SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the better-to-ask-for-forgiveness-than-permission dept.
T-Mobile, Sprint took a risk by finishing merger without Calif. approval:
California state regulators are trying to hold up the T-Mobile/Sprint merger, saying the companies don't yet have approval to combine their operations in the state.
T-Mobile and Sprint announced yesterday that the merger is a done deal and that the two companies are now one. But while the companies had almost all approvals from government authorities, they have not yet gotten the expected approval from the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). The CPUC is scheduled to vote on the merger approval and related conditions on April 16.
In response to yesterday's T-Mobile/Sprint announcement, the CPUC issued a ruling that says the companies "shall not begin merger of their California operations until after the CPUC issues a final decision on the pending applications."
We contacted T-Mobile today about yesterday's CPUC ruling and will update this article if we get a response.
The state Public Utilities Code prevents companies from merging their California operations without approval, the CPUC order said. "Both Joint Applicants, T-Mobile and Sprint, have California subsidiaries that are public utility telephone corporations under state law, and subject to the jurisdiction of this agency. The merger of the companies' operations in California is therefore subject to CPUC approval," the order said.
But T-Mobile and Sprint argue that the CPUC does not have jurisdiction over wireless transactions and that the merger can be completed without the agency's approval. T-Mobile and Sprint previously received approval from the Federal Communications Commission and Department of Justice, and they defeated a lawsuit filed by California and other states that were trying to block the deal.
Regardless of the outcome at CPUC, the merger is happening. But the dispute between the companies and the Golden State could result in litigation and affect whether the state is able to impose conditions on the deal. T-Mobile claimed that some of CPUC's planned conditions are "practically impossible" and "unfair and discriminatory to T-Mobile vs our competitors."
T-Mobile warned investors that there is a "risk of litigation or regulatory actions" arising "from T-Mobile's consummation of the business combination during the pendency of the California Public Utility Commission's review of the business combination."
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday April 03 2020, @05:07PM (1 child)
Good point.
We also don't want 12 electric companies, 12 natural gas companies, 12 water companies, 12 sewer companies, etc.
It is amusing how AT&T having been broken up managed to re consolidate itself like the evil T 1000 in Terminator 2.
After the breakup, we got cheap long distance. Competition in the 80s. Remember the Sprint pin drop commercial.
Now AT&T (but also other monopolist cell operators) at every bit as evil as AT&T originally was. Remember when you could not connect a third party phone or answering machine to AT&T's system? It wasn't to ensure technical compatibility and quality -- that is a solvable problem. It was so that AT&T could charge outrageously high prices on its own inferior answering machines. Remember the explosion of phones and answering machines that happened once the monopoly was broken? Phones everywhere. Every shape, size, style, color, quality level and price.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 04 2020, @08:26PM
> Every shape, size, style, color, quality level and price.
And yet... you can't buy a phone that just sends texts, does basic GPS and has battery life of a week. Instead every phone animates and fizzles and vibrates every 25 seconds while popping up adverts and trying to map wifi points.