When T-Mobile announced on April 1 (no joke) that its combination with Sprint was finalized, we naturally assumed that meant all the formalities had been completed and there was no longer any reason why the two wireless service providers could not be lawfully joined together in a mutually beneficial merger. As it turns out, however, there might still be one loose end. Yes, really.
California is playing hard to get
The CPUC (California Public Utilities Commission) is not usually in the spotlight much as far as the mainstream tech media is concerned, but due to its stubbornness in holding off a deal cleared by everyone from the Department of Justice to the Federal Communications Commission a long time ago, the regional regulatory agency has made a lot of headlines in the last few months.
Most recently, the CPUC gave T-Mobile and Sprint a preliminary vote of confidence on a series of strict new conditions, strongly suggesting final approval was on the cards for April 16. But because nothing was guaranteed and the process was taking too long, Mike Sievert warned the Commission the very day before he officially became the "New T-Mobile" skipper his company would go ahead with the merger even in the absence of a formal green light.
We issued an order today that makes clear that @Sprint and @TMobile cannot begin the merger of their California operations until after the CPUC issues a final decision on the pending application, scheduled for the April 16 Voting Meeting. https://t.co/vNQGkd8n3apic.twitter.com/SgoO93Ntnq
Unsurprisingly, that prompted a stern ruling from CPUC Commissioner Clifford Rechtschaffen highlighting "no person or corporation... shall merge, acquire, or control... any public utility organized and doing business in this state without first securing authorization to do so from the commission." In other words, New T-Mobile may not be allowed to "do business" in California until and unless the CPUC authorizes Magenta's acquisition of Sprint.
Right now, it's unclear if the aforementioned April 16 vote will still go ahead and whether or not the outcome of the vote will be affected by T-Mobile's decision to prematurely announce the completion of the merger.
Will the matter be settled in court?
The short answer to that otherwise very complicated question is... yeah, probably. That's because T-Mobile essentially refused to continue playing the waiting game as it doesn't recognize the CPUC's jurisdiction over this vital transaction for the company's future and US 5G network development as a whole.
Despite that "abiding" view, Mike Sievert insisted in his March 31 letter addressed to Commissioner Clifford Rechtschaffen and Administrative Law Judge Karl Bemesderfer of the CPUC that T-Mobile was "fully cooperative" in a 20-month review process, making "nearly 50 voluntary California-specific commitments in connection with the deal" it's still ready to honor.
Mike Sievert is the CEO of New T-Mobile
T-Mo is however unwilling or unable to meet "a number" of other conditions that not only exceed the CPUC's jurisdiction, at least in Sievert's view, but are also "practically impossible, unfair, and discriminatory" to Magenta vs its competitors. At the end of the day, this seems to have turned into a matter of principle, as the California Public Utilities Commission remains adamant it can block New T-Mobile from operating on its state turf.
As such, several analysts see a trial on the horizon, although it's not really clear what that means from a consumer standpoint. As far as T-Mobile is concerned, the merger is a done deal, which might have never been the case if the transaction was delayed any further than April 1 given the "unprecedented uncertainty and risk in the financial markets" caused by the COVID-19 crisis.
Adrian, a mobile technology enthusiast since the Nokia 3310 era, has been a dynamic presence in the tech journalism field, contributing to Android Authority, Digital Trends, and Pocketnow before joining PhoneArena in 2018. His expertise spans across various platforms, with a particular fondness for the diversity of the Android ecosystem. Despite the challenges of balancing full-time parenthood with his work, Adrian's passion for tech trends, running, and movies keeps him energized. His commitment to mid-range smartphones has led to an eclectic collection of devices, saved from personal bankruptcy by his preference for 'adequate' over 'overpriced'.
Recommended Stories
Loading Comments...
COMMENT
All comments need to comply with our
Community Guidelines
Phonearena comments rules
A discussion is a place, where people can voice their opinion, no matter if it
is positive, neutral or negative. However, when posting, one must stay true to the topic, and not just share some
random thoughts, which are not directly related to the matter.
Things that are NOT allowed:
Off-topic talk - you must stick to the subject of discussion
Offensive, hate speech - if you want to say something, say it politely
Spam/Advertisements - these posts are deleted
Multiple accounts - one person can have only one account
Impersonations and offensive nicknames - these accounts get banned
Moderation is done by humans. We try to be as objective as possible and moderate with zero bias. If you think a
post should be moderated - please, report it.
Have a question about the rules or why you have been moderated/limited/banned? Please,
contact us.
FCC OKs Cingular\'s purchase of AT&T Wireless
Things that are NOT allowed: