Judge expected to deliver final approval of T-Mobile and Sprint merger on Tuesday

After nearly two years of jumping through regulatory hoops and fighting antitrust battles, T-Mobile and Sprint are poised to merge into a single entity dubbed "New T-Mobile" this week as a federal judge is expected to clear the way forward for the long-anticipated unification.

U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero is expected to deliver a decision in favor of T-Mobile and Sprint on Tuesday following a December trial involving a clutch of state attorneys general, reports The Wall Street Journal.

Arguing on behalf of the public, 13 state AGs said the proposed merger will result in lower competition, higher cellular phone rates, and reduced quality and innovation. Proponents of the merger say a joining of America's third- and fourth-largest wireless carriers by subscribers will create true competition for what has long been considered a duopoly shared between Verizon and AT&T.

While the Tuesday verdict is anticipated to be favorable to T-Mobile and Sprint, the combined entity might face additional concessions as handed down by Judge Marrero to assuage antitrust concerns.

The two companies officially garnered approval for a merger from the U.S. Department of Justice last July. Republican Federal Communications Commission commissioners concurred with the decision in November, overcoming dissent voiced by both Democrats on the leadership council.

To gain regulatory approval, T-Mobile and Sprint agreed to number of concessions including promises to spin off Sprint subsidiary Boost Mobile. Dish Network, which will become the nation's fourth major wireless provider under the deal, will gain wireless spectrum, some 20,000 cell sites and hundreds of stores as part of the arrangement.

T-Mobile and Sprint first announced the $26 billion merger in 2018.

Follow AppleInsider on Google News

3 Comments

GeorgeBMac 11421 comments · 8 Years

About 4 years ago

anantksundaram said:

About time.
This farce has gone on for too long.

I totally agree.
The argument against it has been that it is better to have 4 competitors than 3. But with 4, two of them are weak and offer little competition to the big two.   Three strong competitors would be better.

But there is another aspect: One of the reasons why America is lagging behind in telecommunications is its redundant efforts: While China is rolling out 5G across the country, the U.S. is building out quadruple services from 4 different companies in a few concentrated areas while ignoring the rest of the country.

I am looking forward to getting 5G transmitters on the telephone poles in my area. But, can they hang 4 transmitters, one from each company, from every pole?   Aside from the wasted cost of doing so, there is also the problem of physical space (and weight) on the pole.   What we have now are 4 companies competing with each other but not serving the public's best interests.

The model of rolling out telephone and electricity 100+ years ago is a far better one:   Provide one company with a monopoly to serve ALL of the country (or region) but regulate it heavily to insure that they do not abuse that monopoly while also insuring the stockholders a reasonable return on their money.
... Unfortunately, with free marketers running the country that efficient and effective approach won't happen here anytime soon -- while the rest of the world moves on ahead with modern technology.

liftfromtheknees 9 comments · 7 Years

About 4 years ago

This is the worst. Currently we have 2 expensive companies fighting and two cheaper companies fighting. Now that they’ll merge, and they’re all big, we’ll end up with 3 expensive companies fighting with little reason for Verizon and ATT to keep their prices down now that the two cheaper ones are gone.

And let’s be honest, Dish isn’t doing so well in its main business. I feel people mainly choose it because that’s all they can get. I wouldn’t touch Dish with a ten foot pole before all this. I suspect many share my sentiments of Dish.

Latest Exclusives

Latest comparisons