x PhoneArena is looking for new authors! To view all available positions, click here.
  • Home
  • News
  • Verizon Wireless CEO: "We're not interested in Sprint. We don't need them."

Verizon Wireless CEO: "We're not interested in Sprint. We don't need them."

Posted: , by Victor H.

Verizon Wireless CEO:

CTIA has already made quite a few headlines, but this one, made hours before the show, stands out. Verizon's very own Dan Mead confessed in an interview to Reuters that Verizon has no interest whatsoever in acquiring Sprint and thus joining the biggest carrier race started by AT&T:


"We're not interested in Sprint. We don't need them," Mead commented. After such a bold statement, we can't accuse Verizon of lacking swagger, for once.


The chief executive officer also said he won't oppose the $39-billion deal between AT&T and Deutsche Telekom, despite the fact that it will widen the gap between Verizon and AT&T, which recently outgrew Big Red and became the U.S. biggest carrier in terms of subscribers. At the same time, Mead mentioned that "anything can go through if you make enough concessions." Well, with Verizon withdrawing from any possible legal battles, the AT&T-Mobile deal seems to encounter much less difficulties in its approval. And while one of the biggest moves in the industry happens, Big Red will become much smaller in terms of size, but in Meads words it won't be distracted from its goal of being the most profitable carrier.


source: Reuters via Engadget


33 Comments
  • Options
    Close




posted on 22 Mar 2011, 08:53 2

1. Gaby unregistered (unregistered)


Savage...

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 09:02 10

2. Ralston1983 (Posts: 65; Member since: 03 Feb 2011)


I have to admit I admire vzw confidence in this matter.

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 20:59 1

28. Lucas777 (Posts: 2131; Member since: 06 Jan 2011)


yes, but he never said anything about metro... possible buy?

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 09:31 7

3. remixfa (Posts: 13903; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


they know ATT wont be able to retain all of tmobile's customers. some will go to sprint, vzw, and metro. also others will be divested out to whatever the FCC demands. VZW has been the biggest carrier without the iphone, that was ATTs only success. Now that they both have the iphone and ATT is growing by absorbing tmobile, VZW will only have more people come to their network as there is less choices.

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 09:46 3

5. snowgator (Posts: 3201; Member since: 19 Jan 2011)


I agree. Verizon stands to get ahead just by being the stable, healthy alternative to AT&T as it tries to get approval for, combine tech with, and keep the customers of T-Mo.
Besides, I don't know if Sprint wants you, Big Red, so maybe not that bold of a statement .....

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 09:40 4

4. Slammer (Posts: 997; Member since: 03 Jun 2010)


Don't be fooled business propaganda.

ATT and Verizon have worked as a secret cartel for the last decade. This has allowed them to reach the dominant status they are today. Acquiring and swapping assets. Children separated at birth, being brought together little by little. Verizon's statement is to allow an easier acquisition of TMO. By not contesting this, ATT has a far better shot to seal the deal. Once the deal is done, Verizon is wide open to bid on Sprint. Then the family will be complete once again. Hopefully, the government will impose major regulations or our communications will end up just like the oil industry.

John B.

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 09:49 5

6. broro (Posts: 4; Member since: 28 Jan 2010)


How quickly people forget. VZW became the largest carrier, not by OUTSELLING any of the others, including at&t, but through acquistion. Since Big Red jumped ahead of at&t at the time of purchasing Alltel, at&t has chipped away at the margin between the two by SELLING NEW CUSTOMERS, culminating in at&t regaining the lead in total subscriber base in Q4 2010. Of course at&t knows that not 100% of TMO's customer base will not stay, the majority will most likely jump to the new "value based" carrier, Sprint.

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 10:28 4

9. Monique27 (unregistered)


and lets not forget how at&t became the #1 carrier, by purchasing Cingular. Besides that, even though the iPhone was exclusive to at&t for a few years, vzw still gained customers and had the lowest churn rate out of the biggest 4 wirelesess companies. Therefore, I don't think VZW will be worried. Like someone posted, they will be the most stable/reliable network. It will take at&t a few years to get everything converted. By then, VZW's LTE network will be great and they will probably proclaim the network as "America's Most Reliable 4G" network. VZW will be fine, if only they will come down on plan/data prices, that would be great.

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 11:50 3

17. Tottenham (Posts: 86; Member since: 05 Jan 2011)


Actually, if I recall correctly, Cingular (aka Southwestern Bell) bought ATT. They (SWB) elected to retain the ATT name as it had wider geographic and brand name recognition.

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 10:56 3

11. remixfa (Posts: 13903; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


umm.. hate to remind you, but VZW was about to overtake ATT before the aquisition of Altell. its called more growth and less churn. ATT's only saving grace has been aquisition and iphone exclusivity. Both companies have gotten huge through aquisition though.

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 11:27 2

12. ozinator80 (Posts: 2; Member since: 14 Mar 2010)


And lets not forget how ATT has also grown by purchasing others, check the history of the company. That is how they got so large in the first place. Plus they did get some of the Alltel deal too if you recall. Maybe not a big chunk, but when VZW aquired Alltel, ATT was the first one there to swoop in and take the Markets that VZW couldn't solely own.

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 17:45

25. remixfa (Posts: 13903; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


i cant remember exact numbes, but i think they ended up with like a million or 2 alltell customers that they had to convert.

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 09:59 3

7. leefer77 (Posts: 23; Member since: 04 Jan 2011)


Good, because Sprint doesn't need Verizon either. The consumer doesn't need Verizon buying out Sprint. If they play their cards right, I think Sprint could gain a great number of subscribers with the At&t acquisition of T-Mo.

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 10:18

8. JeffdaBeat (unregistered)


See, I just don't think that's the case anymore. I am right there with you in wanting Sprint to succeed, but they have half the customer base as Verizon and almost a third of the new...new AT&T. Granted people will defect to other carriers, I just don't think Sprint has a chance. It'll be either AT&T or Verizon...

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 12:00 1

18. Tottenham (Posts: 86; Member since: 05 Jan 2011)


As I commented in a different post, I believe the marriage of Sprint and US Cellular would be a good move. It would combine the (now) 3rd and 5th largest providers. US Cellular has a great longstanding reputation for customer service and support, and Sprint has the national name recognition and the clout to get exclusive first class smartphones (albeit, no iPhone). In a world were consolidation seems inevitable, I would rather see three top tier players, rather than Big Red swallowing up US Cellular (and other regional players), and leaving Sprint even more marginalized.

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 14:29 2

19. remixfa (Posts: 13903; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


i could go for that. i also think metro/cricket/virgin/boost need to merge together and take up the spot left by tmobile as the cheapest carrier. that would help them be able to keep their plans down, have more phone buying power and sway, n stay competitive.

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 16:37

22. stjcripes (Posts: 27; Member since: 31 Mar 2010)


Sprint actually owns Virgin Mobile USA and Boost.

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 17:46

26. remixfa (Posts: 13903; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


sprint does not own anyone else.. virgin mobile and boost both pay to use sprint's network, the same way simply mobile pays to use VZW network

posted on 23 Mar 2011, 10:58

33. Research Department (unregistered)


Do your homework.

Sprint did indeed buy Virgin Mobile USA some time ago, Boost has always been a subsidiary.

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 16:39 1

23. stjcripes (Posts: 27; Member since: 31 Mar 2010)


A Metro/Cricket merger probably wouldn't be a bad idea, though.

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 10:47 1

10. jovy121 (Posts: 14; Member since: 14 Mar 2011)


So keep paying alot more for your Verizon service. Sprint will be just fine. They own virgin mobile, boost mobile and half of clearwire so its worth much more than T-Mobile 39 Billion.

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 11:29 1

13. CNahoz (unregistered)


Wow. I actually laughed at VZW's cockiness. Truth be told tho, I don't think VZW needs Sprint or vise-versa. The ability to have more than 2 markets makes it easier on the consumer. Imagine if there were only 2 "Biggies" in the Wireless industry in the U.S.? our prices for service would skyrocket and we wouldnt be able to do anything about it. It would be the smaller "mom & pop" companies that would be our only option (Cricket, U.S. Cellular, etc). The only question still lagging in my mind is that, if VZW does plan to acquire Sprint, does that have anything to do with Sprint wanting to move from WiMAX to LTE???

*DUN DUN DUN.....**scary foreshadowing music in the background**

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 11:30

14. cornerofthemoon (Posts: 505; Member since: 20 Apr 2010)


Sprint will probably try to gobble up some more regional carriers. Cricket, MetroPCS, etc. in the effort to stay viable.

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 11:37 1

15. roldefol (Posts: 2859; Member since: 28 Jan 2011)


The way I see it, Verizon stands to gain in the eyes of customers by NOT being #1. There's something to be said for being the slow-and-steady underdog. If Verizon keeps hammering away at their time-tested "most reliable/best coverage" sales pitch, adds to that some innovation by taking the lead with LTE, and then invests in expanding the new network, they'll further solidify their reputation. Meanwhile AT&T will have the biggest carrier label, but with a mess of a merger to deal with. AT&T is now The Evil Empire...again.

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 11:39 2

16. trin (Posts: 88; Member since: 11 May 2010)


1. Why is there a pro at&t/iPhone, anti VZW/droid slant to this site? Smh.
2. As far as ATT recently surpassing VZW in subscribers didn't they say that was only because ATT counts every connection whether its a phone or not and VZW doesn't?
3. Lack of competition is never a good thing.

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 17:48 1

27. remixfa (Posts: 13903; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


correct. the sales numbers that PHONE ARENA MISQUOTED, originally showed ATT's numbers as all post, pre, ect while VZWs numbers only showed post. When VZW released the prepaids n other things, they were still the biggest carrier by a few million. VZW is the largest carrier in america until this deal is official.

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 15:37

20. CRICKETownz (Posts: 980; Member since: 24 Oct 2009)


Not sure why anyone is surprised. In business esp. when you have the top 2 players involved there is bound to be some kind of powershift/power play. The latest, At&t throws down the gauntlet to purchase T-Mobile. Next who knows what the next move will be for the next player. This keeps competition going for the consumer in the end. The possible threat of prices going up is never a big issue. Look at Comcast/Time Warner or whatever its called in your area. Their prices continue to go up but in this area continues to be the dominant service b/c of good performance & being the most reliable.

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 16:02

21. Glorfindale (Posts: 17; Member since: 16 Jul 2010)


I think that whenever there is less choice, the consumer looses. More competition will drive innovation and cheaper service, so overall I wish T-Mobile would stick around just for that.

Otherwise why would Verizon care to be the biggest? In this deal Verizon is probably going to benefit a great deal from increased lines and less churn. Being #1 in size really doesn't have a benefit in itself.

Sprint does have a tremendous opportunity here due to the fact that T-Mo was probably the cheapest out of the four, and Sprint is the next cheapest, so if a lot of customers were going for spending less money, Sprint would be a natural choice.

Verizon will win with the network, and Sprint should really be there, two major carriers is simply not enough. Besides, buying sprint would be a huge hassle right now, concentrating on LTE and reliability is the right thing to do. Besides Verizon does have over 90 mil in subscribers, that's nearly 1/3 of the US population.

posted on 22 Mar 2011, 21:28 1

29. urboypedro (Posts: 3; Member since: 19 Mar 2010)


Verizon Wireless pay Sprint For There Service..yes that is true.. So Verizon CEO shouldnt be talking shit about Sprint why you think they plan are so expansive.....and why u think verizon got 4g cause of sprint notice how htc thunderbolt dose the same thing as sprint 4g network u talk n data at the same time n they both are CDMA ....so fuck verizon sprint all th way baby and notice how the map match sprint service

posted on 23 Mar 2011, 08:55

32. Youranidiot (unregistered)


LMAO!!! You have got to be kidding me?? Sprint pays Verizon to ROAM because Sprints network is not as large.

Not to mention Verizons 4G network works off a SIM CARD not the CDMA network so thats how they can talk and do data at the same time.

Id love to see your sprint map that matches Verizons map though.

posted on 23 Mar 2011, 01:58

30. lowe (unregistered)


virgin/boost are already part of sprint and sprints not far behind think bout it

posted on 23 Mar 2011, 02:38

31. nobody (unregistered)


URBOYPEDRO:
Know what your talking about before posting sucka.... Sprint is the one living off of Verizon towers. You can see this very obvious fact by going to sprint.com and looking at their coverage map of "actual sprint towers" and see how much smaller it is. If you dont believe that then check out Verizons prepaid service (which cant rome on non verizon towers) and you will clearly see it is almost as big as Verizons regular coverage that includes roaming agreements.

If anyone doubts Verizon is the best they clearly havent had service with them in the last 2 years. AT&T gets bashed very regularly by famous people who very obviously travel a ton and know AT&T has poor performance. Sprint is a nice option on price and offers pretty good coverage but the network reliability isnt what Verizons is. With the number of towers which all have backup generators and backup batteries to those generators its very obvious why anytime this nation has a crisis it's BIG RED that continues to work and is the first on scene with COWS or COLTS......... VERIZON number 1 regardles of subscriber numbers period!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

posted on 23 Mar 2011, 20:15

34. Glorfindale (Posts: 17; Member since: 16 Jul 2010)


Also, I don't think that saying "we don't need Sprint" is talking shit, merely an observation.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories