More Wireless Consolidation And Price Hikes Loom As T-Mobile Eyes U.S. Cellular Merger
from the stop-me-if-you've-heard-this-one-before dept
One of the primary reasons U.S. consumers pay some of the highest prices in the developed world for mobile data is because U.S. regulators — from both parties — routinely sign off on “growth for growth’s sake” mergers that reduce competition, lower product quality, raise prices, and trigger waves upon waves of layoffs. Usually under the pretense of “amazing new synergies” and job growth.
Yet every single time the exact opposite happens. And despite this happening repeatedly, year after year, nobody learns anything from the experience because the folks doing the wheeling and dealing got what they wanted (usually tax breaks, a short-lived stock price bump, and outsized compensation packages).
We just went through this via the Sprint T-Mobile merger, during which everything deal critics predicted pretty quickly came true (including 6,000 lost jobs). Now the U.S. wireless sector is poised to consolidate further, with the news that either T-Mobile or Verizon (or some combination) will soon announce a purchase of the nation’s fourth biggest wireless carrier: U.S. Cellular:
“The WSJ reports that a T-Mobile/US Cellular “deal could be reached as soon as later this month.” Verizon reaching its own deal with US Cellular could result in “separate transactions that would give both buyers access to valuable airwaves,” the report said.”
You might recall that when the Trump DOJ and FCC greenlit the Sprint T-Mobile merger (purportedly without even reading deal impact studies) they proposed a “fix” in the form of creating a new fourth major wireless carrier out of Dish Network. But that effort has been a preposterous mess, with most predicting a likely Dish bankruptcy and spectrum sale (likely to Verizon or T-Mobile).
Wall Street demands its quarterly growth at all costs. You can’t get there by offering a quality, affordable product people like. You can get there through subscriber growth at first; but eventually as a market saturates you need to start getting creative. That usually means nickel-and-diming consumers, price hikes, weird and annoying technical restrictions, layoffs, worse customer service, and wave upon wave of otherwise pointless megamergers (you see it happening in streaming TV right now as well).
But because the folks making these decisions (revolving door regulators and over-compensated fail-upward executives) never see anything remotely resembling accountability, nobody learns anything from the experience and the consolidation machine endless repeats itself — until there’s nothing left to buy.
Filed Under: 5g, consolidation, high speed internet, jobs, telecom, wireless
Companies: t-mobile, us cellular


Comments on “More Wireless Consolidation And Price Hikes Loom As T-Mobile Eyes U.S. Cellular Merger”
“You might recall that when the Trump DOJ and FCC greenlit…’
Okay, we assume democrat unless Trump is mentioned.
Re:
Is Trump the only republican president you can remember?
Re: Re:
The only one that gets mentioned here he is.
Thomas Jefferson
Meanwhile, back here in reality, offering a quality, affordable product people like is how Apple, NVIDIA, Google, and Meta became the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th biggest companies in American history.
Re:
Re:
Okay, I’m gonna stop you right there. Apple offers expensive elitist culture devices in a closed environment with dictated user experiences.
Re: Re:
Ok, I’m gonna stop you right there. There are 136 million American iPhone users. Anyone who thinks a device used by 41% of the entire US population is an “expensive elitist culture device” obviously took Donald Trump’s advice to inject themselves with bleach during lockdown.
Re: Re: Re:
You’re just saying that 136 million Americans bought into an expensive elitist culture device, which includes looking down on its own users. Hence the walled garden, green message bubbles, “you’re holding it wrong,” living with broken screens, parts pairing, “genius” bar, etc. I’m not insulting the users. I’m saying Apple is abusive and bullying and profiteering. Defending that isn’t a good look.
Re:
Apple and nVidia overcharge for many products(because they can), Google routinely shuts down/retires useful products and Meta literally has to fill their main products with ads to make money.
Making money at pretty much any cost is priority #1 for these companies. Making products that people like is #2.
Re: Re:
And your explanation for why consumers choose overpriced bad products over the superior cheap products (which must logically exist for your subjective comparison to be true) is… what, exactly? What is the cheap, superior smartphone that the iPhone displaced? Oh yeah, there wasn’t one. What’s the superior search engine that Google displaced by offering shittier service? Oh wait, there wasn’t one.
You’re just whining that companies that are widely liked by their customers aren’t offering even more.
Re:
Those are literally a list of the most premium devices in the space.
Apples phones are very expensive when compared to Android phones for the basic features.
NVIDIA has a number of very expensive solutions in the GPU and AI space, which is where all of their growth is.
Both Google and Meta change a LOT of money for their adds, because everyone else sucks balls in comparison.
Re:
I mean it certainly starts that way. And your point makes sense if you completely ignore the later stage trajectory of most large privately-traded companies over a long enough timeline. Like Boeing. Or the entirety of telecom.
And you mention Google, but their search quality is an absolute dumpster fire now because, in part, they’re financially incentivized at every level to pursue impossible ever-upward scaling growth over quality.
The FTC and DOJ only have legal authority to block mergers that “substantially lessen competition”. Congress has never passed a law giving the FTC and DOJ authority to block mergers that “cause layoffs” or “make customers unhappy” or “make products worse”.
Before the merger, 23.1% of US cellular subscribers use T-Mobile, making it the third-largest cellular subscriber. After the merger it will have 24.0% of US cellular subscribers, making it… still the third-largest US cellular subscriber. That is not a “substantial reduction in competition”. If they merged with AT&T or Verizon (or if AT&T and Verizon merged), that would be a substantial reduction in competition.
Karl’s complaining that the FTC is following the actual law instead of acting has some sort of crusading force for progressive economics. Mergers might sometimes be bad, but the government doesn’t have a blanket power to stop anything and everything it thinks is bad. We’re a mixed economy, not a fully socialized one.
Re:
This is gibberish.
The FCC literally didn’t read the merger review impact studies from its own agency before approving the deal:
https://www.techdirt.com/2019/10/22/fcc-approved-t-mobile-sprint-merger-without-even-seeing-full-details/
And the Trump DOJ “antitrust enforcer” Makan Delrahim worked with both companies, in his personal time using his personal phone and email accounts, to make sure the deal got approved:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/19/technology/sprint-t-mobile-merger-antitrust-official.html
That is not how “antitrust enforcement” works.
Also here’s a study from just this week showcasing how the consolidation in competition immediately put a halt to all wireless data price competition
https://research.rewheel.fi/downloads/The_state_of_mobile_and_broadband_pricing_1H2024_PUBLIC_REDACTED_VERSION.pdf
mindless consolidation apologists are embarrassing
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Article lost all credibility in the opening paragraph
The “highest prices in the developed world for mobile data” myth is as tiresome as it is false. Do people really still believe this garbage propaganda?
Re:
Well, you needed to misrepresent the original argument to make your point, so there’s probably something to it.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re:
People don’t read Karl’s articles to learn things. Did you ever notice that almost all of his “supporting” links are to earlier opinion pieces by him?
He’s just a good source of catharsis for people who share his politics. Blah blah brunchlords blah blah mergers blah blah fail upwards etc.
Re: Re:
Even if the linked articles are mere opinion pieces (which there’s no evidence of), doesn’t mean there’s nothing factual in them.
Re:
here’s a study from just this week showcasing how U.S. mobile data price competition effectively halted in the wake of the deal
https://research.rewheel.fi/downloads/The_state_of_mobile_and_broadband_pricing_1H2024_PUBLIC_REDACTED_VERSION.pdf
I’ll trim out the relevant bit for you:
“Five years on, the Sprint / T-Mobile 4-to-3 mobile merger made the US one of the most expensive mobile markets in the world.”
Re:
“This is wrong.”
Source: Trust me, bro!