Sprint happy with AT&T's decision to stop proposed T-Mobile purchase
With the deal off the table, T-Mobile still could be a suitor for a carrier with a much smaller footprint than AT&T. AT&T has put T-Mobile in play and you can bet that there are some M&A bankers who have been playing dialing for dollars with some of the smaller regional carriers to gauge interest in a T-Mobile acquisition. Of course, most of the regional carriers don't have $39 billion to spend, but if you take a company with deep pockets dying to get into the mobile carrier business, another bid could be possible. Dish Networks recently said that if the deal with AT&T fell through, it would be interested in partnering with T-Mobile. While being a partner isn't the same as owning another company lock, stock and barrel, it is hard to believe that some large tech related company somewhere would not be interested. Even a company in the entertainment business like Disney might be open to a deal. And what about Apple or Google? Both have a ton of money and might be open to some vertical integration.
1. ILikeBubbles posted on 20 Dec 2011, 01:48 5
google. oh for the love of god let it be google.
as much as i really enjoy my grandfathered unlimited data on my family share plan... someday i'm going to have to get my own plan and when that day comes i PRAY to whatever's holy that Google will have a provider at that time.
3. Droid_X_Doug posted on 20 Dec 2011, 02:20 4
Dan Hesse is probably the happiest person in the U.S. cellular business today. Well, maybe the T-Mo employees who were going to be let go if the merger had happened, might be happier.
One guess who on PA is the most pissed that the merger is over with....
4. mctcm posted on 20 Dec 2011, 02:29 3
Sprint isnt buying T-mobile.
They have no money. They are so leveraged, they're barely viable themselves
5. belovedson posted on 20 Dec 2011, 04:01 2
obviously you didn't read the article or the comments. it makes no mention that sprint wants to buy
7. mctcm posted on 20 Dec 2011, 06:04 0
i read the article. they imply t-"T-Mobile still could be a suitor for a carrier with a much smaller footprint than AT&T"
i.e., sprint, because -- who else is there? following in the typical phonearena chickens**t commentary manner, they imply and make statements in question form.
clearly, you are unable to read between the lines.
8. ardent1 posted on 20 Dec 2011, 06:11 2
First line in the second paragraph made an allusion to Sprint. Even I got the OBVIOUS hint.
Sprint isn't is a bona fide buyer, they haven't been profitable in about 4 years and Clearwire has sucked up a lot of Sprint's limited capital and liquidity. Plus Sprint is on the hook for all those new iPhones it wants to sell.
6. Jeradiah3 posted on 20 Dec 2011, 05:37 5
Smh. Dan Hesse is just stupid!! He didn't want to acquire T-Mobile, but didn't want AT&T to buy then either. He's such a crybaby and I already don't like Sprint because of their billing practices. He so damn nosy and the only GOOD thing Sprint has is their unltd data
Speaking of their data plan......once they switch to LTE, they won't have unltd data anymore which makes him look even more of an AZZ!!
13. audiblenarcotic posted on 20 Dec 2011, 07:40 5
I think you sir are the crybaby for griping about issues with Sprint that are from 5 years ago. If you actually took the time to look at the Sprint of today I think you would find that not only are there no more issues with Sprints billing system but that they offer custoemr service above most of the other carriers out there. Sprint in most instances is willing to do more for thier customers then the top two carriers. All of this is a direct product of having Dan Hesse at the helm. Next time you decide you wanna spew off at the mouth about things that are no longer relavent I suggest that you actually take the time to so some research on where things stand today.
As far as your LTE theory... that is speculation. There has never been a single thing said by Sprint that they will do this. It's no wonder you think that the merger would have been a good thing. You clearly believe things that don't exist in the world of reality that the rest of us are living in. Keep sipping on the kool aid.
16. Jeradiah3 posted on 20 Dec 2011, 09:24 1
For you to say that Im a crybaby is BS!!! I had sprint for 5 years and i left them because of their billing. They force you on a spending limit and they gave me alot of BS when it came to my bill. how is it that i pay my bill one day and its still cut off even thought it was paid in full. I know that im not the only one!
As far as Sprint is concerned, they should have merged with T-mobile and called it a day because AT&T and Verizon wouldnt have said anything. Seems to me that Sprint is the REAL crybaby because they were the only company that complained about it like they got their favorite toy taken fom them.
The only marketing value they have is the Unltd Data. but how long will that last because WiMax is slow and outdated compared to LTE from Verizon and now AT&T.
T-mobile wont last another 5 years with the way they are straggling behind the competition and Sprint needs to keep up with the slow "4G" network they already have
17. audiblenarcotic posted on 20 Dec 2011, 10:30 6
"how is it that i pay my bill one day and its still cut off even thought it was paid in full."
Because you waited till the day before your next bill posted to the account to pay your balance and the new palance posted brought you above your spending limit? That would be the only reason for that to happen. Pay your bill on time and don't rack up the next one and you shouldn't have that problem.
As far as spending limits go... I'm fairly certain that all carriers have spending limit programs. They are based on the credit rating of the individual who is applying for service. It also has to do with whether or not you have left a balance with a previous carrier. How is an individuals personal credit rating and history the fault of a carrier?
Sprints reasoning for using WIMAX had to do with the time limit that was placed on them to use the spectrum or forfeit it and LTE wasn't available at the time. Also, again.... Sprint has never once said that they are anything but commited to keeping unlimited data even once LTE begins to roll out so you are just going on speculation. Plus the fact that LTE is suppose to be an easier and cheaper way for carriers to provide voice and data services so it really isn't a reason to cap data usage. Verison and AT&T are really only doing this because they are big players who can and have always seemed to price gouge thier customers more then all the other companies.
Also, Sprint wasn't the only company to complain... just the only one of the national carriers. There were plenty of regional carriers agains this. And why were they the only national carrier to voice opposition... well clearly neither tmo or att will have a bad thing to say and verizon wanted to keep thier nose out of it because they would stand more to lose from any future aquisitions they might want to make if the deal got nixed.
Sprint wasn't really in a viable position to merge with Tmo from a cash perspective. Also, I think they have learned a valuable lesson with merging incompatable technologies from the Nextel merger.
As far as calling you a crybaby, I apologize if I came off too harsh. I was simply stating it to prove a point and my point still stands that...
A. You're complaints are do to with something tied to the invidivuals own credit rating.
B. The issues withSprints billing system are long gone and have been fore anumber of years.
C. You claims about the end of unlimited data and based soley on speculations and not a shred of fact.
18. downphoenix posted on 20 Dec 2011, 11:41 3
there aren't enough thumbs up buttons in this world for the above post.
30. robinrisk posted on 22 Dec 2011, 17:12 1
exactly!!!!! that post was awesome and i believe if he keeps posting that he will be the best commenter on the site!
Concise, with a very good argument.
28. items17070 posted on 20 Dec 2011, 16:37 2
audiblenarcotic, UM,,, if you search phonearena VERY CAREFULLY, it states that sprint is VERY CLEARLY moving to LTE, how blind are you! research before you bitch!
29. audiblenarcotic posted on 22 Dec 2011, 16:28 1
items17070, UM... Did you even bother to read my post before you started talking nonsense? If you actually read it you would realize that I full well acknowledge the fac that Sprint is moving to LTE. Here, I'll help out...
"Sprint has never once said that they are anything but commited to keeping unlimited data even once LTE begins to roll out so you are just going on speculation."
I was simply stating the reason for why they originally went with the WIMAX platform over LTE in the first place. And if you speak with anyone who is actually knowledgable on the subject they will tell you that i'm right.
Next time why don't you actually take the time to read what you try to criticize. Or you can go one step further and do yourself a big favor by closing your account on here before you make yourself look any dumber.
9. arcq12 posted on 20 Dec 2011, 06:18 2
why are you guys even saying that Sprint will acquire T-Mobile? That's bs.. Sprint is currently 6 feet below their debt. They never mentioned or even thought about buying T-Mobile. Sprint is on the right track enhancing their services and coverage.
On the other hand, Sprint is lucky because if the merger went through, they'll go out of business.
11. ardent1 posted on 20 Dec 2011, 06:25 2
If you had listen to Doug_x_droid, you would have believed that ATT would have engaged in a hostile takeover of t-mobile, which is just dumb. People write crazy things without thinking.
10. ardent1 posted on 20 Dec 2011, 06:20 3
10 years from now, history will show Sprint's action of suing ATT was really dumb. All Sprint had to do was play ball, and ATT would have given Sprint much needed sprectrum as a bone.
The US consumers are getting screwed by DT -- DT confirmed they have no desire to invest in Tmobile USA's network and how the $3B fee from ATT only covers about 1 year's worth of tmobile's annual capex spend. Expect tmobile to continue to lose its subscriber base and watch tmobile chase after the no contract market like prepaids.
20. cakvalasc posted on 20 Dec 2011, 12:23 2
Sprint actually has enough spectrum, more than their subscriber base uses.
23. ardent1 posted on 20 Dec 2011, 15:01 0
That doesn't change the fact that ATT would have thrown Sprint a bone when ATT/Tmobile needed to divest certain spectrum.
Look at Sprint's current footprint; it would have had the ability to grown their footprint. That is all I am saying.
31. robinrisk posted on 22 Dec 2011, 17:14 1
why would you like a cent when you have a million dollars?
Sprint has more than enough spectrum to work for the next decade.
The problem is their network and they are fixing it and will be almost done by the next year. Marketing is pretty good, so i believe they will see explosive growth over the neext few years.
12. mike2959 posted on 20 Dec 2011, 07:00 4
Here is a history lesson.
First of all Sprint was VERY interested in purchasing Tmo. Do some research and you can see that. They could not pull it off with their horrible balance sheet. Sprint really is the cry baby of the bunch. Att&t (the bully of the bunch) was the largerst carrier in the U.S. until when? Well the answer to that is Verizon (the Fonz of the bunch) buying Alltel. After that purchase it clearly made Verizon the mobile leader. Stop down playing that. Alltel was the largest regional player. In subscriber base they were right behind TMO. That is also why Verizon hasn't really said crap about the Att&t merger, they just did it 3 years ago themselves! Sprint is finished...and here is why
1)Nextel....spent billions on a dying almost dead technology.
2)Nascar..I love Nascar..but billions also spent here and it's about RETURN ON INVESTMENT.
3)Virgin Mobile...Another investment,, just read the balance sheet on this. Barely making a profit for them.
4)WIMAX..6 billion investment because they want to spend another 1.5 billion on advertising to say the FIRST 4g carrier with the EVO 4g. WIMAX is another investment at the time only 3 other countries in the world were even bothering with. 80% of the world 3 years ago were heading to LTE. Now WIMAX sure looks like a waste, they could have taken the wasted resources of the past 4 years and be the dominating player right now with LTE.
5) Now Sprint has the multi billion dollar deal with LightSquared. This company is a wholesale of LTE. Just announced Lightsquared may run out of money by the 2nd quarter of 2012. Another great investment Dan Hesse.
The writing was on the wall then, and now. Sprint has made bad investment after bad investment. It is just a matter of time.
14. audiblenarcotic posted on 20 Dec 2011, 07:54 4
Mike2959... here are the reasons i think you are wrong... and in list order.
1. Nextel - yes in hindsight this may have been a mistake, but the bleeding has pretty much stopped. The iDen network is almost empty and will be shut down in order to open up more spectrum for Voice and LTE. All the damage that could possibly come from the Nextel merger already has and Sprint is still standing.
2. Nascar - This was a partnership that was made by Nextel before the merger and the return on investment was made up in the first year that this deal was in place. It was a 10 year deal and that left 9 years for it to be a profitable partnership.
3. Virgin Mobile - Sprint currently leads the industry as far as the top 4 carriers are concerned in the realm of prepaid. Granted that this is majority Boost, but VM is contributing as well. Being able to consistantly grow thier prepaid division has allowed Sprint to supliment the post paid carriers that Sprint had lost from the iDen network the last few years. Without prepaid Sprint would be in a much worse situation then the one they are currently in. I might add to that Sprint is definitely heading in the right direction currently.
4. WIMAX - Yes it is going to go away and LTE will take its place. But the reason that Sprint chose WIMAX was because they had aquired the spectrum they are currently using for the WIMAX network through the Nextel merger. There was a time limit on when they had to use this spectrum by or they had to forfiet it. WIMAX was ready... lTE wasn't. Would it have been a better or more profitable decision to simply forfiet the spectrum? I don't think anyone would argue that they should have allowed themselves to lose the spectrum.
5. Lightsquared - This deal was for Sprint to build out the network for lightsquared and then have the rights to use the network. If the deal ends up going through then it will actually be a very profitable venture for Sprint. If it turns out that the deal does not go through then oh well. Sprint doesn't really have any money to lose. Its all tentative at the moment.
Almost all the bad investments made by Sprint were done with Gary Forsee at the helm not Dan Hesse. Please fact check and if you feel that I am in any way wrong then feel free to point it out.
21. cakvalasc posted on 20 Dec 2011, 12:26 0
Also keep in mind on Number 4, the Wimax tech can easily be migrated to LTE without must cost or downtime.
24. ardent1 posted on 20 Dec 2011, 15:08 1
That assumes Clearwire will be a going concern and that Sprint will also be a going concern as well.
Sprint is on its last legs if wants to tap the capital market. Without liquidity, Sprint is toast. Think about this for a minute, Sprint went to the capital market to raise $4 billions in a recent debt offering, and one can argue that some of that monies when to buy additional equity shares in Clearwire (the argument is that money is fungible).
Here's the point, Sprint's debt has sum certain cash interest payments due every 6 months while the returns from the Clearwire equity or other investment in Clearwire is suspect.
15. snowgator posted on 20 Dec 2011, 08:25 1
Simply put, a handful of posters here are missing the point of this story and Dan Hesse's opposition to AT&T buying T-Mobile. Take Sprint's initial talks about T-Mo out of it, the talks went nowhere and Mr. Hesse knew it. Here is the big number and the only one that mattered to Sprint: 230 million. That is how many subscribers AT&T and Verizon would have had if the deal went through. How does a cash strapped company with a 3-5 year rebuilding plan compete with 2 monoliths of that size with those amount of resources? Yes, I am among those who felt Sprint would gain over time if this deal went through, but Sprint wanted things a little more even on the playing field. How can ANYONE not understand their point of view?
25. ardent1 posted on 20 Dec 2011, 15:13 1
How can ANYONE not understand the view of a company that hasn't be profitable during the past 4 years?
If you read the M&A playbook, it would advise Sprint to act a certain way and it will reap the most benefits. Instead, Sprint used the wrong play and now, with more debt thanks to a $4B debt offerring, with a considerable amount of that money going to a sinkhole called Clearwire, you wonder what the HELL is Dan Hesse doing?
The rule on sinkholes is to take your lumps and more on as opposed to dragging Sprint down to bankruptcy. Have anyone looked at Sprint's debt rating recently and tried to calculate their probability to default??
19. Jyakotu posted on 20 Dec 2011, 11:43 1
Dan and Sprint needs to honestly STFU and explain to me why whenever it rains in my area, I get no service. Or why in my own house, I average 1-2 bars of service.? Point being, Sprint is still playing catch up to AT&T and Verizon and even T-Mobile will have use of AT&T's coverage improving almost slightly. Sprint has made mistake after mistake and it's finally bitting them in the arse. Their phone selection still leaves much to be desired, their data speeds are slow, their coverage is horrid, and they're so busy giving away service to smaller MVNOs that they're forgetting their postpaid network. I know they believe in competition, but honestly, because they're giving their service away to all these prepaid carriers, it leads customers away from the parent company.
22. cakvalasc posted on 20 Dec 2011, 12:27 0
There can be known issuse with penatration into buildings, I had the same issue and called Sprint they sent me a Airave device that works with my highspeed DSL and I have full bars and no issues inside my home. :)
27. lsutigers posted on 20 Dec 2011, 15:43 0
Sprint's network is doing quite well, my employer recently moved over 15,000 lines (including 3G and 4G devices including phones, new Sprint Direct Connect / Nextel Direct Connect / 3G 4G data cards, MiFi's and embedded tablets and laptops) from VZW to Sprint and the service has been so good I made the same switch for my family. Although I rarely roam, people tend to forget that Verizon and Sprint have roaming agreements and roam on each other's networks wherever they have deadspots (which every carrier has, trust me, I used to work for VZW). Sprint is heading in the right direction with Network Vision. Check out
3G data IS getting faster with the improvements but the iPhone has done some damage as expected. I read a Reuters article the other day that Sprint is working with Apple to improve network performance due to heavy iPhone usage. As for 4G, LTE should be up and running by Q3, in the meantime, I get 8mbps average with WiMax which is almost as fast as my cable internet which I am about to replace with the Sprint Overdrive.
32. LordBonztie posted on 25 Dec 2011, 17:49 0
thats the answer why you have slow speeds with WiMAX.
meaning to say. sprint has a lot of subscribers.