Sprint board rejects $8b MetroPCS merger

Posted: 24 Feb 2012, 14:55, by Michael H.

Share Tweet Share

Sprint board rejects $8b MetroPCS merger

CNBC has reported that even though Sprint CEO Dan Hesse had endorsed a proposed merger between the carrier and MetroPCS, the Sprint board has rejected the deal just hours before it was supposed to be announced. The deal was expected to be valued at $8 billion and had been in the works for months according to CNBC's Dan Faber.

There is no word yet on why the board rejected the deal, or whether the deal is now completely dead. Not surprisingly, Sprint has no comment on the rumors. We'll update this as we learn more.

source: Dan Faber via The Verge

23 Comments

Options

Close Follow ›

posted on 24 Feb 2012, 16:02 2

1. atheisticemetic (Posts: 377; Member since: 18 Dec 2011)

8B is a lot of money for Metro. But this would be a good thing for sprint imo. Metro wasnt the most integrity based cellphone provider i've known

posted on 24 Feb 2012, 16:31 6

2. tigermcm (Posts: 860; Member since: 02 Sep 2009)

all i can say is WTF Sprint??

posted on 24 Feb 2012, 16:31 1

3. pbui.818 (Posts: 78; Member since: 06 Feb 2012)

I would have supported the proposal to combine with MetroPCS in that it would solidify Sprint's position and it would have consolidated the market. However, I can't see the real value to Sprint beyond that. T-Mobile would be the better merger but a more challenging objective in a number of ways.

posted on 24 Feb 2012, 16:32 1

4. VinCrel (Posts: 39; Member since: 26 Dec 2011)

Sprint is against the Tmo and At&t merger saying that it will complicate things and make plan prices go high .. now, how is this so differrent?

posted on 24 Feb 2012, 16:49 11

6. Cwebb (Posts: 501; Member since: 05 Oct 2011)

Because Tmo is significantly bigger than Metro

posted on 24 Feb 2012, 17:14 8

8. remixfa (Posts: 14604; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

because ATT is a high priced company buying up the low priced company. sprint is a low/middle priced company buying up a small prepaid carrier.

posted on 24 Feb 2012, 23:42

19. bvalde09 (Posts: 188; Member since: 22 Nov 2011)

Mmmmm I would think they dont have the money to buy Metro PCS. I mean they spend a lot cash on the iphone right? I mean I think is the right choice. If they have close deal would have been good. But isnt that they rejected more like they couldnt do so

posted on 24 Feb 2012, 18:51 3

16. Giggity (Posts: 147; Member since: 17 Nov 2011)

Right now, there are 4 major wireless carriers, 2 for CDMA network and 2 for GSM network. If the AT&T and T-Mobile merger went through, then you'll end up with AT&T as the sole GSM wireless provider in the US. And by becoming the sole GSM wireless provider, that will gives AT&T full control to dictate the pricing. Knowing AT&T, they will jack up the price one way or another to recuperate the money they spent on the merger.

posted on 24 Feb 2012, 16:33 6

5. mad5870 (Posts: 60; Member since: 21 Nov 2011)

Idk how much it would of been worth. but They should go through with the deal. Since metropcs has LTE in 9 cities and majority of Florida. It would of been a good start to there "aggressive LTE roll out." Especially now with all the LightSquared LTE drama.

posted on 24 Feb 2012, 17:11 2

7. TechnoTechyes (Posts: 64; Member since: 24 Jan 2011)

This story was less than an hour old when you posted it... The original poster (The Verge), posted it at the end of a business day on a Friday... So, what is with the "Not Surprisingly, Sprint has no comment" comment? They were probably still in traffic heading home.

posted on 24 Feb 2012, 17:36

9. EclipseGSX (Posts: 1737; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)

wow, it would be interesting if they would still honor their $40 a month unlimited plan or how that would work out

posted on 24 Feb 2012, 17:51 1

10. Das70 (Posts: 124; Member since: 05 Jan 2011)

I doubt they would have changed it. Sprint has Boost and they are $45 a month.

posted on 24 Feb 2012, 18:21

11. downphoenix (Posts: 3165; Member since: 19 Jun 2010)

This wouldnt have had any real benefit to Sprint, glad they shut it down.

posted on 24 Feb 2012, 18:25

12. nyamo (Posts: 274; Member since: 19 Mar 2011)

Once again sprint shoots itself in the foot. I swear they do the exact opposite of what should be done

posted on 24 Feb 2012, 18:42

13. Carlitos (Posts: 553; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

Thumbs up, not down, I accidently hit the down thumb.

posted on 24 Feb 2012, 18:47

14. Carlitos (Posts: 553; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

Either sprint is stupid, or they are to broke to afford to buy Metro PCS.

posted on 24 Feb 2012, 23:43

20. bvalde09 (Posts: 188; Member since: 22 Nov 2011)

They are broke :D

posted on 24 Feb 2012, 18:49 1

15. blaze456 (Posts: 51; Member since: 06 Oct 2010)

the only real ebenfit would be the 9 million added customers which would still make sprint way behind in customers than att and verizon

posted on 24 Feb 2012, 19:12 1

17. snowgator (Posts: 3604; Member since: 19 Jan 2011)

Curious decision. Anything to add infrastructure and more bandwidth for Sprint to play with would have been a good plan. I am wondering that if "no comments" means "not dead, just retooling....."

posted on 24 Feb 2012, 22:46

18. theguero (Posts: 7; Member since: 24 Jan 2011)

I hope they are still in negotiations. Sprint needs Metro and Metro needs Sprint. It would be a match made in heaven! Both are CDMA, Sprint had EVDO, Metro has a good start in LTE. It seems like a no brainer!

posted on 25 Feb 2012, 03:07

21. richardyarrell2011 (banned) (Posts: 510; Member since: 16 Mar 2011)

This is pretty shocking the board blocking Mr. Hesse?? That can't be good. Gotta wonder if Mr. Hesse is on his way out???

posted on 25 Feb 2012, 18:07

22. Phoneguy007 (Posts: 218; Member since: 02 Jun 2011)

I wonder if this has any thing to do with google selling all its shares it has with clear....hmmmmm