AT&T: Is the T-Mobile effort worth the hassle?

Summary: For AT&T, T-Mobile's spectrum outweighs the distractions from an ongoing battle with regulators over a $39 billion acquisition.

AT&T pulled its proposed merger with T-Mobile from the Federal Communications Commission, said it will take a $4 billion charge and reportedly will aim to divest network assets in a bid to get the Justice Department to somehow go for a deal.

It has been a busy few days for AT&T, which is still aiming to complete a T-Mobile acquisition that increasingly looks like a $39 billion long shot.

Analysts think this deal is cooked. Stifel Nicolaus analyst Christopher King said in a research note that AT&T's moves of late signal that the company is aiming to start settlement talks with the government. Nevertheless, King said a deal is unlikely:

We view the odds of reaching an agreeable settlement as quite long, as the gov't. would be looking for some type of deal that would maintain four reasonably strong national wireless carriers. An AT&T deal with T-Mobile, even assuming significant divestitures, would -- at best -- create a weakened fourth national carrier, even assuming a complete acquisition of the divested assets by a non-wireless carrier (Google, CenturyLink, etc.).

Macquarie analyst Kevin Smithen said:

We expect that the final outcome may not be known until August or September of 2012, when we expect T will have to pay T-Mo its full breakup fee of $3 billion plus spectrum and better roaming rates.

The big question here is whether this AT&T-T-Mobile song and dance with the government is worth the effort. On the surface, the deal looks like a huge distraction for AT&T. Underneath, however, it's clear that AT&T has to push forward. It needs the spectrum that T-Mobile has. The Bloomberg report gets to the point:

AT&T’s proposal is likely to include the divestiture of a higher share of customers and lower percentage of spectrum, said the person familiar with the matter. The company needs more capacity to serve users as it adds customers and more of them adopt data-intensive smartphones.

For AT&T, the spectrum outweighs a gaudier customer count. T-Mobile subscribers will fall due to the iPhone launch at Sprint, AT&T and Verizon Wireless. AT&T is in it for the spectrum. T-Mobile's spectrum is valuable and the plan B for the carrier may be to partner with a cable company.

AT&T general counsel Wayne Watts outlined the spectrum issues back in March. Watts said:

For different reasons both AT&T and T-Mobile are facing impending spectrum shortages in major markets. AT&T has been at the leading edge of mobile data growth on our network as a result of supporting more smart phones, more tablets and more eReaders than anyone else in the country. This has created an urgent need — an ongoing need for significantly more spectrum to support this explosive demand. T-Mobile is also limited in its spectrum capacity, so much so that T-Mobile has no spectrum to build out an LTE network.

In other words, that wireless spectrum shortage means that AT&T can't completely punt on the T-Mobile deal. The carrier seems more than willing to push the T-Mobile acquisition uphill and hope time runs out on the Obama administration and its regulators. Next up is more positioning ahead of a February courtroom showdown with the DOJ.

More:

Topics: Mobility, AT&T

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

24 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • RE: AT&T: Is the T-Mobile effort worth the hassle?

    Good grief . What does AT&T pay you to right this ? Because AT&T needs more spectrum they should be allowed to take over a company with better rates and customer service . Yeah AT&T's network is lame as well . I guess that is another reason for allowing them to takeover competition .
    The_Todd
    • RE: AT&T: Is the T-Mobile effort worth the hassle?

      @The_Todd

      The only part of this article questioning the government's decision is a quote from AT&Ts general counsel.

      Not sure why you find it offensive that someone might report on why AT&T is so interested in the deal.
      SlithyTove
      • RE: AT&T: Is the T-Mobile effort worth the hassle?

        @SlithyTove

        The entire article is written from the position that AT&T can only grow high speed services by deploying them on fresh spectrum rather than actually replacing their relics with new equipment. The position that AT&T can only increase their bandwidth by increasing their spectrum is completely overblown.
        tkejlboom
    • What do you mean take over? AT&T couldn't buy T-mobile unless

      T-mobile wanted to sell. Governments are the only entities that can confiscate your business or property without your consent.
      baggins_z
      • RE: AT&T: Is the T-Mobile effort worth the hassle?

        @baggins_z

        Spectrum belongs to the people baggin_z . Americans shouldn't have that spectrum used against them in the form of less choice and higher wireless rates.....unless ofcourse you would prefer the telco industry to be highly regulated . I mean it would already be fully unionized if this deal did go though . Why not ?

        @ SilthyTove

        The way I read this piece it made it sound like AT&T needs TMO's spectrum or it won't be able to compete . Simply not true . They will be fine for the foreseeable future . There will be many auctions ahead and they also will still get the spectrum they purchased for Qualcomm .
        The_Todd
  • Wouldn't this need for more spectrum be a reason to block this merger?

    Allowing AT&T to obtain more of a scarce resource doesn't seem like a win for the consumer.
    ye
    • In the end, isn't that between AT&T and T-mobile? AT&T can't by T-mobile

      unless T-mobile is willing to sell. If it bothers you so much, feel free to raise the capital needed to put in a competing bid. Oh. Wait. You'd rather have the state determine who can own what. Let me amend that. You'd rather have the state telling OTHER people what they can and can't own.
      baggins_z
      • RE: AT&T: Is the T-Mobile effort worth the hassle?

        @baggins_z

        You're tilting at windmills. I took these ninnies to task a few months ago on this issue and they had a meltdown. They think that the government should be able to stop a consentual merger because "AT&T has bad customer service." These people have no problem getting the government involved in every aspect of their lives, at least until their ox is gored.
        aaronc0027
      • RE: AT&T: Is the T-Mobile effort worth the hassle?

        @baggins_z

        For your simplistic argument to hold any weight AT&T would have to quit relying on spectrum that is held by the American people .....That and huge government contracts that AT&T gets..... because it is in bed with our government .
        The_Todd
      • RE: AT&T: Is the T-Mobile effort worth the hassle?

        @The_Todd

        +1
        tkejlboom
  • RE: AT&T: Is the T-Mobile effort worth the hassle?

    I assume there's some deep dark reason that AT&T couldn't simply rent the spectrum from T-Mobile, or do some kind of partnership? No, just greed.

    AT&T (aka Southwestern Bell) takes the long term view, especially when it comes to controlling the customer and limiting competition. Yes, spectrum is important, but in the end, eliminating competition and driving up rates are the true goal.
    terry flores
    • RE: AT&T: Is the T-Mobile effort worth the hassle?

      @terry flores TRUE
      sackbut
    • Right. Greedy people just love to spend $39 billion dollars. Sheesh. You

      guys are like a push button doll. Press the button that says "corporation," and out pops the word "greed" from your speaker.
      baggins_z
      • RE: AT&T: Is the T-Mobile effort worth the hassle?

        @baggins_z - to me, "greed" is bad when it involves anti-competitive tactics, cornering the market, and outright fraud. AT&T has a well-documented history of hindering innovation to protect their investments in aging infrastructure and technology. The essence of a free market economy is the ability to compete and offer the customer a reason to buy your product, not force them by limiting others' ability to compete.
        terry flores
      • RE: AT&T: Is the T-Mobile effort worth the hassle?

        @baggins_z

        Yeah, that is because corporation = greed! If it walks like a greedy duck...
        michaellashinsky@...
      • RE: AT&T: Is the T-Mobile effort worth the hassle?

        @baggins_z

        wtf, you can't be for real can you?

        Doesn't raise any alarms to you that they have $39 billion but claim they don't have the resources to improve their existing network? How about that T-mobile currently lists $46 billion is assets, including $15 billion is spectrum alone? So yeah, not only do you fail to get that greed isn't about what you took last year but about the continuing need to keep taking more, $39 billion is a low ball offer.
        tkejlboom
  • RE: AT&T: Is the T-Mobile effort worth the hassle?

    Out of curiosity, what's stopping T-Mobile from getting the Iphone?
    duplai@...
    • RE: AT&T: Is the T-Mobile effort worth the hassle?

      @duplai@... in one word "APPLE"
      vl1969
    • RE: AT&T: Is the T-Mobile effort worth the hassle?

      @duplai@...

      Apple requires a multi year agreement for that phone . Naturally with TMO being for sale they are not able to give one .
      The_Todd
  • RE: AT&T: Is the T-Mobile effort worth the hassle?

    ATT wants the spectrum off the market, to increase demand. They can't use it with current phones. More capacity comes from putting in more cells, decreasing individual cell coverage.
    dickdavies