Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

[dkyeager]

Part of the attraction of the deal for T-Mobile is all the Sprint tax losses.  I am not sure Sprint could afford its share of a much larger network.

Sprint was dancing with so many potential partners before.  Perhaps they have one with less favorable terms.  Hopefully it is someone who will spend the money needed to make them successful. Don't rule out Dish playing the spoiler again -- that is what chewed up most of Softbank's improvement money for Sprint.

[tyroned3222]

Part of the attraction of the deal for T-Mobile is all the Sprint tax losses.  I am not sure Sprint could afford its share of a much larger network.
Sprint was dancing with so many potential partners before.  Perhaps they have one with less favorable terms.  Hopefully it is someone who will spend the money needed to make them successful. Don't rule out Dish playing the spoiler again -- that is what chewed up most of Softbank's improvement money for Sprint.

Just one more year of a 5-6 billion dollar investment would makes sprint network just that much better


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Thomas L.]

I still don't understand why, if the Sprint and T-Mobile merger falls through, they don't do what Bell and Telus (number 2 and 3 providers in Canada) did 10 years ago when they needed to build a GSM-compliant HSPA+ network after they decided to give up on CDMA and wanted to catch up with Rogers (#1 Canadian provider) which went with GSM and then HSPA+ from the start. The two stayed separate companies but agreed to build a joint HSPA+ network because they knew that neither one could do it alone and build a network quickly enough with wide enough coverage in a competitive way.

Sprint and T-Mobile could develop a 5G network equipment and spectrum sharing agreement, pursue their own marketing and business strategies, but share a 5G network infrastructure.  It seems to me like it's false to say they have to merge to pursue a shared network. There are more nuanced agreements that could be formed.

[dkyeager]

1 hour ago, Thomas L. said:

I still don't understand why, if the Sprint and T-Mobile merger falls through, they don't do what Bell and Telus (number 2 and 3 providers in Canada) did 10 years ago when they needed to build a GSM-compliant HSPA+ network after they decided to give up on CDMA and wanted to catch up with Rogers (#1 Canadian provider) which went with GSM and then HSPA+ from the start. The two stayed separate companies but agreed to build a joint HSPA+ network because they knew that neither one could do it alone and build a network quickly enough with wide enough coverage in a competitive way.

Sprint and T-Mobile could develop a 5G network equipment and spectrum sharing agreement, pursue their own marketing and business strategies, but share a 5G network infrastructure.  It seems to me like it's false to say they have to merge to pursue a shared network. There are more nuanced agreements that could be formed.

Being a conglomerate, perhaps Softbank is looking for and exit strategy or looking for ways to be able to invest more money.  They are hamstrung the way it is currently structured.

[danlodish345]

Being a conglomerate, perhaps Softbank is looking for and exit strategy or looking for ways to be able to invest more money.  They are hamstrung the way it is currently structured.

So the two companies merging will give SoftBank an exit strategy?

Sent from my LM-Q610(FGN) using Tapatalk

[dkyeager]

Just now, danlodish345 said:

So the two companies merging will give SoftBank an exit strategy?

Sent from my LM-Q610(FGN) using Tapatalk
 

They could sell or buy shares over time, although it is likely restrictions are in place for a period of time.

 

[Thomas L.]

22 hours ago, dkyeager said:

Being a conglomerate, perhaps Softbank is looking for and exit strategy or looking for ways to be able to invest more money.  They are hamstrung the way it is currently structured.

I agree, in a way that was my point. The claims of Sprint going belly-up if they aren't able to merge are hyperbole, it will just be most profitable for both sides. There are definitely other ways forward that will keep both companies viable, Softbank in particular just wants to be rid of Sprint. 

[RedSpark]

7 hours ago, Thomas L. said:

Softbank in particular just wants to be rid of Sprint. 

It's hard to believe it's come to this, but you're absolutely right.

Part of me wants this merger to fail just so SoftBank is stuck with Sprint on its ledger. Sprint finally got its house in order, but SoftBank starved Sprint of essential capex for years in the process. All of those network plans that Marcelo and Masa spoke of were complete vaporware.

Now Sprint has to do a traditional network build as the market analysts always said, and if this merger fails, it will need to do it on its own. Because of SoftBank's decision to have Sprint sit out the 600 MHz auction, SoftBank actually put its own asset in the unenviable position of having to build a 5G network without the propagation (and economic) advantages of low band spectrum should the merger fail.

[chamb]

1 hour ago, RedSpark said:

  Because of SoftBank's decision to have Sprint sit out the 600 MHz auction, SoftBank actually put its own asset in the unenviable position of having to build a 5G network without the propagation (and economic) advantages of low band spectrum should the merger fail.

But T-Mobile is not in a good position for 5G either if the merger fails. They do not have the 2500 that is going to be top dog soon.

T-Mobile has the low band, but not the wide fast spectrum. If the merger fails, the two need to work together and they both will have something good.  Allow T-mobile to saturate with the low bands especially in Rural Areas and Sprint to install 2500 where appropriate.

Then cooperate and share.

[dro1984]

15 hours ago, chamb said:

But T-Mobile is not in a good position for 5G either if the merger fails. They do not have the 2500 that is going to be top dog soon.

T-Mobile has the low band, but not the wide fast spectrum. If the merger fails, the two need to work together and they both will have something good.  Allow T-mobile to saturate with the low bands especially in Rural Areas and Sprint to install 2500 where appropriate.

Then cooperate and share.

That's a great thought, but where is Sprint going to get the capex for that?   Softbank won't give any funding.   Sprint has financed itself to the brink and has to refinance it's existing loans.   T-Mobile won't hand over a fist of money.     IDK.... great idea, but I don't see it happening.   And no offense... but if you give Sprint the money, and leave it up to their own management... will it get done and 100%??   Ummm... not too... sure... about.. that...  ...  it's a catch 22.    It's why I want them sold and run by someone else.   

Edited April 1, 2019 by dro1984

[S4GRU]

17 hours ago, RedSpark said:

Part of me wants this merger to fail just so SoftBank is stuck with Sprint on its ledger. Sprint finally got its house in order, but SoftBank starved Sprint of essential capex for years in the process. All of those network plans that Marcelo and Masa spoke of were complete vaporware.

I wouldn't say SoftBank starved Sprint of capex.  They just never went out and borrowed more money for them.  Which was always the hope.  That SoftBank would bring a huge capital infusion.  That did not happen as we know now.  But they did clean up the house which also makes Sprint a healthier company to compete and even borrow money.

Robert

[tyroned3222]

I wouldn't say SoftBank starved Sprint of capex.  They just never went out and borrowed more money for them.  Which was always the hope.  That SoftBank would bring a huge capital infusion.  That did not happen as we know now.  But they did clean up the house which also makes Sprint a healthier company to compete and even borrow money.
Robert

I agree, and now Braxton carter is leaving TMO. So, I think softbank just need to hang in their and it’s investment If any will be worth it. Now that numbers are looking better SoftBank should be able to convince banks/investors that it’s ok for them to invest money into sprint


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bigsnake49]

1 hour ago, dro1984 said:

That's a great thought, but where is Sprint going to get the capex for that?   Softbank won't give any funding.   Sprint has financed itself to the brink and has to refinance it's existing loans.   T-Mobile won't hand over a fist of money.     IDK.... great idea, but I don't see it happening.   And no offense... but if you give Sprint the money, and leave it up to their own management... will it get done and 100%??   Ummm... not too... sure... about.. that...  ...  it's a catch 22.    It's why I want them sold and run by someone else.   

No, I want the network run by an independent company in which both T-mobile and Sprint have shares. The members of that company should come mostly from T-Mobile.

[dro1984]

I'll go along with that.    But something has to change, big time!   I don't care what it takes.  Buyout (someone with a different plan/attitude than Softbank), merger whatever.   

[Terrell352]

I'll go along with that.    But something has to change, big time!   I don't care what it takes.  Buyout (someone with a different plan/attitude than Softbank), merger whatever.   

I still believe that dish and Sprint together makes sense. Not to mention more lowband for Sprint that they could use for 5G

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[RedSpark]

2 hours ago, S4GRU said:

I wouldn't say SoftBank starved Sprint of capex.  They just never went out and borrowed more money for them.  Which was always the hope.  That SoftBank would bring a huge capital infusion.  That did not happen as we know now.  But they did clean up the house which also makes Sprint a healthier company to compete and even borrow money.

Robert

SoftBank stopped the bleeding, but it’s failure to follow on with a substantial capital infusion left Sprint listless, and unable to effectively compete post acquisition. This was so irresponsible and stupid. As a Sprint shareholder made me really frustrated.

I believe that SoftBank’s failure to do so actually weakened and devalued Sprint to such a degree that Sprint wound up becoming the minority merger partner, with T-Mobile in charge. Masa couldn’t have had this in mind at the outset or during his previous merger overtures. At no point did I hear Masa or Marcelo say anything about being the minority partner.

Sprint’s cleanup process could have happened under Hesse, and I don’t believe he would have gone along with Capital being held back. That’s why he was shown the door in my opinion. Marcelo was handpicked to be a yes man to Masa.... and here we are.

 

[tyroned3222]

SoftBank stopped the bleeding, but it’s failure to follow on with a substantial capital infusion left Sprint listless, and unable to effectively compete post acquisition. This was so irresponsible and stupid. As a Sprint shareholder made me really frustrated.
I believe that SoftBank’s failure to do so actually weakened and devalued Sprint to such a degree that Sprint wound up becoming the minority merger partner, with T-Mobile in charge. Masa couldn’t have had this in mind at the outset or during his previous merger overtures. At no point did I hear Masa or Marcelo say anything about being the minority partner.
Sprint’s cleanup process could have happened under Hesse, and I don’t believe he would have gone along with Capital being held back. That’s why he was shown the door in my opinion. Marcelo was handpicked to be a yes man to Masa.... and here we are.
 

A buddy said this to me : it’s simple, the merger was always in mind and it’s harder to mergers 2 companies that are doing well. So, one company has to show significant loses for the merger to make sense. Masa, wanted them to merge from the very beginning


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[belusnecropolis]

I remember in merger attempt one how Masa was touting the ability to offer a fixed wireless solution. Many of us with a minor curiosity to a need for that solution have figured out how to make that happen on either operator in past, current and future form. Now they are dangling this carrot as only possible via a merger. A lot of this merger and ensuing dramedy has to do with how we perceive carriers and what they are capable of, where the market is and how we will benefit, but only with the permissions of our current conglomerates getting their way. Do not play by their rules.

They are trying to socialize the costs of not merging. One example is losing a 5g race to China, if we look beyond this line into how, where and what a market needs for rising consumption we will get 5g either way. We are told nationwide coverage won't happen; when we don't have nationwide coverage of the last gen yet, but we are seeing massive investment this year in making the legs of LTE read like it's title; long term evolution. 

They tell us we need 1GHz wide bands in millimeter wave or it will simply not be possible to meet these needs. When many of us see capacity growing in low, mid and the formerly high but now reclassified as mid bands like 2GHz to 4.2GHz. Why? millimeter wave reaches a block and building that costs trillions. Reality is crushing the narrative, some days the only way to win is to not play the game. We will get these things either way. Be it a state enforced roll out in the east used to monitor and control society at a lower cost, or a market demand for capacity in the west based on pushing carriers into areas to get new customers and to meet that capacity. Either place has a need and a way to get there within the current framework.

At this point in our observation of wireless evolution, it is tough to subscribe to the current despairing pleas of folks in private jets, as has been the case for years. If this sounds like a lot of doublespeak look to the speakers and then between their words.

[Brad The Beast]

What are the odds of Sprint buying some or all of Dish's lowband? Since they aren't using it for anything and probably won't. 

[belusnecropolis]

7 minutes ago, Brad The Beast said:

What are the odds of Sprint buying some or all of Dish's lowband? Since they aren't using it for anything and probably won't. 

Probably the same as them participating in the current Spectrum auctions in MMwave. It is all about the will to execute and the cash to back it up. They make a great case that they will apply neither of these. It is fun speculation though.

[Brad The Beast]

6 minutes ago, belusnecropolis said:

Probably the same as them participating in the current Spectrum auctions in MMwave. It is all about the will to execute and the cash to back it up. They make a great case that they will apply neither of these. It is fun speculation though.

Any thoughts on purchasing some of Dish's 600MHz for the first 9 5G cities? It would improve coverage where a lot of the people and money are. They would be able to get a minimum 10x10 in 7 out of the 9 cities. Then purchase some more low band when they go to deploy 5G in more locations? 

[Terrell352]

Any thoughts on purchasing some of Dish's 600MHz for the first 9 5G cities? It would improve coverage where a lot of the people and money are. They would be able to get a minimum 10x10 in 7 out of the 9 cities. Then purchase some more low band when they go to deploy 5G in more locations? 

They would likely not waste money deploying in the first 5G cities but rather rural territories to expand coverage.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Brad The Beast]

2 minutes ago, Terrell352 said:

They would likely not waste money deploying in the first 5G cities but rather rural territories to expand coverage.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 

But the cities are where the money is. Wouldn't it be more wise to make coverage as bulletproof as possible where the money is?

[Terrell352]

But the cities are where the money is. Wouldn't it be more wise to make coverage as bulletproof as possible where the money is?

These are markets where sprint has so many towers and small cells that low band is not needed nearly as much. You wouldn’t be on low band very often where as rural you would be on lowband a lot and provide decent speeds. Sprint can not be the only carrier without rural support. Roaming costs more money than building out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Brad The Beast]

2 minutes ago, Terrell352 said:

These are markets where sprint has so many towers and small cells that low band is not needed nearly as much. You wouldn’t be on low band very often where as rural you would be on lowband a lot and provide decent speeds. Sprint can not be the only carrier without rural support. Roaming costs more money than building out.

Ok. That makes sense. What do you think of a phased rural low band deployment?