on circumstances.

The only thing that I am more tolerant of with lack of access is when it involves people deciding to live in extreme rural environments, where it just cannot be feasible for all of these options. Yet even now, larger areas still have lack of access where really shouldn't be an issue to serve, but regulation and competition challenges make it difficult for even moderate populated areas to be fully served. Such as if Sprint had more customers and more money, they could grow the network faster, but they can't really, because they are the smallest carrier with money issues and three much larger competitors.

Yet together with T-Mobile, it makes Sprint much stronger as it does for T-Mobile, gives them much more power and resources to compete, along with a much stronger combined network that has the ability to really grow. Not to say though that Sprint couldn't do this alone with the right financing, but really can we seriously trust Softbank to do that now after so long of not financing Sprint as it needs? T-Mobile under DT and John Legere certainly will, and we will all benefit under it, regardless of our disappointment Sprint couldn't get the proper support to do it alone. But it could be even worse with Charter. Cable isn't the right path for Sprint at this point.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The closest thing to a national cable company is Comcast. That said, they didn't really compete against anything except satellite up until cord cutting became commonplace. Sure you could mention U-Verse. That wasn't in enough places and a lot of times wasn't much better or different than X1. Then AT&T panicked and overpaid for DirecTV.

Cablecos will be losing revenue as the pay TV bubble deflates.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Comcast will not merge with Verizon. Just stop. That would create a mega corporation beyond all imagination. Not even a Trump administration would approve that. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-28/comcast-buying-verizon-it-doesn-t-like-wireless-that-much
Comcast won't give up control because the Roberts family doesn't want to be in the same back seat Masa Son will likely soon be in.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JustinRP37 said:

Comcast will not merge with Verizon. Just stop. That would create a mega corporation beyond all imagination. Not even a Trump administration would approve that. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-28/comcast-buying-verizon-it-doesn-t-like-wireless-that-much

 

2 hours ago, Fraydog said:

Comcast won't give up control because the Roberts family doesn't want to be in the same back seat Masa Son will likely soon be in.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
 

I know you both doubt it will happen, and that is fine. Opinions. I've read plenty of articles stating the benefits and the likelihood of such a merger, and I think it stands a good chance. I do agree with Fraydog about Comcast being the closest to a national carrier, which is part of why I think them getting involved in wireless is possible at this point and worthwhile enough to them. They may get involved again, possibly with Charter for a Sprint merger if the T-Mobile merger doesn't happen. Otherwise though, Verizon is their closest suitor. What I don't believe are the rumors in the past of Comcast and T-Mobile. No way!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, dro1984 said:

Deutsche Telekom Said to visit SoftBank, Son,  this weekend in Japan to discuss Merger.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/03/sprint-t-mobile-talks-continue-deutsche-telekom-to-visit-softbank-this-weekend-sources-say.html

Is it just a coincidence that Trump is visiting Japan this weekend as well???

:blink:

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, greenbastard said:

Is it just a coincidence that Trump is visiting Japan this weekend as well???

:blink:

Perhaps so, perhaps not. Although, the more I hear about the positive meetings between the two, the more likelihood I believe there will be that regulators will approve this merger. I use to be skeptical about regulatory approval of it under the Obama administration, which had regulators already voicing their concerns and opposition. Enough so, that the merger attempt was delayed by Softbank in the hopes that a different administration more supportive of the merger would result from the 2016 Presidential election. Despite Marcelo Claure supporting Hillary Clinton for President, I seriously doubt regulators in her administration would have approved of the merger.

When Trump won, I believed the merger seemed more likely to be approved, unless a counter merger offer was made by AT&T, in which I still believe could happen if AT&T made a very enticing offer to DT, enough so to offset the increased interest in T-Mobile DT has gained from T-Mobile's growth and success during the past few years that has caused DT to lose most of the interest they once greatly had in selling T-Mobile. This seems to have affected Sprint and Softbank's ability to successfully negotiate a deal with terms that fully satisfy Softbank's agenda for this merger, due to DT being so unwilling to split away from T-Mobile nowadays.

Yet now that things are the way they are with T-Mobile being very successful and Sprint still not well, while according to news reports Softbank has had great difficulty trying to sell Sprint, it appears Softbank may not have the bargaining power enough to keep much of a controlling interest in Sprint that may have been a factor in the failed attempts to sell Sprint. Now with the merger possibility with T-Mobile, it appears Softbank may be realizing it doesn't have enough bargaining power to get exactly what they want from such a deal. Yet, considering the massive long-term benefits of the deal, it may simply be too good for Softbank to pass by. The speculation of Softbank dropping the deal likely is the result of Softbank trying to pursue as much benefit to them they can get out of the deal without having DT/T-Mobile call it off.

Right now, T-Mobile is doing very well, and much less needs this merger than does Sprint. Still, DT/T-Mobile very likely realize how advantageous this merger deal is for them, which probably is the reason for their willingness to negotiate with terms allowing Softbank some amount of control, influence, and power within the combined T-Mobile/Sprint company. Whereas a merger deal with AT&T most likely would mean a full sale of T-Mobile over to AT&T, which isn't favorable to DT. However, if the Sprint deal were not to happen, regardless of my suspicions of AT&T possibly making a counter offer for T-Mobile during the Sprint merger regulatory process, I still believe an AT&T attempt for T-Mobile may occur.

This could end up in a situation where AT&T becomes the anti-cable company if they buy Dish to combine with Directv and get T-Mobile for the added network and spectrum to have a full range of these services which compete with the possible pro-cable company of Verizon combined with Comcast/Charter and Sprint. In the process Sprint may also get US Cellular. This would be a situation of the "big two" , which would happen under a very pro-business regulatory environment. While the Trump administration may allow this, I believe they would find preferable as a compromise between being pro-business and merger-friendly with also preserving some level of consumer protection through competition by allowing Sprint and T-Mobile to merge, which may include Dish, as competition against AT&T, while Verizon likely will go with the cable route.

I also wanted to reiterate my viewpoint on how spectrum might be reallocated, etc. in my writing this post, but I wrote long enough here detailing my other points. I apologize for the length. I'll write about the spectrum in another post later on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Fraydog said:

https://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Sprint-Charter-in-Merger-Talks-140639

 

Charter back in it. I see the problem with this is that Rutledge and Malone will want control over Sprint and will put Masa in the back seat. When Masa meets with them, that will be the air let out of the Charter/Sprint balloon.

 

Also, cable and wireless tech isn't exactly complimentary at this point, though Sprint could push Charter off QAM to IP for wired video, they might also need a better DVR because Charter's current DVR sucks compared to Dish' s Hopper, DirecTV's Genie, or Comcast's X1. Even my local cable company has a whole home DVR. Charter got rid of theirs! It isn't like a combined Sprint and Charter will be able to bully people into getting wireless like Charter does with cable and Rogers can do with cable and wireless up in the frozen North. Rogers has one less national competitor for one. Only way Masa can replicate that is for DT to take over Sprint and with Masa playing backseat driver while Legere and Hottges trying to negotiate something with Comcast or Charter.

 

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

There's a lot of synergies between a cable company and a wireless company. Strand mounted small cells and WiFi is one. Backhaul and fronthaul for another. Integration of fixed and mobile telephony. With cord cutters, a chance to capture some of the cord cutting crowd by offering them OTT choices. A way to pressure content providers to offer ala carte channels.

Edited by bigsnake49

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's a lot of synergies between a cable company and a wireless company. Strand mounted small cells and WiFi is one. Backhaul and fronthaul for another. Integration of fixed and mobile telephony. With cord cutters, a chance to capture some of the cord cutting crowd by offering them OTT choices. A way to pressure content providers to offer ala carte channels.

Those synergies can only be found in certain areas. Truth is, Sprint doesn't have to be doing a straight up merger with Charter (which doesn't seem to know what they are doing with their tech compared to Comcast) to get advantages. I'd prefer other ways of working with cable.  

Let's not forget that linear cable channels over QAM have never offered less content or less value. Some cable companies still are pumping out analog QAM channels. Comcast over-compresses HD. Pay TV isn't even a good margin business any more because content providers are trying to milk customers out of everything they are worth through the cable companies.

 

Look at the Dodgers channel that Charter can't sell to anyone else. You really want that obligation on Sprint's books? I wouldn't.

 

AT&T and Dish have had cord cutting options but Comcast and Charter? Comcast won't even sell their OTT product that is in beta outside their footprint. Charter is AWOL in that field.

 

If Comcast or someone like that could get to all IP and off QAM for full fiber to the home, I'd reconsider my stance. Right now, not a fan.

 

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Fraydog said:

Those synergies can only be found in certain areas. Truth is, Sprint doesn't have to be doing a straight up merger with Charter (which doesn't seem to know what they are doing with their tech compared to Comcast) to get advantages. I'd prefer other ways of working with cable.

Let's not forget that linear cable channels over QAM have never offered less content or less value. Some cable companies still are pumping out analog QAM channels. Comcast over-compresses HD. Pay TV isn't even a good margin business any more because content providers are trying to milk customers out of everything they are worth through the cable companies.

Look at the Dodgers channel that Charter can't sell to anyone else. You really want that obligation on Sprint's books? I wouldn't.

AT&T and Dish have had cord cutting options but Comcast and Charter? Comcast won't even sell their OTT product outside their footprint.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
 

I get it, cable has basically been operating like it is still the 90s. But the great conflict between content providers and cable providers is coming. All cable has to do is to increase the bandwidth available to the cable modem so that people can stream different channels over the internet and hopefully from the cables cos own video servers. Something like Apple does with AppleTV. Apple takes a percentage off the top with no risk. The risk lies with the content providers. Heck they can partner with Apple or Roku or Amazon or Netflix. Provide access to content over wireless or cable. 

 

Edited by bigsnake49
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I get it, cable has basically been operating like it is still the 90s. But the great conflict between content providers and cable providers is coming. All cable has to do is to increase the bandwidth available to the cable modem so that people can stream different channels over the internet and hopefully from the cables cos own video servers. Something like Apple does with AppleTV. Apple takes a percentage off the top with no risk. The risk lies with the content providers. Heck they can partner with Apple or Roku or Amazon or Netflix. Provide access to content over wireless or cable. 

 

Shentel sees it your way for their cable company. They prefer over the top as they call it.

 

Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Fraydog said:

Some cable companies still are pumping out analog QAM channels.

All QAM -- whether wired or wireless -- is analog RF.  But the information it carries is digital.  There are no analog QAM cable channels.

AJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The merger talks are dead. I guess now Legere will go back to his childish ways to mock Sprint. I am pretty sure these two companies were having talks for a long time.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-sprint-corp-m-a-t-mobile-us/sprint-and-t-mobile-end-merger-negotiations-idUSKBN1D40RY

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Merger officially cancelled.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The merger talks are dead. I guess now Legere will go back to his childish ways to mock Sprint. I am pretty sure these two companies were having talks for a long time.
 
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-sprint-corp-m-a-t-mobile-us/sprint-and-t-mobile-end-merger-negotiations-idUSKBN1D40RY
 

Maybe Sprint and SoftBank will go pedal to the metal. Get serious about competing and make some game changing moves. The Sprint network has improved dramatically since 2010.
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what’s next? What’s plan B? To me for this not work is a telling story within itself. Son really sees something with Sprint to where he wanted more favorable terms. SB quarterly call is Monday and hopefully we get some news on the next steps with Sprint. I can only imagine the stock price Monday.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RIP Sprint, etc. Okay maybe not that bad but I still don't see a future of growth for Sprint unless they partner with Dish/Others  like ATT and direct TV have done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be truly great to see Son just crap all over TMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, my belief why this termination in the merger plans, despite whatever Sprint and T-Mobile say about "mutual terms", is the real issue had less to do about that and more to do with regulatory approval. Surely there was a strong possibility the deal would have been approved by regulators in this pro-business political administrative environment, but I think both companies considered the possibility of having to give up alot of valuable spectrum in the process, due to the immense amount of additional spectrum the combined entity would have had in contrast comparison with AT&T and Verizon.

I even went through a short time where I though maybe the spectrum differences wouldn't matter so much to regulators, until I got to thinking about non-competitive issues such as governmental connections to AT&T and Verizon, and how much of a disadvantage this merger would be to them in regards to spectrum. I was going to include my figuration in my earlier post here about what I believe might happen with the merger to get approval based on spectrum and what the combined company could do with that, but I wanted to end that post as it got quite long.

I'll mention it here now for what its worth, despite the merger being cancelled. I believe T-Mobile and Sprint would have fought to keep band 41 as is, which likely would mean losing low-band and mid-band spectrum. My thought is if they managed to then go after Dish, as I think eventually would have been considered, the combined companies would have to give up all mid-band spectrum, other than two bands of which through negotiations with other carries arranging spectrum swapping/selling and regulatory approval, the combined company might have ended up with national 20x20 in the 1900mhz, along with Dish's AWS-4, then giving away all low-band spectrum, other than the 600mhz band, trading in areas with less of it so to form a national 20x20 600mhz.

That would have given the combined company, say band 41 were to be divided evenly between down and up, 100mhz of download spectrum and 100mhz of upload spectrum. That still is quite a spectrum advantage over AT&T and Verizon. Again, I believe this was an issue that doesn't appear to be talked about in the tech media covering this. Its also a major reason why I think T-Mobile would get a much better regulatory deal with Dish without having to give up much spectrum, along with a fairly quick approval. Since AT&T got Directv under the Obama administration, T-Mobile getting Dish under the Trump Administration should be a breeze. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×