Consumer Reports wants T-Mobile's merger with Sprint blocked, joins the congressional hearings chorus

Consumer Reports wants T-Mobile's merger with Sprint blocked, joins the congressional hearings chorus
The fight for T-Mobile's merger with Sprint seems to be reaching its final stages, as no less than 14 organizations, including Consumer Reports, have penned a letter against it. Sent to ranking members on the Committee on the Judiciary and Committee on Energy & Commerce in Congress, the letter contains various arguments against the deal in its current state, as well as a request for congressional hearings on the matter. 

It's open season for questions and comments before a final decision is made, so we can expect the below list of all involved to grow:

  • American Antitrust Institute
  • Center for Media Justice
  • Common Cause
  • Communications Workers of America Consumer Reports
  • Fight for the Future
  • Free Press Action
  • The Greenlining Institute
  • National Consumer Law Center, on behalf of its low income clients
  • New America’s Open Technology Institute
  • Open Markets Institute
  • Public Knowledge
  • Rural Wireless Association Writers
  • Guild of America West

The arguments against the merger include potential "collusion" between the New T-Mobile, Verizon and AT&T for price-fixing, as well as job losses and general anti-competitive behaviour. In addition, we have an organization called Protect America Wireless sound the alarm on the Saudi Arabia Public Investment Fund's $45 billion venture into SoftBank, Sprint's de facto owner. 

They worry that Saudi Arabia has been snooping on the cell phones of its "dissidents" and could get a backdoor into the US wireless communication infrastructure with the merger. Needless to say, the biggest grievance that concerns the parties responsible for the merger approval, should be the potential for job losses, and the Communications Workers of America's director has the following statement on the matter in the aforementioned letter:



1. drazwy

Posts: 361; Member since: Jan 15, 2014

What bulls**t. Collusion? LOL so why is collusion possible with 3 companies and not 4? Wow. garbage. And why would some of these orgs. be against it? Like Rural Wireless. LOL Reral areas are already under served anyway. This might help. What they are doing now, isn't for sure. Someone is handing out cash at the door to this party. Wonder who...

2. baldilocks

Posts: 1545; Member since: Dec 14, 2008

They wouldn't allow the AT&T merger with T-Mobile, why should they allow Sprint and T-Mobile?

4. phoneguy

Posts: 213; Member since: Jan 08, 2009

Umm because its not the same thing? I mean two smaller competitors combining into one to offer what the two big ones are doing is diff. They didnt allow it because att would have had too much control over the Us wireless industry. I am no Dr. but come on

3. talon95

Posts: 1004; Member since: Jul 31, 2012

I prefer 3 national companies than 2. If Sprint doesn't merge they could go under and then all this talk will be for nothing. T-Mobile has no 5G option if not for Sprint. I don't need 2 more 3rd rate carriers that can't hold their own, I need more competition for Dumb and Dumber, so wile I'm not a huge fan, it's the only option that makes sense.

6. Eclectech

Posts: 355; Member since: May 01, 2013

Sprint is owned by Softbank. Softbank is number 6 on the list for top telephone operating companies and the 39th largest public company in the world. Sprint, on its own, is making a profit. They are in no danger of going out of business. They merely used "alternate facts" to support their merger attempt.

9. Derrrrr

Posts: 1; Member since: Nov 29, 2018

Spoken like a true Johnny Boy Leger fan boy...

5. djcody

Posts: 236; Member since: Apr 17, 2013

What if 3 big CEO sit down by table while eating nice dinner and say: after 3 years heavy investment and spending, 5g upgrade we rise price 5$ a line. Would you like to pay more? Less people by table agree quickly then multiple. So four is better than anything less. I will easy say us market is big enough for 6 carriers

7. SpencerO

Posts: 31; Member since: Nov 29, 2017

I'd be happy if they merged. That would only make my T-mobile service better... And my rate is locked in so it's just going to expand their network and lighten the load on their towers.

8. Rigmaster

Posts: 234; Member since: Jan 22, 2018

Ironic that CR would weigh in on this given that all they really should be doing is rating the providers. Imagine companies started penning letters against CR outlining all the reasons it's testing shouldn't be believed - especially since there's almost no direct competition for CR. There's no real reason why this is being resisted other than groups who stand to lose something. It's just money-grab and protectionism of small pots. Let's face it. The government and all these naysayers aren't even suggesting that the two alone are better for everyone.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit for samples and additional information.