Two new documents were filed by Sprint-Softbank with the FCC and appear on the FCC.gov website. You can find them by Googling doc #s 7022130373 and 7022130374
These put forward response to recent objections to the FCC and DOJ's approval of the Softbank acquisition that are consistent with remarks I've made on this board: that the Crest objections about minority shareholder issues are outside the scope of the FCC determinations and other concerns are not substantive. It dismisses DISH's offer as being outside of normal bounds of FCC deliberations and, in any case, conditional.
The summarizing document includes this:
"Spectrum screen issues should be addressed in rulemaking
Record supports retaining current treatment of BRS and EBS spectrum "
This may show alignment with having wholesale access rules imposed by the FCC in the rulemaking. What else could be implied that counters the objections?
Thus far, the issues are lining up as I had guessed. In such a complex deal and slate of interests, it would be unusual for early guesses to work out entirely. My 'vote' is that the DOJ will give their waiver soon, perhaps with a blanket assurance that S-SB will continue to work in the national interests. There could be specifics such as measures to avert interference with public safety being specified, however, these are likely to be more a hand-shake on the working relationship than new requirements. The FCC is likely to approve but since Sprint-Softbank appear amenable concerns of many being addressed in FCC rulemaking and the nature of the concerns of Verizon, AT&T and others is aimed at achieving flexibility in access to this and other spectrum, it looks like the ducks are lining up. S-SB put forward that the deal is good for competition including innovation and capitalization. These override the much lessor concerns. Get the structure right, with as little direct government intervention as necessary, and the deal will sail through.
"...and the deal will sail through."
Wow, guess I better sell! Thank you Teamrep. What a shock that Sprint's response is, as you announce, in line with your previous analysis. I'll stick with Crest and a former FCC commissioner. Thanks very much for your insight and altruistic wish to protect CLWR longs' savings. Why don't you go on to the Sprint board and cheerlead over there? Doesn't pay as well as being the self-appointed booster of CLWR shorts?
"outside the scope ", "being outside of normal bounds of FCC ", "blanket assurance "?, "override the much lessor concerns"....thats right, now S wants to treat the FCC, DOJ like they supressed CLWR all these years by misuse of their dominant position vis-a-vis clear- FAT CHANCE!.