Sprint plans to oppose the merging of T-Mobile with AT&T
According to Mr. Hesse, once T-Mobile becomes a part of AT&T and the resulting entity emerges as the largest wireless carrier in the U.S., this would have a negative impact on industry innovation and could result in 79% of subscribers nationwide to use the services of only two carriers, namely AT&T and Verizon. Sprint's CEO shared his intentions to bring his concerns to the attention of the U.S. Congress in an effort to oppose the merging of the two carriers and to retain the status quo on the wireless market.
AT&T responded with an email saying that it was ready to address whatever issues Sprint may have to present and that it was expecting to see its competitor's disapproval of the proposed coalition. The U.S. House Judiciary Committee is yet to approve or reject the $39 billion acquisition between AT&T and T-Mobile. We should also point out that Dan Hesse refused to comment when prompted whether Sprint has ever been in the talks of taking over T-Mobile or not.
source: Bloomberg via Phone Scoop
1. BaiGanyo posted on 23 Mar 2011, 18:02 5 13
Um, yeah, 80% market share with 2 carriers, largely because of mergers? Very uncompetitive market for consumers. Unheard of in almost any country in the world,
4. clevername posted on 23 Mar 2011, 18:14 7 4
What are you talking about? To say it's almost unheard of in any other nation is uninformed at best. Several nations have a federally controlled wireless provider and no other options. Canada really only has 2 major carriers same with Japan and England as well. Many countries only have 2 maybe 3 major options. 79% of people would be with two carriers true but that's by choice. No one is forcing them to stay away from sprint or any prepaid or regional carrier. It doesn't leave people with only 3 choices. It leaves people with 3 major choices and a bunch of other smaller choices. We have more carriers in the US than any other nation.
10. kcombs posted on 23 Mar 2011, 19:12 0 0
don't forget China mobile that has 570 million customers, the largest carrier in the world in terms of subscribers.
23. Donkeysauce (unregistered) posted on 23 Mar 2011, 21:10 2 5
Talk about uninformed! Canada isn't a real country!
32. BaiGanyo posted on 23 Mar 2011, 23:37 2 1
Um, Canada has 3 major carriers, and the top 2 equals only 65% of market share. Big difference. And no, the us does not have more carriers than any country. Whoever is telling you this information is wrong. Please name all the countries that only have 2 carriers, I'd be interested to know which they are. And which countries have 80% controlled by only 2 companies? Please provide facts instead of patriotic propaganda. I seriously doubt you have ever had a wireless account in any country but the states.
34. BaiGanyo posted on 23 Mar 2011, 23:57 2 1
Here's the situation in the UK. Not 2 like you said. The top 2 barely equals 50%.
The article about Japan names at least 4 carriers, with the top one having 47% market share--with that expected to DROP BECAUSE OF REGULATIONS!
OK, what other tea party anti regulation propaganda would you like to spout off, with NO facts to back any of it up?
35. Gawain posted on 24 Mar 2011, 00:28 1 0
I know this is splitting hairs, but Canada has at least three major players, Bell, Rogers, and Telus. Japan has three, SoftBank, NTT, and au/KDDI. Even in Europe, like UK, Vodafone, O2, Orange/T-Mobile.
To your other point, while I don't support the merger, it will likely be approved by regulators, albeit with a ton of divestitures in the process. All those divestitures, I would look at USCC at buying a lot of them, and expanding their footprint, perhaps MetroPCS as well. As you said, there is no shortage of options here in the US.
36. BaiGanyo posted on 24 Mar 2011, 00:46 0 1
I agree there are options in some of the larger metro areas, but if we have a competitive market, that is something to preserve, to avoid another "necessary" merger in another few years, and then another. Simply considering niche players like metro pcs and cricket to be real competition isn't realistic because they are still dependent on national carriers for roaming, and for now, they allow voice because the government made them, but they are still not restricted in a lot of data areas. That's a big problem. Also, the prepaid market has less choice of carriers to piggy back on now, so that will raise their prices, which even further reduces "competition."
13. JG (unregistered) posted on 23 Mar 2011, 19:37 1 0
Here in Mexico we have Telcel that has a 70% market share followed by Movistar with a mere 20%.
25. BobbyTaba posted on 23 Mar 2011, 21:27 0 3
There are also people that will leave Sprint for the iPhone cuz they would )e only major company without it
38. tuminatr posted on 24 Mar 2011, 00:49 0 1
the real honest truth is sprint knows if this merger goes through Verizon will try to buy sprint, so sprint opposes the merger
48. snowgator posted on 24 Mar 2011, 12:57 0 0
Verizon is pushing 100 million subscribers on it's own. It has taken the iPhone advantage away from AT&T, and has service in every area that AT&T and T-Mobile has(to my knowledge). Phone producers are pursuing them to get on their sales sheet, and they are pushing LTE to the point where some consumers think they invented it. Why, again, would Verizon need Sprint???
2. Brenda 123 (unregistered) posted on 23 Mar 2011, 18:02 8 5
The merging of T-mobile and at&t does not need Sprint's approval.
3. Tre-Nitty posted on 23 Mar 2011, 18:12 6 10
Dan Hesse is getting on my nerves. Worry about your customers, which you have plenty and just shut up already.
5. Hello-dirt posted on 23 Mar 2011, 18:24 10 2
I think he is worried about his customers silly goose. Just like many small businesses go out of business due to big box stores, Sprint is worried that 1) he'll lose his company and job, 2) that he will not be able to compete with the big carriers with phones that people want, 3) Sprint will not have enough income to bid for more spectrum, if the extra spectrum is opened up for bidding, and 4) I am happy that someone is forcing ATT and the FCC to actually think about what could happen. I am sure there are other reasons, but I wouldn't want to irritate you further.
9. Tre-Nitty posted on 23 Mar 2011, 18:51 4 5
I'm sorry that you care so much about a Guy who is probably worth more than you'll ever see. Sorry I don't have sympathy and don't give a shit about Dan Hesse losing his customers. Btw sprint has about 50 million customers, so I think they'll be fine. Oh yeah your poor attempts at humor don't irritate me. I don't know you or care that you exist.
16. JW1ngman posted on 23 Mar 2011, 20:14 2 0
its the fear of monopoly. just like gas they will get you by the balls and then you have to pay whatever they ask for. we live in a country of competition and it keeps a healthy balance of economy. trenitty, youre just negative on everything you comment on.
17. remixfa posted on 23 Mar 2011, 20:32 3 0
i dont know why sprint is so worried. i think it puts them in a banner position to pick up tons of pissed off Tmobile customers. Sprint will only GAIN from this situation, at least as far as customers go, if they play their cards well. As the only major "value" carrier left, they will be in a golden position as ATT and VZW go after eachother.
They just need to keep working on getting kick ass android phones, keep a positive "we care" image, expand out their 4g, and work on their customer service issues, and life will be grand.
Im not worried about it.
22. homineyhominey posted on 23 Mar 2011, 21:06 4 1
hasn't sprint won tons of customer service awards the last year? They had THE biggest increase in customer satisfaction of ANY company in ANY industry. AT&T bought out T-Mo for customer service, although i never really had luck with T-Mo customer service either. Sprint's spectrum holdings now are the industry leader. No one comes even close. Verizon's network has sucked since the iPhone came to them.
On another note, has no one seen or heard Dan's slams against the other companies?
Jim Cramer: My phone freezes, whose fault?
Dan: It's cause you have Verizon.
Dan to AT&T CEO: I thought you and T-mo had 4g?
19. Tre-Nitty posted on 23 Mar 2011, 20:39 1 0
Not negative just not a little crybaby and I give my honest opinion. Sprint is fine and will be fine. Hesse is just a whinny little baby. Heck why doesn't he just look into buying metro or cricket. Etc
41. cheesy chade (unregistered) posted on 24 Mar 2011, 10:14 0 1
50 mil customers are great and all but when you angle in the market is the "value" carrier you’re already operating at a minimum. ATT and VZN charge higher rates AND have more volume than S, so realistically it could be a knockout blow to Sprint. Think about it, here's a scenario ATT and VZN could temporarily lower their rates to be below what Sprints offering. Sprint in turn either experiences lower customer acquisition or lowers their rates even lower. Both options are a bad because over time, the company would lose the necessary cash flow to keep operating. Time frame on that about 5 years tops.
I personally hope the FCC handles this well
20. JerzeySniper posted on 23 Mar 2011, 20:44 0 1
I agree, I believe that if we were reduced to only two major carriers the power of choice will shift from conumer (what little power we have) to the big companies who will be able to dictate everything from the cost of a post paid plan,deposit and credit requirements, to which phones will be launched when and with what on it. It's like when walmart moves and destroys lil mom and pop buisness. So while some may say sprintnextel is whinning, i say somebody needs to talk some sense into this mess, the same people rallying for it will be the same people later that complains about why they dont have a choice to move away from two big companies that jack up prices and mirror each other an have terrible customer service.
6. therygy posted on 23 Mar 2011, 18:33 1 0
sprint is not going to get T-Mobiles costumers anyways so why does it matter if they are with AT&T or T-Mobile? I know Dan should not just sit back but things will settle in after the combination takes place. The US could still use a carrier with low prices, such as all the college students graduating this spring and have to get kicked of their parents plan, sprint should start advertizing to them. AT&T and T-Mobile combining is a very good thing. AT&T needed the spectrum and they are thinking of their costumers also, so it is not like they are just doing this for fun. I think sprint needs to think of better ways to improve their subscribers, not just blame other companies for beeing too big. Dan Hasse, you should have thought about taking a step further three years ago. Now it is too late becasue AT&T jumped on the band wagon first.
7. Yo (unregistered) posted on 23 Mar 2011, 18:48 1 0
Lol. Him shaking in him boots.
8. Syksyd posted on 23 Mar 2011, 18:49 1 1
Dan Hesse should be more concerned with the other competition there, like Metro,Cricket,Tracfone,Net10, just like we all do(A T-Mobile Employee), there are options for the consumer right there so what is he crying about
11. Brandon523 (unregistered) posted on 23 Mar 2011, 19:13 0 0
Syksyd I would think you would be worried about this merger being a T-mobile employee alot of them are gonna lose their job because if this merger... The malls in example are not gonna have 2 AT&T stores.
18. remixfa posted on 23 Mar 2011, 20:36 1 0
only an idiot thinks that. everyone from ATT AND TMobile needs to worry about their jobs. They will cut the fat from both sides, not just Tmobile. Many stores will be shut down, middle management on both sides will be cut like crazy as they merge markets, ect ect ect.
They will probably cut more from ATT anyways.
Tmobile employees are generally paid a lil less as well as they were brought up in a company that cared about great customer service. Its an exellent opportunity for ATT to cut costs while fixing one of their biggest problems.
27. think again (unregistered) posted on 23 Mar 2011, 21:30 0 0
I seriously doubt that AT&T will lose many jobs since the majority of the workforce is unionized...
12. Rawrzellers posted on 23 Mar 2011, 19:25 0 0
This is kinda cute how he's trying to act like his opinion matters. Unless he offers a higher price then I don't see any reason why his opinion should matter. I don't agree with AT&T merging with T-Mobile but I know that I can't just say I disagree with it and BAM fixed problem.
14. IphoneVZwW (unregistered) posted on 23 Mar 2011, 19:52 0 4
why dosnt verison just buy sprint solves all there problems lol.....
15. IphoneVZwW (unregistered) posted on 23 Mar 2011, 19:54 0 1
i ment verizon....
33. BaiGanyo posted on 23 Mar 2011, 23:42 1 0
So more mergers solves the problem of too many mergers. You're quite the philosopher aren't you?
21. TKFox007 posted on 23 Mar 2011, 20:59 0 0
He's worried that if the AT&T/T-Mobile merger/buyout happens then his company will be the smallest of the major carriers and will no longer be able to compete in the US and will have to be absorbed into Verizon just to keep from going under.
28. luis_lopez_351 posted on 23 Mar 2011, 21:31 1 2
Isn't this good? T-Mobile Customers will go to At&t and realize how Awful it is(They will noticed the "No Unlimited Data" right away) and go to sprint Where they offer Unlimited Data (Verizon too but they are more expensive). The only bad is Sprint does not have HSPA+ (Famous for Phone calls while searching web) or LTE (Upcoming real 4G faster than Wimax) oh! and Coverage too.
29. KIANO posted on 23 Mar 2011, 21:52 1 0
The starting point for Sprint is to focus on customer service. Therefore subscribers should be their highest priority.
The other strategy perhaps Sprint should look into acquisition of other network carrier for the sake of reliable and expansion network, to offset cost of bidding for spectrum or building new cell towers.
Perhaps Sprint should look into exclusive strategy, for example; only Sprint offers white iPhone or Android Nexus, yes it is a wild guess but the point is exclusive.
And finally the ultimate thing for Sprint is 'unlimited'. Yes, unlimited in data, talk or text, do attract customers. If Sprint is the only network carrier that offers unlimited service, then Sprint should worry no more.
30. DOGIEFRESH posted on 23 Mar 2011, 22:43 0 0
He wanted to screw tmo by himself that's why he is very angry....!!!!!
31. wholuvsyababe (unregistered) posted on 23 Mar 2011, 22:48 0 0
All he needs to do is to just show the facts. competition is good for the majority of people. we dont need another walmart type monopoly. they come into a town lower their prices then when the competition cant keep up and then they go out of business then they proceed to raise the prices. all in the name of GREED. its already been said that att needs tmo. att is in the boat they are in for a reason. simply buying another company in hopes of fixing the problems doesnt work if the problem is how you run / manage the company because given time and then you will be right back it the same situation. I say the deal does not go through. att pays tmo 3 billion and tmo acquires some spectrum that they need for their business and att is force to try and correct their problems on their own. only this way will it be a loss/win. loss for att and a win for the people and tmo.
42. snowgator posted on 24 Mar 2011, 10:31 0 0
Sprint has every right to oppose this merger. It is not whining, crying, or sour grapes or whatever you want to call it. It is a sound, buisness decision on Sprint's part to push for things to stay the same- they have improved their customer base and their position in the industry with things the way they are. However, they did not want to put forth the resources to merge with T-Mobile. They HAD to know someone would. AT&T has the resources, is a GSM carrier, and wants to be the largest carrier. If the FCC says no to this deal, it won't be Sprint that sways the decision. It will be to prevent an unfair buisness advantage, which is the ONLY reason for regulations- not to dictate price, control options, ect. It is just to ensure all companies have the chance to both succeed and fail on their own merits. Honostly, in my humble unimportant opinion, I can not see how this merger puts Sprint in any worse position. If they work on their own product, they can improve the position they are in. Period. Again, he has a right and a near company obligation to oppose it, but AT&T will not be worried about Dan in the least as they seek approval of this deal and all the hassles of combining tech with a new company. There are much bigger hassles coming down this road.
43. XxVerbalxX (unregistered) posted on 24 Mar 2011, 11:13 0 0
sprint is prob jus pissed their offer got rejected. either way they arent sprint customers. people will go to t-mobile to sprint as it is the next least expensive option after the merger. they just want them all for less money than at&t is paying.
44. jdmrice posted on 24 Mar 2011, 11:14 0 0
Dan hesse is the last ceo to bad mouth another company. He is a legit busniess man and enjoys competition. Att and tmobile isnt a competiton. Thats not business when its just you. Hesse is just looking to keep it fair, And for his employees to keep their jobs.
46. DJLegacy2k5 posted on 24 Mar 2011, 12:35 1 0
LOL @ people thinking ANYTHING in America is about "keeping it fair". America is about capitalism and making as much money as possible by any means needed.
This BUY-OUT (not exactly merger) will probably go through but Sprint shouldnt worry. They just were the only carrier to win a JD POWER AWARD for CUSTOMER SEVICE! They have the most affordable prices and Im sure they can use some marketing to draw unhappy people over to Sprint.
Plus everyone is having issues with the iPhone on ATT and Verizon so they will figure that Sprint is the best way to get away from the BS and get themselves a sweet Android device along with great customer service...They just cant use the GPS and talk at the same time until LTE gets built.
47. juniorak (unregistered) posted on 24 Mar 2011, 12:53 0 0
can someone created link to FCC and Congres so we are email ours NO to marge,as a T-mobile users,we can sent milions of emails,so we stay away from ATT