Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Friday April 03 2020, @01:58PM   Printer-friendly
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."


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Friday April 03 2020, @02:19PM (12 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Friday April 03 2020, @02:19PM (#978699) Journal

    I hate to cheer California on, but the telcos need to be reminded that they are subject to REGULATION. The telcos don't get to pick and choose which regulators they want to listen to. And, the telcos can't appoint an Ajit Pai to every regulatory agency in the country.

    Maybe California should just tell the marriage made in hell that they cannot operate in California. Kick 'em out.

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 03 2020, @02:34PM (3 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 03 2020, @02:34PM (#978710)

      This is all well and good balancing the role of State and Federal but you also have to remember that "Trump Replaced White House Pandemic-Response Team With Jared Kushner".

      • (Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 03 2020, @02:37PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 03 2020, @02:37PM (#978712)

        Yeah, but Jared is really smart. Did you know that he ties his own shoes, AND his own tie?

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 03 2020, @04:34PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 03 2020, @04:34PM (#978783)

          What, he doesn't use tape on his tie?
          No, I can't accept that(!!!), must be fake news.

      • (Score: 2) by epitaxial on Friday April 03 2020, @04:24PM

        by epitaxial (3165) on Friday April 03 2020, @04:24PM (#978773)

        Other states have to pick up the slack because Uncle Sam is too fat and lazy to do his job. Like New York shutting down Jim Bakker's colloidal silver scam because the feds sure don't have a clue.

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by DannyB on Friday April 03 2020, @03:44PM (4 children)

      by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Friday April 03 2020, @03:44PM (#978749) Journal

      <no-sarcasm>
      I do not want over regulation. Yet it seems to me that the healthiest economic environment for any product or service is when it is a commodity in a market with healthy competition among plenty of providers. Monopolies are not good for anyone except the monopolist. People in government who encourage and promote monopolies are not working in the public interest, as a public service, and should remember their oath of office.

      My favorite example of commodity and healthy competition (at least in my town): Mexican food restaurants.
      </no-sarcasm>

      Trump promised that if Hillary won we would have a taco truck on every street corner. I want a taco truck on my street coroner!

      --
      People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
      • (Score: 1, Offtopic) by srobert on Friday April 03 2020, @04:42PM (2 children)

        by srobert (4803) on Friday April 03 2020, @04:42PM (#978787)

        " Yet it seems to me that the healthiest economic environment for any product or service is when it is a commodity in a market with healthy competition among plenty of providers."

        hange the word "any" to "most" and I mostly agree. In some cases, the public can benefit from "economies of scale" that sometimes can only be achieved in monopoly. When AT&T was a monopoly, back when the technology only permitted phone-level voice communications over hard wires, it was necessary. We couldn't have 12 competing phone companies, each stringing wires everywhere. But new tech made possible competition in telephone services. So it was safe to end the monopoly and bring the benefits of competition to the telephone markets.
        But there's still Verizon, AT&T, etc. so I don't think a Sprint/T-mobile merger constitutes the creation of a monopoly in California, or nationally. And it may improve service to the customers of the two companies, thus providing a more competitive environment with the other carriers.

        • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday April 03 2020, @05:07PM (1 child)

          by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Friday April 03 2020, @05:07PM (#978795) Journal

          We couldn't have 12 competing phone companies, each stringing wires everywhere.

          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.

          --
          People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 04 2020, @08:26PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 04 2020, @08:26PM (#979128)

            > 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.

      • (Score: 2) by captain normal on Friday April 03 2020, @05:43PM

        by captain normal (2205) on Friday April 03 2020, @05:43PM (#978810)

        s/
        Wow, you have a coroner on every street where you live? Must be a lot of gang violence going on there, or Covid 19 is really out of control in your city.

        --
        When life isn't going right, go left.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 03 2020, @04:25PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 03 2020, @04:25PM (#978775)

      The bottom line is sprint is pretty much finished without tmobile. That was clear years ago. They bet on the wrong tech and it nuked their company. They do not have the freq's to compete with AT&T and Verizon. They wanted that sweet sweet rent money from that tech. Everyone else picked LTE.

    • (Score: 3, Touché) by legont on Saturday April 04 2020, @12:40AM (1 child)

      by legont (4179) on Saturday April 04 2020, @12:40AM (#978919)

      Maybe California should just tell the marriage made in hell that they cannot operate in California. Kick 'em out.

      Well, perhaps others could follow T-Mobile and call california's bluff out?
      Say, car companies could stop complying, followed by food and pretty much all other companies (re: "caused cancer" notice)

      --
      "Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
      • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday April 04 2020, @01:50AM

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday April 04 2020, @01:50AM (#978929) Journal

        Bluff? I don't know - maybe. Let's remember that Cal has it's own police forces, to enforce the laws it passes. Not to mention, Cal has it's own militia, more commonly known as the National Guard. If the ruling class in Cal decided to shut down T-Mobile, there really isn't a damned thing that T-Mobile can do about it, other than to whine in court. Of course, by the time T-Mobile got it's day in court, most of the damage would be done. T-Mobile stock value would be about nil.

  • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 03 2020, @03:51PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 03 2020, @03:51PM (#978755)

    ...Then let TMobile and Sprint sue them when they pull power to every tower they own for acting in open defiance of the law.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 04 2020, @08:29PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 04 2020, @08:29PM (#979129)

      Where's "compelled-under-threat-of-violence-guy" when you need him? He was born to reply to this post.

(1)