Jump to content

Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread


Recommended Posts

I don't see a standalone Sprint as a major competitor to the big two.  A merger with Dish or someone else would probably take some significant time.  The big winners would be the Verizon and ATT.  Not sure that is best for the consumer.  Just my opinion.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sprint’s recent FCC Filing is enough to get you depressed... Holy cow they’re in trouble.

https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10415297968006/Sprint%20Standalone%20Ex%20Parte%20-%20REDACTED%20-%20FINAL%20-%204.15.2019%20%5BAS-FILED%5D.pdf

There’s so much in this it’s frankly overwhelming, but here are these nuggets:

“Footnote 55: Sprint chose not to participate in the 600 MHz auction in 2016 partly due to lack of financial resources and the need to spend cash on more immediate network needs, and partly because at the time it expected to successfully densify its network using monopoles, which would have reduced the need for low band spectrum.”

Page 33: ”Churn-bomb”

Page 38: “Liquidity Wall”

If you think they’re telling the truth here, Sprint is in deep trouble...

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RedSpark said:

Sprint’s recent FCC Filing is enough to get you depressed... Holy cow they’re in trouble.

https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10415297968006/Sprint%20Standalone%20Ex%20Parte%20-%20REDACTED%20-%20FINAL%20-%204.15.2019%20%5BAS-FILED%5D.pdf

There’s so much in this it’s frankly overwhelming, but here are these nuggets:

“Footnote 55: Sprint chose not to participate in the 600 MHz auction in 2016 partly due to lack of financial resources and the need to spend cash on more immediate network needs, and partly because at the time it expected to successfully densify its network using monopoles, which would have reduced the need for low band spectrum.”

Page 33: ”Churn-bomb”

Page 38: “Liquidity Wall”

If you think they’re telling the truth here, Sprint is in deep trouble...

I like to think one of our many shitposts was quoted [BEGIN HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL] [END HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL]then [REDACTED IN FULL] to help scare the regulamuhtaters.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RedSpark said:

Sprint’s recent FCC Filing is enough to get you depressed... Holy cow they’re in trouble.

https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10415297968006/Sprint%20Standalone%20Ex%20Parte%20-%20REDACTED%20-%20FINAL%20-%204.15.2019%20%5BAS-FILED%5D.pdf

There’s so much in this it’s frankly overwhelming, but here are these nuggets:

“Footnote 55: Sprint chose not to participate in the 600 MHz auction in 2016 partly due to lack of financial resources and the need to spend cash on more immediate network needs, and partly because at the time it expected to successfully densify its network using monopoles, which would have reduced the need for low band spectrum.”

Page 33: ”Churn-bomb”

Page 38: “Liquidity Wall”

If you think they’re telling the truth here, Sprint is in deep trouble...

if credit market dries up it can only get worse.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bucdenny said:

if credit market dries up it can only get worse.  

That is the key question.  Sprint tells one story to the regulators another for the quarterly reports.  Those loaning money at what interest rates with what collateral are the key indicators of where the truth lies.  The wireless providers are all highly leveraged, but Sprint is even more so.  Sprint was in much worse shape before Marcello.  Creative financing and cost cutting saved it.  But being so highly leveraged means doing nothing is likely not an option. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, RedSpark said:

So they bet the fate of the company on a non-traditional monopole strategy which failed, and now they’re stuck with doing a traditional build but lacking the actual spectrum to do that traditional build in an economical way. It’s like they didn’t anticipate a downside... or perhaps it was “we’ll merge our way out of trouble.”

No wonder there was such confidence that 600 MHz was “Spectrum of the past”. The room was probably full of people who were afraid to say no or bad idea to Masa’s network plan... and then it came crashing down to earth. This is up there with the Nextel acquisition in terms of strategic blunders, I’m sorry.

I am a victim of that strategy. Sprint elected to ditch their traditional macro near my condo and instead moved their voice to a monopoly and moved LTE band 41 to couple of mini macros. LTE coverage suffered. They did send me a Magic Box but that is probably not cheap.

Sprint cannot stand on its own anymore. They need a partner that will infuse some cash into the operation. Maybe a three way partnership between the cable cos, Dish and Sprint. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder what grounds the DOJ has for rejecting the merger. It cannot be on anti-trust grounds. I also wonder if Sprint and T-Mobile will take the DOJ to court if it is rejected. Last time the DOJ went to court on a merger they lost (AT&T, DirectTV)

Edited by bigsnake49
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bigsnake49 said:

When is Sprint's quarterly earnings presentation?

Hasn't been announced yet, but late April or early May.

Last year's Fiscal 4Q2017 call was held on May 2, 2018: https://investors.sprint.com/news-and-events/past-events/event-details/2018/Fiscal-4Q17-Earnings-Call/default.aspx

Just before that was this on April 29, 2018: https://investors.sprint.com/news-and-events/past-events/event-details/2018/Investor-and-Media-Conference-Call/default.aspx

Background: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20180429005059/en/T-Mobile-Sprint-CEOs-Hold-Call-Investors-Media

Edited by RedSpark
Added more detail
Link to comment
Share on other sites


it’s sad to say, but SoftBank is looking for a bailout by any means necessary.
In a note to investors, New Street Research analyst Pierre Ferragu estimated that Sprint would need a $20 billion capital injection if the merger doesn’t go through..
In a filing with the Federal Communications Commission on Monday, Sprint said it suffered from a “huge debt load” of $40 billion and cited an analyst’s report saying Sprint “could restructure their balance sheet through a Chapter 11 process” in U.S. bankruptcy court.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, tyroned3222 said:


it’s sad to say, but SoftBank is looking for a bailout by any means necessary.
In a note to investors, New Street Research analyst Pierre Ferragu estimated that Sprint would need a $20 billion capital injection if the merger doesn’t go through..
In a filing with the Federal Communications Commission on Monday, Sprint said it suffered from a “huge debt load” of $40 billion and cited an analyst’s report saying Sprint “could restructure their balance sheet through a Chapter 11 process” in U.S. bankruptcy court.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

SoftBank doesn't need a bailout. That's the ridiculous thing. They have plenty of money on hand.... They're just not giving it to Sprint. It's pathetic.

Masa put Sprint in this position by trying to do a monopole build on the cheap as opposed to a traditional network build... and when that floundered because of regulatory issues that should have always been anticipated as a risk but weren't for some reason, Sprint had no viable backup plan because it had passed on the 600 MHz Spectrum it needed for a traditional network build. Marcelo went along with this because he was a "yes man" to Masa and wanted to ride his coat tails to SoftBank. The Former CFO even used the term "Spectrum of the past" to refer to 600 MHz because there was so much misplaced confidence about this strategy. Interestingly, Guenther got out... Perhaps he had a feeling this wouldn't work or he disagreed with the overall plan.... which is probably why Hesse got the boot by Masa as well.

Would Chapter 11 do Sprint some good at this point? If it's about to go off the rails and be relegated to carrier purgatory due to SoftBank's unwillingness to inject any capital, then perhaps it would. What a shame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SoftBank doesn't need a bailout. That's the ridiculous thing. They have plenty of money on hand.... They're just not giving it to Sprint. It's pathetic.
Masa put Sprint in this position by trying to do a monopole build on the cheap as opposed to a traditional network build... and when that floundered because of regulatory issues that should have always been anticipated as a risk but weren't for some reason, Sprint had no viable backup plan because it had passed on the 600 MHz Spectrum it needed for a traditional network build. Marcelo went along with this because he was a "yes man" to Masa and wanted to ride his coat tails to SoftBank. The Former CFO even used the term "Spectrum of the past" to refer to 600 MHz because there was so much misplaced confidence about this strategy. Interestingly, Guenther got out... Perhaps he had a feeling this wouldn't work or he disagreed with the overall plan.... which is probably why Hesse got the boot by Masa as well.
Would Chapter 11 do Sprint some good at this point? If it's about to go off the rails and be relegated to carrier purgatory due to SoftBank's unwillingness to inject any capital, then perhaps it would. What a shame.

As I recall .. SoftBanks banks are not allowing them to pour in anymore money in to sprint


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, tyroned3222 said:


As I recall .. SoftBanks banks are not allowing them to pour in anymore money in to sprint


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Time for SoftBank to find some new banks... or it could find itself with a bankrupt asset.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Sprint does indeed files chapter 11, what happens at that point besides restructuring of their balance sheet? Will we still prices go up, etc?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Sprint does indeed files chapter 11, what happens at that point besides restructuring of their balance sheet? Will we still prices go up, etc?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

With their spectrum (2.5) sprint could have the last laugh if they are serious and get away from their failing mentality. They could have a premium 5G network, but it would come at a cost to the consumer


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With their spectrum (2.5) sprint could have the last laugh if they are serious and get away from their failing mentality. They could have a premium 5G network, but it would come at a cost to the consumer

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

That makes sense. It’s so sad because there’s beyond ALOT of potential with Sprint and the assets they have but there’s no one at the front of the company who is serious about letting Sprint excel. As long as there’s no one in charge who genuinely cares for Sprint the other carriers have nothing to worry about. Make no

Mistake, they all know the damage Sprint can do.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mr.Nuke said:

Yes. I do recall that as well.

However, this Filing appears to be a much more bleak assessment of Sprint than before. Although we can't see the numbers/info behind the highly confidential redactions, it seems apparent from the visible language that explains these numbers/info in the Filing that Sprint is in deeper trouble than it was before, and it's only getting worse as time goes on. How would Sprint otherwise spin this empirical data that it's putting forward to the FCC?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. I do recall that as well.

However, this Filing appears to be a much more bleak assessment of Sprint than before. Although we can't see the numbers/info behind the highly confidential redactions, it seems apparent from the visible language that explains these numbers/info in the Filing that Sprint is in deeper trouble than it was before, and it's only getting worse as time goes on. How would Sprint otherwise spin this empirical data that it's putting forward to the FCC?

If the merger does fail I am interested in seeing where Sprint actually does go not where people online think/ Claim they will go.

 

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, tyroned3222 said:


As I recall .. SoftBanks banks are not allowing them to pour in anymore money in to sprint


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They never injected any money anyways. All Masa did was that scheme of putting the spectrum as collateral.

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

    • I assume that any agreement is not perpetual and has an end date. - Trip
    • I think it is likely that T-Mobile will be forced to honor any existing US cellular roaming agreements in those areas as a condition of them taking over the spectrum.  In that case, there would be no improvement of service unless T-Mobile improves the service offering in those areas.
    • My understanding is the MNO carriers are the one who have objected to the use of cell phones in commercial planes.  I understand that it ties down too many cell phones at once, thus I can not see this changing. However this depends on how it is structured. Use of a different plmn for satellite service might make it possible for planes only to connect with satellite. Private pilots have been using cellphones in planes for many decades. Far fewer phones at a lower altitude.
    • On Reddit, someone asked (skeptically) if the US Cellular buyout would result in better service.  I'd been pondering this very issue, and decided to cross-post my response here: I've been pondering the question in the title and I've come to the conclusion that the answer is that it's possible. Hear me out. Unlike some of the small carriers that work exclusively with one larger carrier, all three major carriers roam on US Cellular today in at least some areas, so far as I know. If that network ceases to exist, then the carriers would presumably want to recover those areas of lost service by building out natively. Thus, people in those areas who may only have service from US Cellular or from US Cellular and one other may gain competition from other carriers backfilling that loss. How likely is it? I'm not sure. But it's definitely feasible. Most notably, AT&T did their big roaming deal with US Cellular in support of FirstNet in places where they lacked native coverage. They can't just lose a huge chunk of coverage whole still making FirstNet happy; I suspect they'll have to build out and recover at least some of that area, if not most of it. So it'd be indirect, but I could imagine it. - Trip
    • Historically, T-Mobile has been the only carrier contracting with Crown Castle Solutions, at least in Brooklyn. I did a quick count of the ~35 nodes currently marked as "installed" and everything mapped appears to be T-Mobile. However, they have a macro sector pointed directly at this site and seem to continue relying on the older-style DAS nodes. Additionally, there's another Crown Castle Solutions node approved for construction just around the corner, well within range of their macro. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Verizon using a new vendor for their mmWave build, especially since the macro site directly behind this node lacks mmWave/CBRS deployment (limited to LTE plus C-Band). However, opting for a multi-carrier solution here seems unlikely unless another carrier has actually joined the build. This node is equidistant (about five blocks) between two AT&T macro sites, and there are no oDAS nodes deployed nearby. Although I'm not currently mapping AT&T, based on CellMapper, it appears to be right on cell edge for both sites. Regardless, it appears that whoever is deploying is planning for a significant build. There are eight Crown Castle Solutions nodes approved for construction in a 12-block by 2-block area.
  • Recently Browsing

×
×
  • Create New...