(Bloomberg) -- T-Mobile US Inc. is poised to close its long-sought merger with Sprint Corp., a deal that will reshape the U.S. wireless industry, after winning approval from a federal judge who rejected a state lawsuit against the tie-up.
The two companies said Tuesday they expect to close as soon as April 1 after U.S. District Court Judge Victor Marrero in Manhattan said the states failed to persuade him that a merger of the No. 3 and 4 carriers would harm consumers.
“Today was a huge victory for this merger,” T-Mobile Chief Executive Officer John Legere said in a statement. “We are finally able to focus on the last steps to get this merger done!”
The ruling comes almost two years after the merger was announced. The companies had bet on a favorable reception from the Trump administration, which signed on to the deal last year. Regulators under President Barack Obama in 2014 rebuffed an earlier merger proposal out of fear that consolidating the market would lead to higher prices.
Now the tie-up will give T-Mobile added heft to take on industry leaders AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc. The new T-Mobile will overtake AT&T in total number of regular monthly subscribers.
For T-Mobile’s parent company, Deutsche Telekom AG, the deal reduces the German company’s reliance on Europe, where carriers are struggling to grow amid fierce competition and where its biggest rival -- Vodafone Group Plc -- bolstered its position by buying continental cable assets from Liberty Global Plc. T-Mobile’s importance for Deutsche Telekom has grown steadily in recent years and currently accounts for about half of group sales, up from about a third in 2014.
Approval of the deal will come as a huge relief for Sprint parent SoftBank Group Corp. and its chairman, Masayoshi Son, who had faced the prospect of having to bail out Sprint if the deal were blocked. Now, the entrepreneur can better plug SoftBank as a technology investment powerhouse, allowing him to focus his energies on the $100 billion Vision Fund.
Shares of Sprint soared 74% to $8.33 at 9:56 a.m. in New York from Monday’s closing price of $4.80. T-Mobile gained 11% to $94.13.
T-Mobile and Sprint haven’t renewed the merger agreement since it lapsed on Nov. 1. T-Mobile has suggested there could be new terms, including on the price. Before the merger can close, it still needs approvals from California’s utility board and a federal judge in Washington who must sign off on the Justice Department’s settlement allowing the deal.
In his decision, Marrero rejected key arguments from the states: that the merged company would raise prices for lower quality service and that Sprint could remain as a viable competitor without the merger.
“T-Mobile has redefined itself over the past decade as a maverick that has spurred the two largest players in its industry to make numerous pro-consumer changes,” the judge wrote. “The proposed merger would allow the merged company to continue T-Mobile’s undeniably successful business strategy for the foreseeable future.”
Consumer advocates blasted the decision as dangerous for wireless subscribers even with a settlement approved by federal regulators that envision Dish Network Corp. entering the market as a new wireless competitor. With the core satellite-TV business in decline, Charlie Ergen, the Dish co-founder and chairman, has amassed a trove of airwaves to build a state-of-the-art wireless network.
“Going from four established nationwide wireless networks to only three -- with the possibility that we might someday, eventually, get some version of a fourth network added back into the mix -- will be extremely damaging to competition,” George Slover, senior policy counsel at Consumer Reports, said.
Marrero’s ruling is a major setback for New York Attorney General Letitia James and her California counterpart, Xavier Becerra, who led the litigation for states representing more than 40% of the U.S. population. James said in a statement her office is considering an appeal.
“From the start, this merger has been about massive corporate profits over all else, and despite the companies’ false claims, this deal will endanger wireless subscribers where it hurts most: their wallets,” she said.
The states argued without success that the merger would lead to billions of dollars in extra costs for consumers, with wireless customers in urban areas being hit particularly hard. They also said the deal wouldn’t work out as planned because Dish was unlikely to be able to follow through on its commitments to become a viable wireless competitor.
During the two-week trial, Marrero at one point expressed doubt that the new T-Mobile would “be so bold” as to raise prices after the merger without also offering better service, pushing back on testimony by an expert hired by the states who predicted that customers of the four biggest providers could see combined increases of as much as $8.7 billion, with $4.6 billion from T-Mobile alone.
The defense also presented evidence that Sprint couldn’t survive without the deal. Legere had testified that Sprint would be “sold for parts” if the merger didn’t go through.
The states’ lawsuit was the last major hurdle to the deal after it was approved by regulators at the Federal Communications Commission and the Justice Department’s antitrust division. The states that sued had urged Marrero after the trial not to give any extra weight to the federal government’s decision, calling the government’s review of the deal “cursory.”
--With assistance from Chris Dolmetsch and Stefan Nicola.
To contact the reporters on this story: David McLaughlin in Washington at firstname.lastname@example.org;Scott Moritz in New York at email@example.com;Erik Larson in New York at firstname.lastname@example.org
To contact the editors responsible for this story: David Glovin at email@example.com, ;Sara Forden at firstname.lastname@example.org, ;Nick Turner at email@example.com, Joe Schneider, Paula Dwyer
For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com
Subscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.
©2020 Bloomberg L.P.