Submitted via IRC for SoyCow1984
Mobile carriers face skeptical regulators in attempt to obtain merger approval.
T-Mobile US and Sprint are facing potential rejection of their proposed merger at the US Department of Justice.
DOJ [(US Department of Justice)] staffers "have told T-Mobile US and Sprint that their planned merger is unlikely to be approved as currently structured," The Wall Street Journal reported today, citing people familiar with the matter.
"In a meeting earlier this month, Justice Department staff members laid out their concerns with the all-stock deal and questioned the companies' arguments that the combination would produce important efficiencies for the merged firm," the Journal wrote.
[...] T-Mobile CEO John Legere denied the Journal report, writing on Twitter that "[t]he premise of this story... is simply untrue. Out of respect for the process, we have no further comment." Sprint Executive Chairman Marcelo Claure also claimed that the "article is not accurate," adding that Sprint "continue[s] to have discussions with regulators about our proposed merger."
[...] The Justice Department's antitrust division is reviewing the merger and could file a lawsuit in federal court in an attempt to block the deal. Success isn't guaranteed, a fact the DOJ was reminded of when a US District Court judge allowed AT&T to buy Time Warner despite DOJ opposition.
The DOJ could also approve the merger with conditions, but that would require agreement with T-Mobile and Sprint on what those conditions would be.
[...] T-Mobile has spent at least $195,000 at President Trump's hotel in Washington, DC while lobbying for Trump administration approval of the merger.
[...] The T-Mobile/Sprint deal would reduce the number of nationwide mobile carriers from four to three, limiting customer choice across the United States. T-Mobile and Sprint are smaller players in a market led by Verizon and AT&T, but T-Mobile has surged in recent years by offering more customer-friendly deals than the two biggest carriers.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Immerman on Friday April 19 2019, @01:11AM
Even if there's no immediate difference (which I doubt - abuse tends to get more extreme the fewer "competitors" there are colluding), we're still currently only three mergers away from a total monopoly. Allow this one, and we're only two away.
Not to mention, every little bit of precident against allowing mega-mergers is a good thing. We've let things get way too consolidated already, but turning the tide has to start somewhere.