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.
Related Stories
Judge approves $26 billion merger of T-Mobile and Sprint:
Shares of Sprint soared Tuesday after a U.S. District judge ruled in favor of its $26 billion deal to merge with T-Mobile.
The stock was up 75% Tuesday morning. It had risen after hours Monday after The Wall Street Journal reported the judge was expected to rule in favor of the deal. Shares of T-Mobile were up 10%.
The ruling clears one of the final hurdles for the deal, which still can't close until the California Public Utilities Commission approves the transaction. Tuesday's ruling also culminates a years-long courtship between Sprint and T-Mobile, which have made multiple attempts over the years to merge, only to abandon their plans fearing regulatory scrutiny.
Attorneys general from New York, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, Wisconsin, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Virginia and D.C. originally brought the lawsuit to block the deal following approval from the Justice Department of Federal Communications Commission. The states had argued that combining the No. 3 and No. 4 U.S. carriers would limit competition and result in higher prices for consumers. The companies had argued their merger would help them compete against top players AT&T and Verizon and advance efforts to build a nationwide 5G network.
In his decision filed Tuesday, Judge Victor Marrero wrote, "The resulting stalemate leaves the Court lacking sufficiently impartial and objective ground on which to rely in basing a sound forecast of the likely competitive effects of a merger."
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Thursday April 18 2019, @10:10PM (1 child)
Either way, that ship has sailed. You stop these two huge corporations from merging and it will likely have negligible impact on the whole, there's too few choices problem. The company was broken up, but was allowed to rejoin together into a few huge players. Sure, it's good to have options. I'm just not sure it will it be better to have AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, and Sprint. Instead of AT&T, Verizon, and T-Sprint. There'd be a major problem, if there was only one company. Beyond that, who's to say 3 will be any better or worse than 4 or even 2.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(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.