AT&T’s chief thinks a push for a Sprint/T-Mobile merger would meet the same fate as AT&T’s own failed bid for the “mobile maverick.”
Even though the merger hasn’t been officially proposed yet, AT&T Chairman and CEO Randall Stephenson said Tuesday it is a “stretch” to see how it would get regulators’ nod of approval, because it would reduce competition in the wireless industry from four major carriers to three.
He’s not just bitter about AT&T’s expensive breakup with T-Mobile after regulators blocked its $39 billion deal in 2011. According to Stephenson, regulators made their reasons for blocking the AT&T/T-Mobile in 2011 crystal clear: The merger would reduce competition.
“There were not other major issues. That was the issue, and that’s what they came after,” he said during an interview with David Rubenstein, CEO of the Carlyle Group, for an event hosted by the Business Roundtable. “As you think about Sprint and T-Mobile combining, I struggle to see how that is not four going to three.”
T-Mobile has arguably become more of a “mobile maverick” under the leadership of CEO John Legere, who joined the company in 2012. Legere’s aggressive price-slashing strategy has reverberated throughout the wireless market.
“[Regulators] won’t want to see that to go away,” Stephenson said.
But AT&T’s chief doesn’t necessarily think the merger shouldn’t pass.
“Obviously, if I thought they should approve ours, it would be hard for me to suggest that they shouldn’t approve that one,” he said.
Breaking up with T-Mobile cost AT&T a cool $3 billion in cash and $1 billion in spectrum, and a failed merger would also cost Sprint a pretty penny. If the Sprint/T-Mobile merger fails, Sprint is rumored to have agreed to pay T-Mobile at least a $1 billion breakup fee, according to recent reports of a tentative $32 billion merger agreement between the third- and fourth-largest mobile carriers.
“It’s a pretty good business model,” Stephenson quipped.
Although Sprint sued to block the AT&T/T-Mobile merger in 2011 because it would mean “higher prices and less innovation” for consumers, the company and its owner, the Japanese telecom Softbank, are arguing that a Sprint/T-Mobile merger is different because it would help the two smaller carriers actually compete against Verizon and AT&T.
CORRECTION: A previous version of this article misstated the amount that AT&T paid T-Mobile after their 2011 merger failed.
- 1 How Ron Wyden Banned Internet Taxes Forever
- 2 Obama’s Second-Term Agenda Hits a Roadblock: the Supreme Court
- 3 John Kasich Dismisses Climate Change As ‘Some Theory That’s Not Proven’
- 4 Obamacare Will Reduce Income Inequality, but Quietly
- 5 I Did Improv With the ‘Jeopardy Villain,’ and He’s Exactly as He Appears on Television
What We're Following See More »
Under pressure from a judge, the State Department will release about 550 of Hillary Clinton’s emails—“roughly 14 percent of the 3,700 remaining Clinton emails—on Saturday, in the middle of the Presidents Day holiday weekend.” All of the emails were supposed to have been released last month. Related: State subpoenaed the Clinton Foundation last year, which brings the total number of current Clinton investigations to four, says the Daily Caller.
UPDATED: Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) will not be playing the role of Ralph Nader in this year’s election. Speaking in Dallas today, Webb said, “We looked at the possibility of an independent candidacy. Theoretically, it could be done, but it is enormously costly and time sensitive, and I don’t see the fundraising trajectory where we could make a realistic run.”
“The leaders of the Republican and Democratic national committees on Wednesday weighed in on the prospect of an independent presidential run by” former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I). “DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz suggested that the former New York City mayor’s priorities are already ‘well cared-for’ in the Democratic platform, while RNC leader Reince Priebus welcomed the idea, saying Bloomberg would siphon off votes from the Democratic candidate.”
Three hundred fifty-two, thanks to superdelegates pledged to Clinton, and the vagaries of the delegate allocation process in early states. Not bad, considering her results have been a virtual tie and a blowout loss.