Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

T-Mobile, Sprint Close To Agreeing Deal Terms (reuters.com)

Posted by msmash on from the up-next dept.

From a report: T-Mobile US is close to agreeing tentative terms on a deal to merge with peer Sprint Corp, people familiar with the matter said on Friday, a major breakthrough in efforts to merge the third and fourth largest U.S. wireless carriers. The development follows more than four months of on-and-off talks this year between T-Mobile and Sprint, and comes as the U.S. telecommunications sector seeks ways to tackle investments in 5G technology that will greatly enhance wireless data transfer speeds.

22 of 85 comments (clear)

  1. eeew by markdavis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Eeek, I am not so sure I want my provider, T-Mobile, dragged down by Sprint.

    1. Re:eeew by ctilsie242 · · Score: 2

      Who is buying out whom? T-Mobile buying out Sprint is fine with me, but I really don't like the other way round, since I've not really been happy with Sprint's CS over the years.

    2. Re:eeew by RPGonAS400 · · Score: 2
      I have had Sprint for almost 13 years now and they have been great. Started with 5 lines, now we have 9.

      In rural Ohio you can find Sprint stores in most towns. The closest T-Mobile store to me is 45 minutes away.

    3. Re:eeew by clonehappy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Deutsche Telekom will remain the majority shareholder of the combined entity. T-Mobile is essentially buying Sprint.

      Think before you speak.

  2. Can't wait until there's only one provider by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 2

    Maybe we can call it "American Telephone" or just use a cute ringing emoji symbol and call it "American Bell"

  3. they could also tout text capability. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    This new company could be called American Telephone & Text.

    1. Re:they could also tout text capability. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Don't forget about data.

      American Telephone, Text, and TCP/IP.

      All hail our new overlord, ATT&T!

  4. Capitalism Tends Toward Monopoly by RumGunner · · Score: 2

    We should not be okay with this. Reduced choices leads to increased cost. Fewer companies means less competition, and a greater probability of collusion and price-fixing. We should be furious.

    However, the people who actually run this country are quite okay with this, so it will almost certainly go through.

    1. Re:Capitalism Tends Toward Monopoly by ctilsie242 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then there is shit like actively MITMing traffic which some telcos did, where they actively added in UIDH headers into HTTP traffic as a way to ID people. T-Mobile was one of the few that didn't do this.

      I get no warm fuzzies about this merger unless Sprint is completely absorbed and Magenta's DNA stays the same.

  5. Re:If Sprint takes over ownership future is bleak by Anubis+IV · · Score: 5, Informative

    The reporting I read earlier today suggested that the positions have been swapped at the table, so T-Mobile's owner (Deutsche Telekom) would be the majority shareholder in a 60-40 merger with Sprint (owned by SoftBank). Likewise, the current T-Mobile CEO who has been leading a successful comeback for the carrier would be the CEO of the merged company.

  6. What does T-Mobile get? by PineHall · · Score: 2

    I am wonder what advantage there is for T-Moble. In the last few years, T-Mobile has greatly expanded its network. Coverage is much better. Would Sprint increase the network coverage of T-Mobile? I don't it would make much of a difference. Where is Sprint that T-Mobile is not? I don't see the advantage for T-Mobile. Cost savings from the combine company reducing staff, I don't think will be that great.

    1. Re:What does T-Mobile get? by tgetzoya · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Sprint has a lot of spectrum that it isn't using because it can't afford to. After that, take the total number of subscribers from Sprint and T-Mobile and when it's still less than AT&T or Verizon there's so much spectrum left that T-Mobile could offer (very) much better coverage than either of the two titans.

      When a new spectrum auction comes up, T-Mobile will not need to bid and therefore not raise rates to cover cost. Also, with all that new spectrum, 5G will be more realizable.

      Finally, T-Moblie could start offering home broadband like Comcast or Charter. There would be lower caps than those but it's still a much more viable option at 5G.

    2. Re:What does T-Mobile get? by squiggleslash · · Score: 2

      One less competitor. Both are occupying the same space (unfortunately) as budget operator with a poor (largely undeserved, in T-Mo's case) reputation for quality of network. T-Mobile gets the Sprint customers.

      They could use the additional spectrum to go overboard on their bandwidth (unlimited LTE speed tethering! Data de-prioritization threshold of 500G! Go nuts! Get rid of Comcast!) I guess. Mind you, the problem there would more likely be the physical cables going to each tower. So I don't see that happening.

      As a consumer, this might be a good thing, it might not. It might position T-Mo to challenge Verizon and AT&T more effectively as an equal. But they might also see the opportunity to raise prices.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  7. NOooooo! by xeno · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've been with T-Mobile for... well, since they started in the US in the VoiceStream days. I worked for ATTWS for many years, family members have had Sprint and Verizon, ...so with a couple decades of input it's clear: T-Mobile is pretty good.

    The problem is how godawful the rest are. ATTWS is still a pile of bailing wire pretending to be a premium carrier at top dollar. Verizon's technology is decent, but the customer service is incompetent at best, and the pricing schemes are draconian. And Sprint... oh Sprint... their customer service motto is "we don't care," their technical philosophy is based on lock-in, and their billing policies are designed by people who run those fitness gyms that you can't ever get to stop billing your card even after the service ends. By contrast, T-Mo is amazing, because they just keep being pretty good.

    PLEASE, T-Mo, don't do this. Sprint's infrastructure is barely worth it, and the human capital over on the yellow side of the fence needs to be sent back to barista school, from top to bottom. Why trash a good thing for another .000002% growth? DON'T MERGE WITH SPRINT, she's a-no-good-for-you!!

    --
    I think not...(*poof*)
    1. Re:NOooooo! by squiggleslash · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Verizon's technology is decent

      Verizon's MARKETING of their technology is good. Their technology is awful. They're the only network I consistently have to ask everyone to repeat themselves three times or more if they call me. It's like listening to someone speaking through a garden hose that someone else is jumping on over and over again.

      They've learned the secret to getting people to say they have a really good network is:

      1. Marketing, marketing, marketing.
      2. Maximize coverage, at the expense of everything else.
      3. Focus on call drops and other unlikely events that tend to get used as objective metrics.

      Do those three, and you can get away with anything, to the point your network is virtually unusable in practice. Why? Because if the objective metrics say it's good, people will rarely even realize the more difficult to measure but more critical attributes of a phone service are infinitely better with all the others. Even Sprint.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  8. Network compatibility? by WrongMonkey · · Score: 2

    Sprint is CDMA. T-Mobile is GSM. How does a merger make sense when they can't even combine current customers onto the same network.

    1. Re:Network compatibility? by starblazer · · Score: 4, Informative

      they both run LTE networks and LTE is the way of the foreseeable future. CDMA and GSM are not the main underlying topologies like they used to be.

    2. Re:Network compatibility? by EvilSS · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I imagine they will phase out the CDMA network. Most other CDMA carriers are dropping it. Verizon is slated to turn off theirs in 2019 and several Canadian carriers are moving away from it as well.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    3. Re:Network compatibility? by Solandri · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Aside from the SIM card (which is used for LTE anyway), CDMA and GSM are only used for voice and 3G data (in fact GSM uses wideband CDMA for 3G data).

      LTE uses OFDMA, with a few channels using dynamically assigned TDMA. These are compatible with both GSM and CDMA carriers as long as the phones aren't frequency-locked to a specific carrier's bands. So the networks would in fact be compatible if you made a phone with an OFDMA LTE radio, and both CDMA and GSM voice radios. My old Nexus 5 supports all those. So does the unlocked Samsung Galaxy 8/8+. If a combined Sprint/T-Mobile requested manufacturers to make such phones, I'm sure they would (except Sony, who seems to hate CDMA voice).

      Sprint service is fine in most of the East coast and midwest. Their service has been hamstrung in the West coast because the company they hired to build their tower network there (which has since gone bankrupt) spaced the towers out the furthest apart the specifications allowed. You know, the time-honored tradition of fulfilling the exact letter of the contract while spending the least amount of money possible. This resulted in a cellular network which only worked well in open, flat terrain, and had lots of dead spots in urban and hilly areas. Sprint has tried to fix this by adding intermediate towers, but this is expensive and often results in towers being too close together.

      The only true fix is to tear it all down and build all the towers again with proper spacing. Or to merge with another carrier with their own tower network, and to reallocate transmitting equipment to properly spaced towers, and shut down unnecessary towers. The extra cellular bandwidth wouldn't hurt either seeing as both companies predominantly operate in the 1.8-1.9 GHz bands (Verizon and AT&T have the advantage of 900 MHz voice bands).

  9. Re:I wanted a blanket phase out of CDMA... by squiggleslash · · Score: 2

    When T-Mobile bought MetroPCS they phased out cdmaOne/cdma2000 over a period of two years. Like Sprint, MetroPCS was a combined LTE/cdmaOne/cdma2000 network.

    In all probability, T-Mobile will do the same thing with Sprint, perhaps over a slightly longer period of time. This would leave Verizon as the sole operator of a network still running Qualcomm's standards, and increase pressure on them to turn it off, moving all their customers to exclusively LTE (the latest generation GSM standard.)

    So, other than breaking up Qualcomm, this merger will bring about your wish.

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  10. Sherman Antitrust Act by Eldaar · · Score: 2

    We have antitrust laws (anti-monopoly or pro-competition laws) on the books to stop this kind of thing. The Sherman Antitrust Act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act) is the first that comes to mind. When will the US actually enforce laws like this to promote competition among markets? "The free market" rests on the notion that buyers and sellers in a marketplace have access to good information about what they're buying and selling, and that government creates reasonable rules by which the players play and compete. Allowing companies to gain such huge market share is definitely anti-competitive and hurts consumers.

    1. Re:Sherman Antitrust Act by virtig01 · · Score: 2

      Allowing companies to gain such huge market share is definitely anti-competitive and hurts consumers.

      Sprint's share + TMUS's share is still less than the market share of either VZ or ATT.