|Bid||4.8500 x 4000|
|Ask||4.8500 x 45100|
|Day's Range||4.8200 - 5.0600|
|52 Week Range||4.7200 - 8.0600|
|Beta (5Y Monthly)||0.21|
|PE Ratio (TTM)||N/A|
|Forward Dividend & Yield||N/A (N/A)|
|Ex-Dividend Date||Dec 04, 2007|
|1y Target Est||N/A|
Sprint (S) possesses the right combination of the two key ingredients for a likely earnings beat in its upcoming report. Get prepared with the key expectations.
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- Traders who make a living betting on mergers still won’t touch T-Mobile US Inc. and Sprint Corp.’s deal with a 10-foot pole. The wireless carriers may have been able to butter up two federal regulatory authorities by using the wonders of a 5G-powered America to distract from their deal’s likely competitive harm. Even so, merger-arbitrage traders live in a world of mathematical probabilities informed by laws and legal precedents, and on that basis, it’s hard to imagine that the judge presiding over a case brought by a group of state attorneys general opposing the deal will rule in the companies’ favor. Lawyers for both sides each delivered closing arguments Wednesday, with a decision from U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero expected to come some time in February. Analysts largely view the odds as a toss-up, if not slightly tipped in T-Mobile and Sprint’s favor. But the equity market paints a meaningfully different picture: The per-share value of T-Mobile's offer is 67% higher than where Sprint's shares are trading, by far the biggest spread of any pending U.S. deal. The wide gap implies that traders see an extremely low likelihood that the transaction gets done, and Sprint options activity is sending the same signal.Of course, this also means that if the companies do win in court, some traders popping antacids right now stand to make a substantial return. But for the most part, arbitrageurs have chosen to stay away. “This is one of those seminal situations in merger arb history,” said Roy Behren, a portfolio manager for the Merger Fund at Westchester Capital Management, which oversees $4 billion of assets. He found T-Mobile and Sprint’s arguments persuasive — that together the companies will be able to build out a nationwide 5G service faster, and that Sprint doesn't have the capital or scale it needs to compete. But the potential downside is painfully large, and so it’s simply too hard to make a bet on what will happen. “We like the case, but that doesn’t mean we want to risk shareholders’ money on something where we don’t have a huge conviction,” Behren said in a phone interview. The case may come down to Dish Network Corp. and its assigned role in ensuring the U.S. wireless market remains competitive. Makan Delrahim, the head antitrust enforcer at the Department of Justice, is placing incredible faith in Dish that it can fill the hole Sprint leaves behind and become a formidable new competitor to T-Mobile, AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc., even though it will most likely take years for Dish to live up to those expectations.T-Mobile has relied heavily on the argument that its brand as the customer-first “Un-carrier” means it can be trusted not to raise prices in the meantime, Blair Levin, an analyst for New Street Research, wrote in a report this week. The idea is that with Sprint, it will be able to spread out its network costs across a larger subscriber base and thus keep plan rates low. But as the state attorneys general have noted, AT&T and Verizon have greater scale and higher prices. Judges look at facts and precedent. Just as there was a compelling case to make against AT&T acquiring Time Warner last year in what amounted to a massive vertical consolidation of market power, it was hard to articulate this with facts and not just speculation about what might happen, because of the lack of precedent. The judge in that matter said early on, “I guess I have to get a crystal ball,” which judges do not like to do, and sure enough, he opted to stick with the facts as they were. The Justice Department and Federal Communications Commission have already given their blessing, which carries weight and could mean Judge Marrero will, too. But then if they could look in a crystal ball and see the consequence of doing so, they may not like what they see. Even the stock market knows that the deal shouldn’t go through.To contact the author of this story: Tara Lachapelle at firstname.lastname@example.orgTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Beth Williams at email@example.comThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg LP and its owners.Tara Lachapelle is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering the business of entertainment and telecommunications, as well as broader deals. She previously wrote an M&A column for Bloomberg News.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinionSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
Investors appear to be under the impression T-Mobile Us Inc (NASDAQ: TMUS )'s proposed acquisition of Sprint Corp (NYSE: S ) will fail, as Sprint's stock is trading at a notable discount, The Wall Street ...
A group of U.S. states suing to block T-Mobile US Inc from merging with Sprint Corp on Wednesday told a federal judge that the deal would raise prices for consumers, while the phone companies pushed back and emphasized they would compete aggressively to push prices down. T-Mobile and Sprint contend that the merger would enable the combined company to compete more effectively with dominant carriers Verizon Communications Inc and AT&T Inc. U.S. District Court Judge Victor Marrero, who will decide the fate of the merger, heard closing arguments in the case on Wednesday.
(Bloomberg) -- Sprint Corp. bondholders have long bet that the wireless company’s acquisition by T-Mobile US Inc. will be allowed to go through, but by at least one measure, they’re growing more worried about the deal’s potential to get done.The cost to protect Sprint’s debt against default for five years has nearly doubled since September to around 333 basis points, according to ICE Data Services. Credit traders have been digesting court testimony from a takeover challenge brought by Democratic attorneys general. The attorneys, who hail from 13 states and the District of Columbia, say the merger could lead to higher prices and poorer service for consumers. Closing arguments in the case are scheduled for Wednesday.A victory for Sprint could be a boon to bondholders, potentially sending risk premiums on the debt tumbling as much as 200 basis points, Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Stephen Flynn wrote in a note. But if the deal falls apart, the consequences for Sprint could be dire. Flynn said in a separate note Tuesday that Sprint could face ratings downgrades and require a liquidity injection from backer SoftBank Group Corp. To some investors, the debt still looks too risky to buy.“What we try to look at is, ‘Are we being compensated for the risks?’” said John McClain, a portfolio manager at Diamond Hill Capital Management, which doesn’t own Sprint debt. “With Sprint, you absolutely are not.”A spokeswoman for Sprint declined to comment.Analysts are split on the potential outcome of the case. Cowen & Co. analyst Paul Gallant put the odds of a ruling favoring the states at 60% in a note earlier this month, while LightShed Partners’ Walt Piecyk sees a higher likelihood of a decision tipped toward the companies. The spread between T-Mobile’s offer price for Sprint and the trading price rose to around $3.29 a share on Tuesday from a low of 53 cents in May 2018. The higher the gap, the more uncertain the market is of a deal happening.Either outcome would have broad implications for the $1.3 trillion U.S. junk-bond market. With more than $35 billion of long-term debt outstanding, Sprint is the second-largest issuer of speculative-grade notes, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. T-Mobile is seeking a split debt structure for the combined company, with about 55% of the obligations carrying investment-grade ratings.Sprint, which carries single B range ratings from the three major credit ratings companies, has seen its debt surge since it agreed to combine with higher-rated T-Mobile. Its 7.785% bonds due in 2023 change hands for more than 108 cents on the dollar, up from a low of around 60 cents in early 2016.If the deal fails to close, Sprint will be left to contend with some $25 billion of debt that matures in the next five years, according to Bloomberg Intelligence. Flynn said in a note that SoftBank may need to invest $3 billion to $5 billion to help the wireless company deal with its upcoming maturities.“If it doesn’t go through, Sprint is on its own,” said Dave Novosel, a senior bond analyst at Gimme Credit. “At some point over the next year or two years, Sprint is going to need to consider coming to market to refinance some of that debt, which could pressure the market on the whole.\--With assistance from Scott Moritz.To contact the reporter on this story: Olivia Raimonde in New York at firstname.lastname@example.orgTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Natalie Harrison at email@example.com, Claire BostonFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
The transition is likely to take place in Spring 2020 ahead of HBO Max's official debut in May, supplementing AT&T's (T) broader original content and marketing focus on the streaming service.
(Bloomberg) -- States suing to block T-Mobile US Inc.’s proposed acquisition of Sprint Corp. urged the federal judge overseeing the landmark antitrust trial not to defer to the Trump administration’s approval of the $26.5 billion deal.Lawyers for New York and California, which are leading the lawsuit for the states, said in a filing late Wednesday in Manhattan that the deal’s approval by the Justice Department and the Federal Communications Commission doesn’t carry any special weight and should be ignored by the judge.“The federal government approved the merger with what appears to be only a cursory examination of the approval conditions,” the states said, and the decision was “inconsistent” with its past opposition to consolidation in the wireless market.The government had asked in a Dec. 20 filing that its approvals be given deference. The response comes as T-Mobile and the states are preparing for closing arguments in the lawsuit next week before U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero. The closings will follow two weeks of testimony in December in which the states tried to show that the combination of the third- and fourth-largest wireless carriers would lead to higher prices.The Justice Department’s antitrust division and the FCC signed off on the merger after the companies agreed to sell assets to Dish Network Corp. to set up a new wireless competitor. That remedy is central to T-Mobile’s argument to Marrero.Read MoreT-Mobile’s Sprint Deal Looks Iffy to Traders as Skepticism GrowsTexts Show DOJ Effort to Enlist Senators in T-Mobile DealDish Would Compete With Giants ‘From Day One,’ Ergen SaysSprint Judge Questions Claim That Deal Would Hurt CustomersDuring the trial, the states showed that the head of the antitrust division, Makan Delrahim, took unusual steps to get the deal done, exchanging text messages with Dish Chairman Charlie Ergen. At one point during negotiations, Delrahim suggested Ergen ask his “Senator friends” to contact FCC Chairman Ajit Pai about the deal.Delrahim has been a harsh critic of approving mergers with conditions that impose rules on how companies conduct business. Yet he approved the Sprint deal with just those kind of conditions, the states said in their filing.“DOJ’s antitrust chief previously stated that he does not ‘think [he’s] smart enough’ to design remedies ‘that distort competitive incentives just enough to undo the damage done by a merger, for years to come,’” the states said. “It is unclear what has changed.”Wall Street is increasingly skeptical of the companies’ chances of prevailing. The spread between T-Mobile’s offer price for Sprint and the trading price, an indication of the deal’s risk, swelled to an all-time high Thursday of $3.17 at 2:27 p.m. in New York. Cowen & Co. analyst Paul Gallant sees a 60% chance the judge will rule in favor of the states.Read More: U.S. Sides With T-Mobile in Fight Against States Over SprintIn separate filings Wednesday night, the states and T-Mobile outlined their evidence.The states say the deal would give T-Mobile the power to raise prices by eliminating competition between the two companies and leaving just three major carriers -- AT&T Inc., Verizon Communications Inc. and T-Mobile. The enlarged company would have a national market share of 34% by revenue, making the deal “presumptively illegal” under antitrust law, they said. And Dish -- a satellite-TV provider with no experience in the wireless market -- won’t be a real competitor, they said.T-Mobile and Sprint countered that the tie-up would actually lead to more competition. By combining the two networks, T-Mobile will have more capacity and lower costs, which in turn will lead to lower prices for consumers. Without the deal, Sprint won’t be unable to upgrade its network infrastructure to remain competitive, they said.“There is no realistic way, aside from the merger, to break the ‘vicious cycle’ of poor network quality leading to subscriber losses and reduced network investment, leading to even worse network quality,” the carrier said. “Sprint is increasing prices, and without the merger it will continue to do so and will retreat from nationwide service.”The case is New York v. Deutsche Telekom, 19-cv-5434, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).(Updates with court filings starting in eighth paragraph)To contact the reporters on this story: Erik Larson in New York at firstname.lastname@example.org;David McLaughlin in Washington at email@example.comTo contact the editors responsible for this story: David Glovin at firstname.lastname@example.org, Peter Jeffrey, Anthony LinFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
Sprint (S) teams up with Telstra to deploy virtualized IoT platform, Curiosity, in a bid to fortify connectivity management with enhanced resiliency, performance and security across Australia.
The collaboration between Sprint (S) and Wirecard initially focuses on the retail segment, with plans to expand to other industries and services.
AT&T and the other carriers are here and there are a variety of 5G phones on the convention center floor. AT&T won’t be the only winner, of courser. China is arguably ahead of the U.S. in rolling out service and spurring consumer interest in buying 5G phones. But in the U.S. market, AT&T is better positioned than (VZ) (VZ), which is scrambling to find more spectrum.
Under the agreement, the German payments company’s unified commerce solutions will be integrated into the U.S. communications-services company’s IoT platform.
The seemingly never-ending ordeal involving the merger of T-Mobile (TMUS) and Sprint (S) may finally be nearing a resolution. In a rare instance of good fortune, however way you look at it, says Nomura’s Jeff Kvaal, investors in T-Mobile stand to gain from both outcomes of the forthcoming legal decision.The merger between the US’s third and fourth largest mobile carriers has been an ongoing process since it was first announced almost two years ago, in April 2018. The transaction has already gained approval from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Department of Justice (DOJ), seemingly the highest obstacle standing in the merger’s path. Arguing the merger is anticompetitive, 14 state attorneys general, including the D.C. attorney general, are suing to block the deal from taking place. On January 15, closing arguments will be presented, following which U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero will decide the outcome, expected to be announced by mid-February.Kvaal’s both sides win scenario is based on a simple analysis. Should the merger gain approval, the deal, according to Kvall could send TMUS stock up to $104 as it fulfills T-Mobile’s objective of obtaining Sprint's mid-band 2.5GHz spectrum and would allow the communications giant “to realize significant synergies.” Not to mention, the new size will allow it to up the competition with the larger AT&T and Verizon.And the downside? There is no downside, argues Kvaal. A rejection of the deal would finally bring resolution to the saga and “could remove a sizeable multiple impediment and restore T-Mobile’s modest premium.” The analyst expects the stock to rise following a rejection, too; Up to $93 by his estimates. The deal has a 45% chance of approval, concludes the analyst.In addition to the imminent solution, Kvall further bolsters the bullish case for TMUS through its higher 4Q net adds. The analyst expounded further, “We expect strong 4Q net add figures from TMobile; we lift our 800,000 postpaid phone estimate just above consensus to 925,000. We are comfortable with our churn (0.90%) and ARPU ($45.76) estimates. This suggests T-Mobile is able to execute crisply through recent price reductions from Verizon and AT&T and mounting cable competition.”In conclusion, the 4-star analyst said, “We believe T-Mobile’s faster sales, EBITDA and FCF growth rates should command a multiple premium to its closest peers.”Unsurprisingly, then, Kvall upgraded his rating on TMUS from Neutral to Buy. The upgrade comes with a new price target of $96, up from $88. Should the target be met, investors pockets will be ringing from gains of 22%. (To watch Kvall’s track record, click here)Kvall’s analysis is reflected in the Street’s confidence in T-Mobile’s prospects, too. 10 Buys and a single Hold coalesce into a Strong Buy consensus rating. At $94.60, the average price target could provide 20% upside. (See T-Mobile stock analysis on TipRanks)
Despite the ongoing antitrust trial on its acquisition of Sprint, T-Mobile President and Chief Operating Officer Mike Sievert said the company has continued posting all-time records.
Sprint's move to consolidate its prepaid brands comes at the tail end of an 18-month merger saga with T-Mobile.
A ruling on the deal is expected in the coming weeks, but T-Mobile stock looks like a winner no matter which way the judge’s decision goes.
(Bloomberg) -- Wall Street is chiming in on what’s likely to ensue in the aftermath of T-Mobile U.S. Inc.’s long-sought purchase of Sprint Corp., now that most analysts are saying that “the deal is more likely to break.”Although an approved merger would allow T-Mobile to reap significant synergies, Nomura Instinet’s Jeffrey Kvaal says investors backing the nation’s third-largest wireless service provider are “winners in either scenario.” The equity research firm upgraded T-Mobile to a buy rating from neutral as “a broken deal could remove a sizeable multiple impediment” and restore a modest premium.Shares of T-Mobile gained 0.6% early Tuesday, reversing a decline of as much as 0.6%. The outcome of the offer to buy Sprint has clouded T-Mobile’s growth profile ever since it announced the deal in April 2018. Nomura’s Kvaal predicts a court decision is likely to be come down by early February, and pegs the odds of approval at 45%. According to United First Partners, lawyers representing both companies performed “somewhat better” than state attorneys general’s legal team. Still, analyst Anna Pavlik says not much was seen during the trial last month that would “fundamentally change” the view that AGs will prevail. UFP still figures there’s only a 30% chance the companies beat regulators.Cowen too believes T-Mobile “will experience greater upside” this year if the deal is blocked instead of going through. And while a failed merger would send T-Mobile in search of more spectrum, a denial “would prove a buying opportunity as we estimate the stock is currently worth $96 on a standalone basis,” Colby Synesael, a senior research analyst at Cowen, wrote Monday. To contact the reporter on this story: Kamaron Leach in New York at email@example.comTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Catherine Larkin at firstname.lastname@example.org, Scott SchnipperFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
(Bloomberg) -- Wall Street is increasingly pessimistic that T-Mobile US Inc. will complete its $26.5 billion takeover of Sprint Corp., with the spread on the deal at the highest point since it was announced in 2018.The spread between T-Mobile’s offer price for Sprint and the trading price, an indication of the deal’s risk, has swelled to $2.85 a share on Thursday from a low of 53 cents in May 2018.The key impediment to the transaction, which the U.S. Justice Department and the Federal Communications Commission have already OK’d, is a court challenge brought by Democratic attorneys general from 13 states and the District of Columbia. They maintain that the combination would harm consumers through higher prices and weaker service.Based on two weeks of court testimony last month and the nature of the questions U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero asked during the proceedings, Cowen & Co. analyst Paul Gallant sees a 60% chance the ruling will favor the states, according to a note Thursday.Shares of T-Mobile and Sprint were little changed Thursday, but Sprint has slumped 35% since a recent peak in July, while T-Mobile is down less than 7% over the same period.Industry’s FateThe case will help determine the fate of the U.S. wireless industry as the two smaller national carriers seek to combine into a more effective competitor to Verizon Communications Inc. and AT&T Inc.The pivotal question is whether the combination of T-Mobile and Sprint would simply shrink the playing field to three national carriers, or if, under a plan approved by U.S. regulators, Dish Network Corp. would set up an effective new wireless carrier with assets bought from Sprint and T-Mobile.The attorneys general may have successfully framed the issue as too much industry concentration, said Gallant, a former legal adviser to the FCC. “Both the parties’ private texts and Marrero’s own questions repeatedly referred to this as a ‘four to three merger,’” Gallant wrote. If so, that “probably met their initial burden of proof.”The companies have tried to address the concerns about higher prices. To win approval of the merger, T-Mobile has pledged to freeze prices for three years, offer free wireless broadband access to 10 million underserved students and roll out a new $15-a-month data plan capped at 2 gigabytes.It’s not clear if Judge Marrero views consolidation as necessarily translating to higher prices, and he expressed doubts about unilateral price increases.Carl Shapiro, an economics professor at the University of California at Berkeley, testified as a expert witness for the states, saying the merger would cost consumers as much as $8.7 billion more. After his testimony, Marrero asked him if the wireless companies would “be so bold” as to raise prices after the merger without also offering better services.Closing arguments are expected later this month, and a ruling could come as early as February.\--With assistance from Erik Larson.To contact the reporter on this story: Scott Moritz in New York at email@example.comTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Nick Turner at firstname.lastname@example.org, John J. Edwards III, Rob GolumFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
TECHnalysis Research President and Chief Analyst Bob O'Donnell joins On The Move to discuss the Consumer Electronics Show and the latest tech innovations going into 2020.