Between the Lines

Larry Dignan, Andrew Nusca and Rachel King

Can Sprint win over regulators in AT&T, T-Mobile merger?

By | March 20, 2011, 7:31pm PDT

Sprint has frequently been the underdog in the wireless industry and bargain pricing, early moves to 4G and improving customer service have been its weapons of choice.

When the new week kicks off Sprint may want to employ a few lobbyist and lawyer types. Sprint is faced with an uphill battle as AT&T on Sunday moved to buy T-Mobile from Deutsche Telekom for $39 billion. Now the company has three options:

  • Fight to derail a merger that will make it a distant No. 3.
  • Watch AT&T and T-Mobile become the largest wireless carrier and play in a landscape dominated by two companies (Verizon Wireless is the other).
  • Break up a deal and somehow merge with T-Mobile (at a minimum of $39 billion).

For now, Sprint is going with Door No. 1. In a statement, Sprint spokesman John Taylor said:

The combination of AT&T and T-Mobile USA, if approved by the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Federal Communications Commission (FCC), would alter dramatically the structure of the communications industry. AT&T and Verizon are already by far the largest wireless providers. A combined AT&T and T-Mobile would be almost three times the size of Sprint, the third largest wireless competitor. If approved, the merger would result in a wireless industry dominated overwhelmingly by two vertically-integrated companies that control almost 80% of the US wireless post-paid market, as well as the availability and price of key inputs such as backhaul and access needed by other wireless companies to compete. The DOJ and the FCC must decide if this transaction is in the best interest of consumers and the US economy overall, and determine if innovation and robust competition would be impacted adversely and by this dramatic change in the structure of the industry.

It’s hard to argue with Sprint’s take. AT&T and T-Mobile would change the dynamics in the industry. AT&T is arguing that bigger is better and the beefed up company can bring mobile broadband to more of the country.

Look for this back-and-forth to continue for a while.

Related:

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

Topics

Larry Dignan is Editor in Chief of ZDNet and SmartPlanet as well as Editorial Director of ZDNet's sister site TechRepublic.

Disclosure

Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan has nothing to disclose. He doesn’t hold investments in the technology companies he covers.

Biography

Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan is Editor in Chief of ZDNet and SmartPlanet as well as Editorial Director of ZDNet's sister site TechRepublic. He was most recently Executive Editor of News and Blogs at ZDNet. Prior to that he was executive news editor at eWeek and news editor at Baseline. He also served as the East Coast news editor and finance editor at CNET News.com. Larry has covered the technology and financial services industry since 1995, publishing articles in WallStreetWeek.com, Inter@ctive Week, The New York Times, and Financial Planning magazine. He's a graduate of the Columbia School of Journalism and the University of Delaware.

For daily updates, follow Larry on Twitter.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
29
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Can Sprint win over regulators in AT&T, T-Mobile merger?
mert50 22nd Mar 2011
@condelirios sprint is now adding 10.00 data charge per month if you upgrade to any smart phone , blackberry, htc, palm...etc even if you already have one of these phones on your account. This is per phone.
0 Votes
+ -
I think option #1 makes sense. If they can't succeed in that they would ultimately be swallowed by Big Red. Didn't we go through the process on Ma Bell few decades back and broke that up completely. Now it seems finally there will be two carriers running on different technologies and so that they could loot the consumer more easily.
0 Votes
+ -
@Rama.NET
Well AT&T was Southwestern Bell and Verizon was Bell Atlantic.
0 Votes
+ -
beat your competitor in the marketplace, get the state to beat him for you.
0 Votes
+ -
@frgough@... I'm sure there are some of the many, many, many people involved in this that think this way, frgough. But what you have to remember with this comment and your comment below is that creating market and consumer freedom is not ever as clear-cut as "They got huge and can buy everyone else out so they must be the best". It's a false assumption that fails to take into account multiple variables like infrastructure and undue influence. If government is to guarantee our freedoms as citizens it must also keep an eye on unchecked power and influence from corporations. Capitalism runs on the engine of acquisition, and while that is a powerful and impressive engine, it has been proven time and again that a throttle is needed to cut it back now and then. I actually have no opinion about the deal in question here, as I don't know all the facts, but I do know that keeping the engine running smoothly means not revving it all the damn time.
I have not seen this on the Net, but here's a thought that may indicate difficulties of this deal going through:

In the mid-seventies the Department of Justice filed an antitrust lawsuit against AT&T. The litigation dragged on until 1982-84, at which point AT&T agreed to settle and divest itself (sell off) parts of the Company into what was then called the "Baby Bells."

That entire situation was a fianancial disaster for AT&T, having lost more than two-thirds its value and losing huge sums on failed ventures.

Anyway, I have to assume that at the DOJ there remains lawyers who worked in the litigation against the old AT&T. I also assume those lawyers are in more powerful positions than held back in the eighties.

I submit that those govt. lawyers, who presumably worked really hard on the AT&T antitrust litigation, are not inclined to allow AT&T to do anything that smacks of antitrust behavior. Plus the DOJ's computers are chocked full of evidence and pleadings ready to be resurrected in any lawsuit should AT&T go through with this deal.

Just thinking out loud. If I was AT&T I would not like knowing that there are eager DOJ lawyers ready to go on AT&T antitrust, part deux, or at the minimum to prevent AT&T repeating antitrust behavior.
@SanFranciscoCA

That sounds good. It even sounds logical. But ATT has a long-term view that is without rival in the business world. After fighting the antitrust suit for several years, they realized it was a battle the could not win, so they agreed to a breakup that was like throwing the rabbit into the briar patch. Since then they've expanded into areas they were previously unable to, and they've been pulling most of the pieces together they lost in the breakup. We played right into their hands. The breakup was 30 years ago. There may be some DOJ lawyers still around that were involved, but they'll get steamrolled. I expect this deal will go through, with only token resistance at the regulatory level.
0 Votes
+ -
a better run company than their competitors. And that's bad.
@R.L. Parson

I can see why you believe as you do, you might be right, but I s-o-o-o hope you are wrong!

This merger will be a disaster for the consumer and the end of innovation in the mobile phone industry.
@SanFranciscoCA

I would not assume that such lawyers are "in more powerful positions" now. The atmosphere under the Bush Administration must have been unbearable for them.
0 Votes
+ -
Still wet behind the ears
Robert Hahn 21st Mar 2011
Hey folks, look at this. Here's a guy who thinks that the same Justice Department lawyers who won the AT&T antitrust suit during the Reagan Administration were somehow dispirited by the Bush Administration. Only one explanation for such idiocy: public school indoctrination ("Democrats good. Republicans bad.") not yet leavened by any real-world experience.
0 Votes
+ -
Let me clarify what I said. When AT&T was broken up it was able to excise unprofitable or low margin businesses and accelerate investing in future businesses and technologies. As the lower margin businesses became stronger under the RBOCs, both AT&T and Verizon were able to take advantage of or successfully lobby for less strict regulations that allowed them to start snatching up the RBOCs, as well as other companies and businesses, to eventually become the beasts they are now.

DOJ will throw some wrenches into the works, but AT&T will be able to easily put those worries to rest. DOJ is not toothless because it became dispirited. It became toothless, in this case, due to regulatory change through government agencies and congress.

I'm glad there are people who think this can be stopped. I hope they're right. I'm just not optimistic. The trend by government regulators over the last 20 years has been to allow industry consolidation into larger and larger behemoths. This has been occurring under both Republican and Democratic administrations and/or congresses.
0 Votes
+ -
India Payroll
monicabrownom9 Updated - 20th Mar 2011
Hello,I am Monica.I agree with you.
____________
Monica.
India Payroll
0 Votes
+ -
No they cant
JT82 21st Mar 2011
There is a laundry list of reasons why this would be bad for consumers; At&T has a shady past with Android and has never treated it as an equal, AT&T has different 3G frequencies so cash-strapped consumers will have to buy a new device to be compatible, they throttle Android and allow the iPhone to run full tilt.
Help join the fight to keep this merger dead - http://www.facebook.com/saveourdroid
0 Votes
+ -
This is a terrible deal for consumers...
condelirios 21st Mar 2011
AT&T will impose tiny bandwidth caps and stop all mobile internet progress by gouging its customers. Oh wait.. it already is!

Come on People ! Wake up and switch to Sprint.
0 Votes
+ -
because that's the best way to get lots of customers so you can make enough money to pay $39 billion to buy a competitor.
@frgough@...
Very little of this will be paid in cash. Much of it will be paid by diluting stock for the previous owners of the company.

Additionally, Monopoly and Oligopoly are bad for consumers, face it.
@frgough@...Please! All of the iPhone customers on AT&T alone funded this transaction.
@frgough@... agreed. If AT&T has 39 BILLION dollars sitting around, then they've been charging us too much.
If they don't have $39 Billion dollars sitting around, then eventually they Will be charging us too much. AT&T is already introducing bandwidth caps. And I got an email from them today announcing changes in their terms of service for their ISP customers. It's not a real pretty email.
In the end, We customers are the ones paying for this merger... which AT&T wants so it can get even richer.
But I really doubt that this merger will be very beneficial to AT&T customers. Indeed, recent articles I've read indicated that T-Mobile had the fastest 4G network going, and the best overall prices with their voice and data plans. I believe that will change after the merger.
It's a bad thing.
0 Votes
+ -
@condelirios You're joking right? Go look at what Verizon's doing. That's right: Imposing tiny bandwidth caps. Merger or not, in 5 years time, the idea of "unlimited data" and "unlimited text" will be dead regardless of carrier. It's simply not cost effective for ANY of them to allow absolutely unlimited access to OTA data without imposing some kind of caps or restrictions. The big two have already started this party - AT&T & Verizon - and it's only a matter of time before Sprint (including Sprint dba Virgin Mobile) and T-Mobile do the same.
@condelirios sprint is now adding 10.00 data charge per month if you upgrade to any smart phone , blackberry, htc, palm...etc even if you already have one of these phones on your account. This is per phone.
What will they call the combined company?
* AT&T-Mobile?
* AT&TT?
* TT&T?
* AT&T-Mo?
Oh, the possibilities!
My RANT: I switched to Sprint to escape AT&T! To Sprint, just keep hammering on your very much appreciated EXCELLENT customer service & perhaps the masses will come to their senses.
@mwilson9999 "Excellent customer service"? That's a laugh. I have had nothing but trouble dealing with Sprint. It's actually EASIER to do everything through Best Buy Mobile than it is to deal with a Sprint store or a Sprint CSR on the phone.
0 Votes
+ -
I can't see any credible future for Sprint, than to bend over and wait for Verizon to give them one, to make it a 2 player game - AT&T-Mobile v's Sprint/Verizon.

With Sprint/T-Mobile running their incompatible technologies, T-Mobile won't be interested, unless Sprint are wanting to get out of the dead-end globally irrelevant CDMA market, and that will mean a price premium - doubt Sprint could even raise the initial $39 bn.
0 Votes
+ -
The first thing Sprint may want to do is shine more light on AT&T's recent messages suggesting to subscribers who tether. The ones that basically say - we know what you are doing and what apps you are running. Now pay up or else. If I was at the DOJ or FCC, or was a state attorney general for that matter, I would want to know a little more about how AT&T is monitoring the apps its subscribers use and how they use them. I might be concerned about allowing a company that does this to become the largest player in an already very uncompetitive US mobile market.
0 Votes
+ -
Sprint had a golden opportunity to bring T-Mobile into its Clear Wimax (4G) fold - this would have involved a cash infusion from T-Mobile, and could have sped the WiMAx rollout. It might have given AT&T some pause in looking at a merger, if T-Mobile had already committed to WiMAx and had a good number of phones out there.

I'd like to see something along the lines of Option 3, if Option 1 does not work. On the down side, Sprint would be looking at similar incompatibility issues that it had with the Nextel merger, this time involving CDMA/GSM instead of CDMA/iDEN, and the added expense of again at least temporarily running two networks. After the last experience with that, I don't think Sprint would relish the idea of going through a similar nightmare. On the other hand, I'd much rather see a Sprint/T-Mobile merger than later seeing Sprint get swallowed up by (ick) Verizon.

I was originally a Nextel customer, and have become *extremely* happy with Sprint, its pricing, coverage, its customer service (and my current phone, an EVO 4G).
0 Votes
+ -
Since Sprint and Verizon are CDMA, perhaps they should merge and use Sprint's pricing schemes. Think about (for those of you gung-ho over it) having an iPhone with an unlimited voice/text/data plan for $70 a month. Sounds good, doesn't it?
I have Sprint, and love them, except for one small problem - the selection of phones. The choices are all too little, too late. There's no WP7 phones (I don't trust Google and by association Android).

Now, if someone were to make a Motorola Atrix-style phone system, on Sprint, and running WP7 - I'd find the money to be one of the first in line. Otherwise, I'll stick with my already outdated when brand new Samsung Exclaim M-550.
@reziol Sprint just got a semi-decent WinPho7 phone, but it has the unfortunate (typical) HTC drawback of having an inferior battery (1250mAh vs. the more standard 1500mAh).

Regardless, if Verizon buys Sprint, they're not going to keep Sprint's pricing. That's pretty much guaranteed. Verizon, already, is going to make tons of cash going to the tiered data plans, and if you increase their subscriber base to current+Sprint, there's no way they could realistically afford to offer EVERYONE cheap, unlimited, access without data usage spiking to the point it grinds their network to a crawl.
0 Votes
+ -
Sprint deserves a better repution.
stonyb31@... 22nd Mar 2011
As someone who has sold services for att. tmobile, and Sprint. My experience is that no-one provides better service, better rates than S. Come on, all you can eat for $99. or limited voice, and unlimited everything else for $69. With an tt/tmobile merger, I believe these plans, our rates will be threatned, and possibly network sharing! I pity the customer service this new MegaMart of wireless will bring.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix