Jump to content

Will Sprint seek PCS divestitures from the Tmobile/MetroPCS merger


ericdabbs

Recommended Posts

I was wondering if you guys think that Sprint will try to pursue PCS divestitures from the Tmobile/MetroPCS merger to bolster those 20 MHz markets that are in dire needs of more PCS spectrum?

 

I guess the only way this will happen is if the FCC would have to force Tmobile to divest PCS spectrum if that was a condition for approval. I would like to see make an attempt at PCS divesitures if possible since it appears that going forward AWS spectrum will be Tmobile's bread and butter spectrum for LTE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This seems very unlikely, considering Sprint's current plan to purchase Clearwire will give them more than double the spectrum T-Mobile / MetroPCS will have.

 

If anything, it might be a requirement on Sprint to divest some of their Clearwire EBS spectrum to other players. (This seems very unlikely to me too, but if any divestitures were to occur, I'd expect them in the Sprint/Clear deal before the T-Mobile/MetroPCS deal)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This seems very unlikely, considering Sprint's current plan to purchase Clearwire will give them more than double the spectrum T-Mobile / MetroPCS will have.

 

If anything, it might be a requirement on Sprint to divest some of their Clearwire EBS spectrum to other players. (This seems very unlikely to me too, but if any divestitures were to occur, I'd expect them in the Sprint/Clear deal before the T-Mobile/MetroPCS deal)

 

I agree that because of the CLWR deal, it is unlikely Sprint would have a foot to stand on in arguing they should divest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point, thanks to picking up USCC spectrum in Chicago and the surrounding areas, Sprint has less to gain from MetroPCS spectrum. The number of markets where they're under 30MHz of PCS...and could be pushed to 30+ by a MetroPCS divestiture...are pretty low. Though if T_Mobile decided that it wanted to sell some PCS I'm sure Sprint would love to buy it.

 

Buying Leap/CricKet on the other hand...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If anything, it might be a requirement on Sprint to divest some of their Clearwire EBS spectrum to other players.

 

Sprint-Clearwire could not really divest EBS spectrum because it is not actually licensed any EBS spectrum. Rather, it only leases EBS spectrum from educational institutions.

 

If Sprint-Clearwire were forced to terminate those leases, that would financially penalize the educational institutions more than anything else. So, I would expect an FCC consent order to require Sprint-Clearwire to allow other carriers the first right to negotiate with EBS lessors as those leases come up for renewal. And my guess is that few other carriers would step up, such that Sprint-Clearwire would be able to renew most EBS leases that it desired.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point, thanks to picking up USCC spectrum in Chicago and the surrounding areas, Sprint has less to gain from MetroPCS spectrum. The number of markets where they're under 30MHz of PCS...and could be pushed to 30+ by a MetroPCS divestiture...are pretty low. Though if T_Mobile decided that it wanted to sell some PCS I'm sure Sprint would love to buy it.

 

Buying Leap/CricKet on the other hand...

 

Buying Leap for its PCS spectrum is something I think Sprint should still consider in the future since they do have some valuable PCS spectrum in their C block. Sprint already has 3 deals on the table waiting for FCC approval so they have enough on their plate for now. Executing Network Vision and complete ASAP should be their number 1 priority to stay with the competition.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Buying Leap for its PCS spectrum is something I think Sprint should still consider in the future since they do have some valuable PCS spectrum in their C block. Sprint already has 3 deals on the table waiting for FCC approval so they have enough on their plate for now. Executing Network Vision and complete ASAP should be their number 1 priority to stay with the competition.

 

I have long advocated that Sprint buy Metro and Leap for their PCS/AWS spectrum, trading AWS to T-Mobile and AT&T. I think that Sprint will make a bid for T-Mobile/Metro. I don't know whether it will come before or after both deals close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Naw I think sprint isn't gonna bite on this deal because they want the multiple deals they have going through this year to go through. Plus they already has their hands full

 

Sent from my Sprint Galaxy Nexus rockin 4.2.1 using Tapatalk 2

 

Yeah, maybe the old Sprint would. The new Sprint with Masayoshi will be a lot more aggressive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see Sprint seeking for any divestitures from NewCo(T-Mo/Metro). The Sprint/Clearwire/SoftBank/USCC deal combo-pak is already moving it's way through our regulatory system. Not only would it look a bit greedy to go after NewCo for divestitures, but it may only bring another party that would get in the their way from getting these deals done.

 

As for what may come after these deals are completed, I don't see any budding relationship with Sp-ank-wire(don't google that) and NewCo for at least a few years.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They may try to buy it just to keep Sprint out; that's the great thing about the Revenge of Ma Bell... They get a government-protected monopoly, including rights to use *my* land to run their lines, then they get to lobby state legislatures to make it illegal to compete or run municipal broadband, then sign non-compete deals amongst each other. Then they can use their massive market power and cash to put the squeeze on potential competitors. If anyone tries to interfere they just get shouted down for messing with the "free" market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They may try to buy it just to keep Sprint out; that's the great thing about the Revenge of Ma Bell... They get a government-protected monopoly, including rights to use *my* land to run their lines, then they get to lobby state legislatures to make it illegal to compete or run municipal broadband, then sign non-compete deals amongst each other. Then they can use their massive market power and cash to put the squeeze on potential competitors. If anyone tries to interfere they just get shouted down for messing with the "free" market.

 

Frightening...that's why no matter how evil the cable companies are, I'm glad they exist to offer some form of competition.

 

Verizon on the FiOS side is bending over backwards for customers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • https://www.androidauthority.com/t-mobile-sales-tactics-employee-interview-3460125/   From the "Uncarrier" to Carrier....
    • Another SCP beta is rolling out now, with some bugfixes as usual but also some fun new options to test: Non-standalone 5G-NR cells can now display Site Notes. This feature works in the same manner as how neighbor cell notes are displayed, requiring a PCI and your device's location. This option is enabled by default. As is the case with neighbor cell notes, you cannot edit NSA site notes directly unless there is an NCI being reported (which I have never seen); it uses the previously recorded standalone log entries. Like neighbor notes, if a cell has been previously logged but there is no note, you will see the distance information only.   Logging cells that are not reporting a valid PLMN is now possible. This option is disabled by default, but if you enable it along with two other options (log sites with missing GCI/NCI and to log sites with missing TAC), you should begin logging most NSA 5G-NR cells. A PCI is needed at a minimum, which is not always reported depending on your device and network factors. ("Sites" will be renamed to "cells" on the Preferences menu in the next update.)   Users can enable an option to display LTE cells above 5G-NR cells in the app if they choose to do so. This option is disabled by default. Should help improve the readability of your screen if you have NSA 5G-NR cells constantly appearing/disappearing. Please give these options a try and let me know if you notice any issues.. thanks!
    • Not yet. We probably won't see one submitted until construction on the new building is substantially complete. 
    • Yes, that is where the site used to be. All the antennas were removed. I hope they add a new site soon. Have any permits been submitted for a new site?
    • Looks like there's a slightly taller building going up next door to where the decommissioned site used to be. Taking a look at StreetView, T-Mobile likely decommissioned the site because the east facing sector would blocked by the new building. If I had to guess, T-Mobile has already agreed to move to the roof of the new building and is just waiting for it to be completed to install the site there. What they should've done is just rearrange the sectors in the meantime but it seems like T-Mobile just bit the bullet and decommed the tower in the short term. — — — — — A permit was issued for a Sprint conversion at 150 Prospect Park West, finally filling in what is T-Mobile's largest coverage gap in Park Slope. Verizon is collocated on that building and AT&T has placed small cells along Prospect Park West to fill in coverage there while T-Mobile struggled using two sites, one at Grand Army Plaza at the far north and another at Bartel Pritchard Square to the far south.  
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...