Here's your chance to tell a federal judge what you think about the T-Mobile-Sprint merger

by Alan Friedman

@wolfcallsputs

Jan 11, 2020, 12:57 PM

Here's your chance to tell a federal judge what you think about the T-Mobile-Sprint merger

With closing arguments set for this coming Wednesday in the trial that will determine the fate of the T-Mobile-Sprint merger, a federal judge says that he will accept comments from third-parties via an amicus curiae or friends of the court brief. Reuters reports that Judge Timothy Kelly, who will be assessing the Justice Department's approval of the merger, said that he would consider accepting such briefs for his review.

Judge Kelly did place some limits on the submissions stating that they should be capped at 20 pages and should not repeat previous arguments made to the DOJ since he already has access to those. During a hearing held on Friday, the judge said, "I want to give (third-parties) a reasonable opportunity to be heard." Additionally, Judge Kelly approved the choice of Facebook's former general counsel, Theodore Ullyot, to be the monitoring trustee in case the merger is approved. Ullyot will oversee the merger and divestiture process according to a court filing.

Dish Network CEO Ergen says that it will be ready to serve wireless consumes "from day one"

The Justice Department originally was against the combination of the nation's third and fourth-largest wireless providers. The concern the agency had was that by reducing the number of major wireless carriers in the country from four to three, there would be less competition in the industry. This would allow the surviving companies to hike prices. This argument has been used quite often by those opposed to the merger including the state attorneys general who are the plaintiffs in the current bench trial. The FCC and the DOJ used the very same argument when Sprint and T-Mobile went to the regulatory agencies back in 2014 and proposed a merger; their response led the companies to drop the idea until it resurfaced in a whole different form in 2018.

If T-Mobile buys Sprint, Dish Network will purchase Boost Mobile and other assets from Sprint

To get around the DOJ's objections, Sprint last year entered into a deal with Dish Network. Once the T-Mobile-Sprint merger closes, the satellite television provider will pay $5 billion to Sprint for the latter's prepaid businesses and other assets. The unit includes 9.3 million customers and Boost Mobile. In preparation for the merger, this past week Sprint said that it is moving Virgin Mobile customers to Boost to form "one cohesive, efficient and effective prepaid team." The migration will begin the week of February 2nd and is designed to make it easier for Dish to acquire the unit.

As part of the deal with Sprint, Dish will take control over 14MHz of 800MHz spectrum (Dish already owns a decent amount of 600MHz low-band spectrum that it might lease to T-Mobile), 400 employees, and 7,500 retail locations. Dish will also sign a seven-year MVNO agreement with T-Mobile allowing it to sell wireless service under its name immediately while building a standalone 5G network. While testifying under oath during the trial, Dish Chairman Charles Ergen said that Dish will be ready to step in as a replacement for Sprint "on day one." Dish will need a deep-pocketed partner to help it build its 5G network. Companies like Google, Apple and Amazon have been rumored to be possible partners.

T-Mobile has made it clear that the merger is all about 5G. The company covets Sprint's mid-band 2.5GHz spectrum. Such airwaves are not easy for wireless operators to obtain in the U.S.; T-Mobile CEO John Legere pointed out that with the merger T-Mobile will have "triple the total 5G capacity of standalone T-Mobile and Sprint combined." he stated. On the other hand, Legere says that if the deal is blocked, in some markets T-Mobile will "exhaust capacity in the next two to four years."

Friends of the court briefs are submitted by third parties with an interest in the outcome of a case. U.S. consumers who subscribe to a major wireless provider could be considered to have an interest in how the court rules. After both sides present closing arguments on Wednesday, Judge Vincent Marrero is expected to make a ruling early in February.

FEATURED VIDEO

Options

38 Comments

1. Perfect-2020

Posts: 1; Member since: Jan 11, 2020

As a Sprint customer, I really wish they consider the value of Sprint customers as we have the most to lose out. That, and Sprint employees of course. I would rather Dish buy out Sprint. Why does Dish have to sign a 7 year MNVO agree with T-Mobile? Aren't they supposed to compete against T-Mobile??? We should do everything to protect competition! Dish has had spectrum for years, they should've just open their own cellular service long ago. They value the paid television market more it seems. Fact is, they have had the spectrum already and did absolutely nothing. Sprint is the only company that offers insanely high tethering plans compared to the competition. 50GB to 100GB while everyone else is stuck somewhere in the 20GB range. I don't want to decrease my data plan to please T-Mobile. This is sad news, if the merger takes place, this will be bad news, and nothing worth celebrating for. Sure, it benefits the investors but try to see this from a customer standpoint. This merger benefits nobody but T-Mobile shareholders. I can't believe everybody thinks that in order for T-Mobile offer 5G, it has to buy Sprint, but they already started their 5G network last year. If we allow T-Mobile to take over Sprint, what will happen when 6G comes out? Will T-Mobile buy out Verizon? Or will they buy out Dish for the sake of 6G? Their 5G excuse doesn't work out. Fact is, Dish could fail as a competitor, and we are taking a big risk by allowing T-Mobile to buy out Sprint. I would rather 4 established competitors than taking a chance with a company who has no mobile experience at all. My argument is, why can't Dish and Sprint merge together instead?

posted on Jan 11, 2020, 11:39 PM 4

5. lordie

Posts: 2; Member since: Jan 12, 2020

i like your theory on dish and sprint merging

posted on Jan 12, 2020, 8:32 AM 2

6. harrisvt

Posts: 22; Member since: Nov 10, 2015

Hmmmmm I guess you like your shotty coverage and speeds and worse customer service. Truth of the matter people are leaving sprint in droves because it's a sinking ship. If they dont get bought they will go bankrupt. Their debt load is insanely high high compared to their revenue. Its a death spiral. I'm a happy tmobile customer. I think you'll find in the long run your fears were unwarranted.

posted on Jan 12, 2020, 10:34 AM 3

24. merk87

Posts: 2; Member since: Jan 13, 2020

I've had Verizon, At&t and T-Mobile. Lousy service Where I live. I live in an affluent neighborhood in Massachusetts. Neither Verizon or T-MOBILE or At&t coverage reaches here. Why should I pay more for lousy coverage? I think the merger will be bad for everyone down the road. Stop falling for that line, less competition WILL be more money for everyone to pay. It's never worked any other way.

posted on Jan 13, 2020, 7:35 AM 2

26. Eddbig50

Posts: 10; Member since: Jan 13, 2020

Agreed. I'm in Massachusetts as well and Sprint is the only service that work in my area the other 3 are horrendous. Coworkers constantly complain about them. I have even allowed some of them to connect using my hotspot.

posted on Jan 13, 2020, 7:38 AM 1

27. Eddbig50

Posts: 10; Member since: Jan 13, 2020

Actually it's the opposite where I'm at many have changed over to Sprint because it's better than the other 3. The prices are reasonable as well. Prove your statement of people leaving in droves. False narrative to push your agenda but not facts.

posted on Jan 13, 2020, 7:40 AM 0

31. mj41478

Posts: 4; Member since: Jan 12, 2020

It isn’t a false narrative, do you just like to through that out because you don’t agree and it’s working for you? I know the numbers and the numbers aren’t good. Churn which is new customers coming in and others leaving is at an all time high. It’s false to say they have all these customers when they have all these customers that leave on the back end. The problem is the service you are receiving isn’t the service everyone receives everywhere they have sprint. That is what their goal is, however this can not happen due to the massive amount of money the owe. They can not afford to improve anything everywhere and will have to pick and choose what kind of national network is that?

posted on Jan 13, 2020, 8:11 AM 0

8. TheNewTmobile1

Posts: 1; Member since: Jan 12, 2020

Former sprint customer as of November 2017 . I'm now with Tmobile and they both have the hotspot set 50gb so they're would be no decreasing on your end. They (sprint) also didnt have that high of a threshold when I left couple years ago . I honestly can't wait for this merger to be done with and finalized . I think it'll be great for everyone all around .

posted on Jan 12, 2020, 3:51 PM 2

25. Eddbig50

Posts: 10; Member since: Jan 13, 2020

Yes cant wait now but watch what happens 3yrs from now. T-mobile making 3yrs commitment to not raises prices, I wander why. All three will raise their prices to similarly match just wait. The cable industry has proven this.

posted on Jan 13, 2020, 7:35 AM 0

32. mj41478

Posts: 4; Member since: Jan 12, 2020

The entire wireless industry should be a utility anyways to govern this better anyways. But that won’t happen. 3 years they can’t raise prices yes but what happened over those three years? Do you not plan to see inflation or to get paid more, there is a cost correlation with certain things and prices eventually will rise how much we won’t know unless government steps in and makes them utility. But for instance the average minimum wage in the past 3 years in my state alone has gone up 30 percent to $12. The other thing is people need to stop buying the most expensive phones for their family and then complain that their bill is high when you knew what it would be. Get what you can afford. Why are we the one of the last country to do away with contracts and pay less to follow everyone else’s model of the customer WILL actually pay for their entire phone that Europe and Western Asia counties have been using. The main difference and it’s huge is while we took that on we did not change pricing schemes of cell plans itself to make them cheap like over there. We are greedy. Capitalist at its finest.

posted on Jan 13, 2020, 8:21 AM 0

9. Allison28

Posts: 21; Member since: May 04, 2013

My best friend has Sprint and the prices are high, the coverage is shoddy, the call quality is pure garbage, and the customer service is impossible do deal with. I am excited for the merger so she can have T-Mobile like I do. They are an excellent company. I would LOVE to see them go in the direction of cable/internet providers as well. I think that is a long term business plan for the company and I am rooting for it.

posted on Jan 12, 2020, 5:06 PM 2

23. Eddbig50

Posts: 10; Member since: Jan 13, 2020

Sprint coverage has been absolutely marvelous where I'm at and their customer service has been amazing with me. My connection is so strong I activate my hotspot so my coworkers can use their AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon devices.

posted on Jan 13, 2020, 7:33 AM 2

14. Tesla_Nate

Posts: 1; Member since: Jan 12, 2020

It is funny that California is trying to stop a "monopoly". California has 3 service providers for electricity. But who cares because California gets paid on these deals. I was in the wireless industry for a long time. Why didn't the states step in when AT&T and Verizon where gobbling up all the competition then. This is something that is needed to get the lower band spectrum out there. The 5G alone will not only reach places that don't have coverage now. But brings us closer to where they are at in coverage around the world. This needs to get done. The states are not getting paid. That is why they are crying could. If the states want to do something stop the monopolies on electricity. San Diego Gas and electric have the highest rated in the country. Do something about that!

posted on Jan 12, 2020, 9:02 PM 1

22. Eddbig50

Posts: 10; Member since: Jan 13, 2020

You cant compare electric companies to phone service because they are governed by the government due to health reasons. There cant be huge power plants everywhere could cause too many health risk such as cancer. This is a bad deal for consumers but logistically it has to happen due to Sprints financial state. I hate this merger otherwise. Less competition will increase prices without a doubt. That is why T-Mobile has stated it will not increase prices for 3 years. I've had nothing but the best service with Sprint for the last 30yrs however all things must come to an end or change.

posted on Jan 13, 2020, 7:30 AM 1

28. merk87

Posts: 2; Member since: Jan 13, 2020

When you can drive your Tesla 450 miles at night with the headlights on at 75 mph without stopping, please comment. Oh, I know why, You can't. But why am I talking about a car? Crazy, huh? Why are you talking about electric rates? Stay focused Homer!

posted on Jan 13, 2020, 7:44 AM 0

18. honeydip

Posts: 1; Member since: Jan 13, 2020

I get it but there’s a couple of things. Dish doesn’t have any cellular services built out yet to Really support any major carrier like sprint. Do a little more research on tmobile. They have the highest throttle limit than any other carrier at 50g and that’s if network is crowded. T-Mobile also has the lowest plans realistically Because sprint promotes lower plans but in small print puts subject to change after a certain amount of years. T-Mobile just has the plan no change unless u change the plan. Any of u go any cheaper u might as well not be making a profit. T-Mobile can’t buy Verizon they’re too grounded in with cdma and not a gsm network and other things. The technology of 6g will happen regardless who cares who has it first due to most carrier only have a few phones that can support it (because u Sometimes you can’t receive that signal Unless you have a phone that supports it.) sprint would benefit from merger way more than Tmobile..stock. Employees benefits..T-mobiles financial plan and profit Is better with or without sprint. Lastly for MVNO(prepaid) dish is not established a cell network so tmobile will provide one for them instead of waiting for them to build out there own. Creating a another company with lower cost like metro pc, net 10, Walmart cellular plan and many others that use the T-Mobile network. At end of the day all carriers support each other especially when roaming.

posted on Jan 13, 2020, 3:38 AM 1

34. mkall

Posts: 1; Member since: Jan 13, 2020

The problem with Sprint is the same problem that AT&T and Verizon have had albeit probably to a lesser extent. Sprint was built off legacy copper, the majority of their towers still reply on copper not fiber per what I have heard from some techs in wireless forums. The biggest issue for Sprint is of course money, it will take Sprint billions to convert their network and still do spectrum deployment, hardware testing and certify with radio suppliers that the radios provided will work on the Sprint network. That still doesn't include the move to 5G and scaling up to compete with the top 3. All in all, Sprint is dead. Nextel was the first nail in the coffin, 4G WiMax/Clearwire was the second nail and Marcelo Claure was the last one. When Deutsche Telekom purchased VoiceStream and entered the US market, they were proactive and converted all their towers to fiber. They had no idea if the fiber would ever be necessary but their gamble paid off in 2012 after the failed AT&T/T-Mobile merger. This time however, the only way AT&T and Verizon do not get stronger is if Sprint merges with T-Mobile. If Sprint goes bankrupt, it will be parted off and AT&T along with Verizon have been wanting the 2.5GHz spectrum as that is the sweet spot to do big deployments economically while still providing fast data without the need of deploying tons of Pico and Micro towers. Verizon wants to use millimeter spectrum but it is not reliable yet and any little interference including wind and rain will cause millimeter spectrum to become useless. 2.5GHz does not have this problem, if T-Mobile got their hands on it they would be a formidable competitor again the big two. Verizon has the coverage and AT&T has density but T-Mobile would have both now with 600MHz. 700Mhz and 2.5GHz. On Dish's end they would fair pretty well as well as they have some mid-range spectrum and would get some 800MHz spectrum once they clear that band (Sprint was sitting on it and has not cleared that band for use in parts of the US, I believe mostly up by the US/Canada border).

posted on Jan 13, 2020, 10:45 AM 0

35. dharris

Posts: 4; Member since: Jan 13, 2020

Well got to tell you this merger would do nothing but help your coverage. I worked for Verizon and Sprint is the worst I am a T mobile customer now and they are amazing

posted on Jan 13, 2020, 12:38 PM 0

40. ClifftonKMorris

Posts: 6; Member since: Oct 15, 2017

I currently have Sprint Service and can tell that it's getting better. In the area where I live, I now have simoutaneous voice/data, and my SpeedTest results are often 90-110MBps. Overall, Sprint could probably do just fine if it's left alone. The only thing I've had to teach myself with Sprint is that they seem to take every customer interaction as an opportunity to upsell or change service plans. I wish they weren't trained that way. As for the merger itself, the rub to me is that T-Mobile (and not the DoJ Or FCC) selected Dish as a company to acquire spectrum, retail locations and customers, this merger as it stands today, creates a severely weaker VZ and AT&T. And like it or not, the number of AT&T + Verizon customers is greater than “New” T-Mobile as well. Thusly, more customers are affected. Ideally, the spectrum, customers and infrastructure (including Sprint’s ISP and fiber optic business) would NOT have been ASSIGNED to Dish, instead, they would have been AUCTIONED in a public asset sale. This private sale has downstream effects to AT&T and VZW customers will be felt for decades! I remember reading court testimony, where T-Mobile CEO John Legere compared Dish to a kid playing on a swing set, and checking out the toys of other kids. However, and in this case, T-Mobile didn't only pre-emptively take assets of Sprint, it also assigned who owns them next, and in due time, will also collect the money. T-Mobile is a bully that way. This was a very revealing statement; must be how T-Mobile internally operates today, because that's one way we got to this mess. More importantly, if approved, this merger creates new legal precedent for mergers that in the past would have been considered “Presumptively Illegal” under Herfindahl-Hirschman Index market concentration metrics. You’d only be “for” this merger if you want to set prescedent to allow even bigger, more ugly, and mean angry companies. This merger is the foundational change to the US economy to usher in more Airline and automotive mergers.

posted on Jan 19, 2020, 1:00 PM 0

4. lordie

Posts: 2; Member since: Jan 12, 2020

i think if dish buys boost mobile the service will be better and they can reprogram the satelites to be mini towers so in the rural areas ,people can get cell service, i liked virgin mobile . maybe this will be a good change ,its too early to tell .

posted on Jan 12, 2020, 8:31 AM 2

12. JerryParma

Posts: 2; Member since: Jan 12, 2020

Reprogram the satellites? You've been listening too much to the shamwow guy at Tesla. That satellite internet hoax is all BS. It's all ground based transmitters for everything... If you believe it, your dumber than a box of rocks.

posted on Jan 12, 2020, 7:27 PM 1

36. dharris

Posts: 4; Member since: Jan 13, 2020

I thought the same thing when I read that comment lol

posted on Jan 13, 2020, 12:39 PM 0

7. tsunsami

Posts: 4; Member since: Jan 12, 2020

As a long time T-mobile customer, I would like to see this merger go through, so I can access the decongested spectrum of Sprint and 5G broadbands. I am getting tired of paying expensive internet by Comcast.

posted on Jan 12, 2020, 11:07 AM 4

10. DAD111

Posts: 1; Member since: Jan 12, 2020

I am a 50 year sprint stock holder this might be a good thing for stock holders. This also should help rural America get coverage they so desperately deserve.

posted on Jan 12, 2020, 5:30 PM 3

11. mj41478

Posts: 4; Member since: Jan 12, 2020

I work for Sprint, I have worked here over three years, before that I work in wireless area/electronics. My family has been in the T-Comm industry for a long time. I would love to have this merger go through, I also to be honest wouldn’t have made any changes to the merger for it to go through no dish or anything. This is about competing with the likes of the big dogs ATT and Verizon. There are different issues at play here unfortunately. If merger fails sprint will very very likely scale back and try to work as a regional carrier only because they can not afford to do anything else. Way to much debt. SoftBank decides to let them go bankrupt then where does our spectrum go? Who buys it well it’s more that likely going to fall into the big dogs hands anyways and we are still back to 3 carriers anyways with much much weaker number 3. To say that Sprint is in the same position T-mobile was in in 2013 is false. The breakup fee alone from their attempted merger is what kick started their comeback. SPRINT does not have a breakup fee coming like that if this goes through and owes money. Not exactly same place as states argue. The other thing is the arguement that because we go to 3 it will cause prices to rise solely because we have 3 national carriers. This is speculation entirely people taking educated guesses based on no info because it has ever happened. They are discounting MVO as competition and region carriers as well. You can’t use both of these for the argument they are making because one contradicts the other. Since when is taking over a year to go through the deal by federal government equal “cursory” looking at? If that is what cursory means I would hate to see what an in depth review is and not like the states did anything more. Lastly. If you truly think this is or will become a problem then change the wireless to a utility like it should be. Because last time I checked not allowing two smaller companies to come together to compete with 2 massive companies, all the while allowing the massive companies to continue growing what’s the point. What are we teaching others. Don’t try to get better and don’t think of competing.

posted on Jan 12, 2020, 6:32 PM 3

21. Eddbig50

Posts: 10; Member since: Jan 13, 2020

No speculation on prices will rise because the law of supply and demand reaches this theory. Prices will increase otherwise T-Mobile wouldnt need to make the commitment of not raising prices for 3yrs. However I do understand the logistics of Sprint not being able to sustain financially so something must be done.

posted on Jan 13, 2020, 7:23 AM 2

39. mj41478

Posts: 4; Member since: Jan 12, 2020

Law of supply and demand is not exactly tied to this the way you think it is. Plus prices could go up from inflation, but yet people will scream immediately that their you go see prices went up. As I have said many times over. Sprint can not continue to compete at this level. They owe money, can’t pay it. How does one stay in the game in no merger takes place? They sell of assets, well then they sell the spectrum they soooo desperately need. In doing so will degrade their network further. They will just become more regionalized until they go bankrupt or merge later, by that time the assets needed are gone. And we are then still left with 3 carriers. 2 really strong ones and a weaker 3. So 2 1/2 really. Plus all the MVO’s. Then it’s just a matter of time as att and Verizon just continue to lean on T-Mobile. Or the merger goes through and you have 3 strong competitors and a newly started (technically speaking) 4, the caveat is dish doesn’t have to deal with all the old tech to get their situation underway. It is far easier and better to build without being handcuffed with those restrictions, which will only help. There are many many factors to take when determining why price is increasing. Supply and demand isn’t going to be one of them because the demand is already present the market is extremely saturated with how many people owning a phone already. All the carriers are doing is tossing customers around or just upgrading phones. Maybe we should just stop being greedy, the wireless companies to Europe’s blueprint on not using subsidizing of phones and having customers pay for them and said we can still gouge them for service too, which is the opposite of Europe. Their is a reason many countries are ahead of us in this industry. Have the government change it to a utility and regulate it and it would solve many many things!

posted on Jan 14, 2020, 7:58 AM 0

13. JerryParma

Posts: 2; Member since: Jan 12, 2020

They are worried about only having 3 carriers. Meanwhile, where I live there's only 1 cable company available to me. There's only 2 rideshare companies, I don't see a big deal being made of that. This whole thing has been one charade put on by the government as if they cared about monopolies. They have amazon shipping all the products to our house, listening to us on Alexa and watching us on their ring doorbells..... But this doesn't show up on the radar as having too much control.. Give me a break.

posted on Jan 12, 2020, 7:33 PM 2

20. Eddbig50

Posts: 10; Member since: Jan 13, 2020

Poor comparisons and I will to bet that cable company is charging whatever they want because it's the law of supply and Demand.

posted on Jan 13, 2020, 7:19 AM 1

15. Jtblockman

Posts: 1; Member since: Jan 12, 2020

I live in Florida and changed over to Sprint it was the worst service I had lived about 5min from the store .good service buy the store got home no service .called Sprint and went to the store and got a runaround .from them all so after 30 days of crap service I went back to T-Mobile and don't have any problems with them Sprint service sucks down here

posted on Jan 12, 2020, 9:19 PM 3

view all comments

Latest Stories

View more news