Wireless Internet

[Commentary] The proposition here is simple: This T-Mobile/Sprint deal will shrink the market for nationwide mobile wireless service from four players to three, giving consumers fewer choices and increasing the likelihood that prices will be higher and service offerings will be less consumer-friendly. Decreased competition in a market that is already consolidated? This deal should be an easy one for the government to reject. Companies seeking to merge typically promise the sun, moon, and the stars to regulators in order to obtain approval, and T-Mobile and Sprint are no different.

[Commentary] Is our government bound by the rule of law or the rule of President Trump? The Department of Justice's Antitrust Division must consider this question. Here's why. There is a two-part, simple legal standard for deciding whether the proposed combination of Sprint and T-Mobile should be allowed. Would it harm competition in such a way that consumers would suffer?

T-Mobile appears to be rallying former regulators and legislators to its side, while some congressional Democrats and some public interest groups are formulating their arguments against the deal. Sitting in the middle are the Federal Communications Commission and Department of Justice, which must sign off on the transaction. It’s unclear how those agencies might act on the deal: Although most observers see the Trump administration as favorable to big businesses, the DoJ filed a lawsuit against AT&T’s attempts to purchase Time Warner.

Windstream is in the process of deploying Radwin’s fixed wireless equipment in two states covering thousands of potential customers, and is considering expanding that effort to additional customers in additional states. 

On April 29, 2018, T-Mobile US and Sprint announced that the boards of the two companies had agreed to enter into an agreement to merge. The companies said they hope to close the deal in the first half of 2019. The most obvious argument in favor the deal?

If you're a Sprint customer and have been frustrated by network performance, you may want to cheer on the deal with T-Mobile. If you're a T-Mobile customer, it doesn't represent much of an upgrade. For both groups, this tie-up—which still has to be approved by regulators—carries the risk of higher prices and fewer deals. For simple speed, though, the merger offers a lot of potential upside for Sprint users. Consider the results found by four nationwide tests of the big four carriers—two relying on crowdsourced data, two based on scheduled drive testing.

[Speech] On of the two historic accomplishments of the current Federal Communications Commission is that it is the first FCC to interpret its statutory mandate to say it doesn’t have much legal authority or policy rights to regulate broadcasters, telephone companies, cable companies, or wireless companies. Instead, its principal regulatory mandate is to regulate another set of enterprises: local governments.

T-Mobile’s John Legere and Sprint’s Marcelo Claure went to the Federal Communications Commission to begin laying the groundwork for their proposed $26.5 billion merger. They met with FCC Commissioners Michael O'Rielly and Jessica Rosenworcel and laid out much the same case that the companies have presented in public. 

T-Mobile executives for years have downplayed the opportunity for fixed wireless technology to replace wired internet connections. But with the proposed deal to swallow Sprint, T-Mobile executives said that the merger would position the newly-combined company to offer internet services to homes, offices and other locations—a move that would put the company into direct competition with the likes of Comcast, Charter, Verizon and other wired internet service providers.