FCC Says It Needs More Time To Review T-Mobile, Sprint Merger (cnbc.com)

The FCC says it needs more time to review the proposed Sprint-T-Mobile deal, the agency said in a letter to the companies Tuesday. According to CNBC, "The agency has paused an 'informal' 180-day transaction clock 'to allow for thorough staff and third-party review' of recently submitted materials." From the report: Sprint and T-Mobile have gone down a rocky road to a merger, calling off and resuming talks. The companies announced that they would merge last April in a bid to cut costs and combine forces to develop a next-generation network called 5G, which would provide faster speeds, more capacity and lower response times. But the companies could encounter hurdles to gaining regulatory approval for the tie-up. A deal between T-Mobile and Sprint, who are the third largest and fourth largest wireless carriers in the United States by subscribers, previously faced opposition from antitrust regulators under President Barack Obama's administration.

Comments

Merger plan

[datavirtue]

Someone competent needs to start reviewing the merger plans of these companies...any company. It is, by default, anti-competitive behavior and suspect in a free market. Harvard has studied this to death and they can rarely find value, let alone a benefit to consumers. The board and management seem to make out but no one else does.

I have been through an acquisition and the only value was to post the revenue of the acquired company in the quarterly results so the CEO could keep the board off his back. The acquired company immediately started a sliding in revenue once the synergies were realized (good people who knew the business were let go or had to leave to preserve thier career status).

Re:Merger plan

[Snotnose]

Someone competent needs to start reviewing the merger plans of these companies...any company. It is, by default, anti-competitive behavior and suspect in a free market.

They have. They have been shouted down for at least since Clinton allowed the merger of 2 large oil companies. I remember that one because I used to think the D's would protect us from this shit, but Clinton took the donations and gave it a free pass.
/ Monica prolly had his cock in her mouth at the time
// #metoo is about 30 years too late
// fewer competition -> fewer consumer choices -> higher prices, no brainer

Re:Merger plan

[h33t l4x0r]

Actually, bigger oil companies can negotiate better with OPEC. It's not remotely the same situation as with Telcos.

Re:Merger plan

[Solandri]

It is, by default, anti-competitive behavior and suspect in a free market.

Mergers aren't anti-competitive by default.

• If one or both of the merging companies would otherwise have gone bankrupt, then it's not anti-competitive. The merger just redistributes the company's assets before bankruptcy, instead of after (assets are sold off). In other words, the merger accomplishes the same thing as a bankruptcy, except with less disruption to the market, creditors, stockholders, employees, and customers.
• If neither company is in danger of bankruptcy long-term, then yeah it's anti-competitive.

Sprint / T-Mobile merging is kinda 50/50. People have been saying Sprint is on the verge of bankruptcy for close to a decade. And T-Mobile's owner (Deutsche Telekom) has been trying to sell it on and off for close to a decade because of its poor financial performance. That would support a merger. But Sprint posted its first profit in years, and T-Mobile's profit (net income) has grown substantially in the last two years. Suggesting the two companies are recovering enough to make a merger unnecessary.

I guess reese's pieces check bounced

[Revek]

Lets face it that dingle berry only approves if he get paid.

Re:I guess reese's pieces check bounced

[Frank Burly]

You lack imagination. Maybe he shorted them.

Re:What's the holdup?

[h33t l4x0r]

They're waiting for a bigger bribe.