T-Mobile merger with MetroPCS approved by Deutsche Telekom, MetroPCS boards
Months after the U.S. Department of Justice denied AT&T’s attempt to acquire T-Mobile, the nation’s fourth-largest operator, now T-Mobile is seeking to merge with MetroPCS.
Regional carrier MetroPCS is known for being the first one to roll out an LTE network in the States. Formerly known as General Wireless, the operator has the biggest subscriber base out of the big four carriers with around 9.3 million subs. T-Mobile on the other hand has 33.2 million subscribers.
Combined the T-Mobile MetroPCS joint carrier would have north of 42.5 million subscribers, coming much closer to the third place held by Sprint with its 56 million subscribers.
source: Wall Street Journal
1. applesauce posted on 03 Oct 2012, 07:42 18 0
That was quick. Good luck to the combined companies, if approved.
30. thelegend6657 posted on 03 Oct 2012, 09:15 1 5
So why is MetroPCS + T-Mobile okay while T-Mobile + AT&T bad ?
31. StalkinUrMom posted on 03 Oct 2012, 09:35 11 0
At&t is HUGE compared to Metro. The FCC didn't let it happen because there's a pretty good chance that a monopoly could result from two major competitors (at&t, T-mo) merging.
34. remixfa posted on 03 Oct 2012, 09:49 9 0
because Tmobile + ATT = competition destruction. Merging the 2 took away the the cheapest of the big 4 carriers and made ATT substantially the largest carrier in the US. Between ATT and VZw, they would have about 80% of all customers creating a virtual monopoly since they both like to mirror each others super expensive pricing.
Tmobile and Metro together dont = sprint's carrier base. Also their plans are similar in pricing for prepay so the price effect is minimal. Having Tmobile be a larger company puts more pricing pressure on ATT/VZW to bring prices down a notch, unlike the TMo-ATT merger which only encouraged them to stay high with lack of pricing competition.
56. thelegend6657 posted on 04 Oct 2012, 03:35 0 0
Oh i see . But Metro uses CDMA and tmobile uses GSM right . I don't think they mix
58. txwalkr posted on 18 Oct 2012, 17:21 1 0
the intent is because with Metro having LTE this would get TMobile a foot in the carrier battle since all carriers are pushing LTE with Tmobile prices being genrally more affordable they would have LTE and could compete better against sprint in Third and get in markets they are not in or strengthen their sprectrum with Metro where they have weak cignal or no cignal. I get your question I though the same thing because sprint was also rumored as one of the original intended's to buy tmobile who is also cdma vs gsm then came the att that was bad more overall competition and now Tmobile with metro gives better comptetion for pricing and tmobile a opportunity in the LTE market against the top 3 carriers.
46. Droid_X_Doug posted on 03 Oct 2012, 13:10 2 0
I hope this 'new' carrier puts pressure on AT&T and VZW. Only good things come from more competition.
52. lsutigers posted on 03 Oct 2012, 16:47 3 2
Up next, Sprint gobs up US Cellular to give them about 62 million customers.
2. -box- posted on 03 Oct 2012, 07:45 6 1
They didn't waste any time, did they? Hope they get approved, and maybe change T-Mobile's color scheme in the process. I like the carrier, but not the pink. Green or dark blue, perhaps
21. -box- posted on 03 Oct 2012, 08:32 2 0
True, and they've been putting a lot of pink in their ads lately
45. Goldeneye posted on 03 Oct 2012, 13:04 0 0
So looks like "you never know who you work for" right at&t?
Funny at&t is paying for this deal and all related costs!
3. Bashok posted on 03 Oct 2012, 07:48 2 1
"Formerly known as General Wireless, the operator has the biggest subscriber base out of the big four carriers with around 9.3 million subs."
LOL you mean the smallest?
13. marcdunn82 posted on 03 Oct 2012, 08:12 3 1
They are number five, making them the biggest non big four carrier.
22. -box- posted on 03 Oct 2012, 08:33 8 0
I think it's supposed to read "outSIDE the big four", meaning fifth or smaller
53. lsutigers posted on 03 Oct 2012, 16:49 1 0
Actually, Clearwire is the 5th largest carrier behind T-Mobile with 11 million subs.
4. mad5870 posted on 03 Oct 2012, 07:48 2 0
This is kind of interesting i think. mosty because of the technology. metro using cdma and t-mobile using gsm. Hope everything works out. just odd feel like it would be a lot of money to convert networks or maintian two netwoks
6. crankyd00d posted on 03 Oct 2012, 07:56 4 0
Eventually CDMA will be phased out, LTE & spectrum is what T-Mobile wants out of this deal so basically it's a forward looking business move
9. mad5870 posted on 03 Oct 2012, 08:00 4 0
That is what i was thinking. as i say in a comment lower. they will need to decide to keep one 3G service or get rid of one.
personally i believe that Tmobile covers more people than metro so...
15. marcdunn82 posted on 03 Oct 2012, 08:14 1 0
I think one big aspect of this is spectrum. Metro PCs has more bands that are iPhone compatible for one. Plus an already functional lte network.
47. iCandy posted on 03 Oct 2012, 13:18 2 0
This will prove an easy merger for T-Mobile and ultimately beneficial to Sprint. Synergies are perfect: MetroPCS and T-Mobile share the same bands 1700 & 1900 and are pledged to move forward with LTE. New MetroPCS handsets need merely to adopt GSM/HSPA on the 1900 band; T-Mobile will start to share LTE on 1700. A problem for MetroPCS subscribers with old 1900 CDMA handsets? None at all - T-Mobile/MetroPCS will continue the MVNO agreement with Sprint and those old handsets will use Sprint's 1900 CDMA until they are no longer in use. This makes MetroPCS/T-Mobile merger smooth and gives Sprint 2 years or so of additional MVNO revenue. Couldn't be sweeter.
5. kshell1 posted on 03 Oct 2012, 07:55 1 0
Hmmmmmm Nice. People need to remember Metro isn't 100%CDMA anymore, LTE is a GSM tech
7. crankyd00d posted on 03 Oct 2012, 07:58 3 0
My point exactly. With everyone going to LTE all of the carriers will basically be GSM in a few years
44. laheelahee posted on 03 Oct 2012, 12:05 0 0
i wish it would happen already! i hate gsm vs cdma. in what world does it make sense to buy a different phone for every carrier? only in the usa...
8. mad5870 posted on 03 Oct 2012, 07:58 2 0
yeah but LTE is only in a few markets. and their 3g service is CDMA. Still being two different 3g services.
They have LTE in 14 Markets. I see that being easy to merge. but they will need to either keep both 3G services or get rid of one.
10. kshell1 posted on 03 Oct 2012, 08:00 0 0
I said it isn't 100% didn't say CDMA was non existent. The cdma would cover areas tmobiles HSPA doesn't cover though.
11. mad5870 posted on 03 Oct 2012, 08:08 0 0
thank you i can read. i didn't intend for it to sound like i was attacking or saying you were misunderstood.
i just really curious about how it will effect finacially having two different 3G networks.
12. kshell1 posted on 03 Oct 2012, 08:11 0 0
It may help or harm, we won't know until the deed is done.
14. snowgator posted on 03 Oct 2012, 08:14 3 0
Sprint's board of directors will feel stupid for letting this merger with Metro get past it. It was a fantastic fit for them, and Metro had a similar vision for the future.
T-Mobile may have to accelerate it's LTE plans to make this work. Despite what some posters here are thinking, there is no denying that a LTE rollout is an expensive proposition. Throw in keeping up 2 different signal towers and the expense of the logistics of the merger, this is not a slam dunk. It looks good on paper, but it may not be the yellow brick road until they are a unified technology.
Good luck. I respect me some T-Mobile, and would have been a customer had their service been offered in my town.
16. snowgator posted on 03 Oct 2012, 08:17 1 0
Side note: U.S. Cellular and Sprint in response, anyone?
28. e.wvu (unregistered) posted on 03 Oct 2012, 08:57 4 0
Oh please no! I just left Sprint to go to U.S. Cellular. Lol.
37. kshell1 posted on 03 Oct 2012, 10:09 1 0
US has reliable service, although some of their phones are out of date, they have a few goodies though
57. ThatDudeMike posted on 07 Oct 2012, 11:55 0 0
That Would be a good merger, Good Service, somewhat old phones but with sprint there's a chance to improve
20. Victor.H posted on 03 Oct 2012, 08:30 5 0
I'd venture a guess Sprint simply ran out of money to make it happen after spending billions on LTE and the iPhone. Whatever the reason, this seems like a good deal for T-Mobile.
17. StalkinUrMom posted on 03 Oct 2012, 08:19 2 0
As a T-Mobile customer, f**k yes! I'm so happy that there's even a tiny chance that'll I'll get LTE without needing to switch. I hope the rates stay low though.
23. -box- posted on 03 Oct 2012, 08:36 0 0
We were going to have LTE anyway, just having to wait for it to be built and turned on
25. StalkinUrMom posted on 03 Oct 2012, 08:41 0 0
Yeah, I know. All the reps on Facebook say it might take until Q3 of next year to have it up and running. The sooner the better! And that means a bunch of areas will have coverage right from the get go...unlike Sprint's launch.
26. kshell1 posted on 03 Oct 2012, 08:44 2 0
Their HSPA+42mbps is plenty fast and highly consistent.
27. StalkinUrMom posted on 03 Oct 2012, 08:53 0 0
Definitely, I'm not saying their 4G is bad. Coverage is perfect here in Downtown Austin.
My brother's Note on at&t smokes my One-s when it comes to loading up pages. I can't let him have that!
40. cptbeatstix posted on 03 Oct 2012, 11:00 1 0
I don't know where they heard the Q3 thing at, but we've been building out LTE for the better part of this year. January is when they start flipping the switch on the markets. But don't get too excited, you still need an LTE phone to get the top speed. Then you can show your brother how slow ATT is lol.
42. StalkinUrMom posted on 03 Oct 2012, 11:38 0 0
Meh. It's my fault for thinking anything on Facebook is reliable information. I was gonna open up a line for my girlfriend next month and give her my One-S so I could get the 8x for myself. I might just wait for an LTE Windows Phone to hit TMo now that I know LTE isn't that far off, thanks man. Do you know which markets will be getting it First?
50. cptbeatstix posted on 03 Oct 2012, 14:19 0 0
As of right now, no. They normally don't even let us know network upgrades go out. It just so happens that one of our employees' dad is one of the big guys in the engineering side. More than likey its will be New york, Dallas and Austin first.
29. tedkord posted on 03 Oct 2012, 09:10 0 0
I can see where this makes sense for LTE and beyond, but where does this leave T-Mobile 's current GSM and Metro 's current cdma subscribers? They get no more coverage, and coverage is the weakest point for each carrier.
How it works out. Verizon and AT&T need some better competition to keep them in check.
36. remixfa posted on 03 Oct 2012, 09:56 1 0
Metro's subscribers are non contract thus very pliable. My guess is since this is mostly for spectrum and LTE that Tmo will convert Metro's CDMA towers as needed to shore up existing coverage weaknesses and lease out or MNVO the rest at least until they are ready to flip them all to LTE. I'm assuming that Tmo will give metro customers some sort of deal/discount to flip over to a GSM/Tmobile phone at some point when they are ready to turn off the majority of CDMA towers and flip them all to LTE/GSM.
33. Bernoulli posted on 03 Oct 2012, 09:46 0 0
Whomever wrote this article, oh yeah victor, why on earth do you consider metro pcs customer base to even stick around?? They ARE ALL PRE PAID CUSTOMERS WHO CAN LEAVE ANYTIME!! If anything that T-Mobile will benefit from this deal is the precious spectrum compatible with T-Mobile, since both carriers will have LTE in the AWS 1700/2100 band, screw consumer base, they can just as easy leave for leap or be stupid enough to go to Verizon or AT&T O.o just saying, spectrum is the main reason here, not consumer base
35. remixfa posted on 03 Oct 2012, 09:52 2 0
spectrum is most definitely the biggest benefit. That is for sure
However, very few metro customers would leave for VZW or ATT. Most of the time Metro customers go to Tmobile and Vice Versa since they are closest in pricing, thus making them unlikely to leave. Metro was Tmo's biggest competitor in the prepay section so it's a big benefit to them by swallowing their biggest "low cost" competitor.
41. cptbeatstix posted on 03 Oct 2012, 11:02 0 0
You do realize that the base pricing between Tmo's monthly4g and MetroPCS's pre-paid service are basically the same.
49. Bernoulli posted on 03 Oct 2012, 13:57 0 0
no it isn't! :) $40 a month won't get me unlimited everything, nonetheless unlimited non-throttled everything, I'm with T-mobile, but just saying how metro pcs is cheaper.
51. cptbeatstix posted on 03 Oct 2012, 14:32 1 0
I said basically. Metro is cheaper because they don't have the subscriber base we do and also don't have the size of network we have. It may be cheaper, but it's definitely crappier in terms of service and stability.
54. Bernoulli posted on 03 Oct 2012, 17:26 0 0
No joke haha, their LTE gets like 1.7 mbps it's a joke to the rest of the world LTE lol I pull 19 mbps on my galaxy blaze 4g lol :)
38. cdgoin posted on 03 Oct 2012, 10:18 0 0
Now they need to merge with Ntelos and with that base, they would be on par with Sprint if not surpass them. But believe Ntelos has no LTE and is CDMA so it would be tricky. BUt Ntelos DOES have iPhone so..
39. NoLoGo posted on 03 Oct 2012, 10:32 2 0
T-Mobile CEO Speaks About Combined Company with MetroPCShttp://www.youtube.com/watch?f
43. Snap123 posted on 03 Oct 2012, 11:45 0 0
From what i get from metropcs customers who has cdma phones most of them hate it with the exceptions of some of the new 4g lte phones that have cdma. They can't wait to get rid of their phones for a better one.
55. solidsnakeduds013 posted on 03 Oct 2012, 19:24 0 0
There is more to this story. Do more research!