Well it Seems like Sprint took care of their affiliate
well that was very expected, especially be me, that sprint would eliminate the potential problems from US wired by buying them out. like i said in my posts, i have expected them to do that for a long time. this way it will make the process smooth again, since US wired was the only sprint affiliate to sue to stop the lawsuit, remember nextel partners doesnt want to stop it.
so, sprint took care of its affiliate and nextel will do the same thing in order to make this merger process flow smoothly.
seems to me that my theory was correct, and i thank you all, cept muchdrama, for our wonderful conversations on the whole topic.
fyi, there shareholders vote on july 13th for the merger.
so, sprint took care of its affiliate and nextel will do the same thing in order to make this merger process flow smoothly.
seems to me that my theory was correct, and i thank you all, cept muchdrama, for our wonderful conversations on the whole topic.
fyi, there shareholders vote on july 13th for the merger.
...
I don't get this whole "non-compete" agreement thing anyway. Yes, nextel is a competitor, but once they merge, they won't be. So it wouldn't violate the a non compete agreement because nextel and sprint will no longer be competing with each other. At least that's the way I would look at it...this is so confusing....
...
its a hard thing to understand, to be frank. it just means in lamen terms that no other carrier then the affiliates can operate in those brands. nextel partners would be going against their affiliates. (sprints that is) so thats why they are saying that. since nextel partners wont be brought in right away, due to the put option and whether or not they will exercize it, partners is indeed competiting with sprint's affiliates. therefore that is why sprint bought out US wired, and i belive if alamosa holdings, another sprint affiliate files suit, then they would be buying them out. (of course thats my opinion)
is that a better understanding?
is that a better understanding?
...
I would be surprised if Justice Dept. doesn't require divestiture of Alamosa markets should they buy them.
Here in West Texas that would eliminate one carrier dropping it to 3 competitors (4 in Lubbock but T-Mobile does not have significant presence that would effectively leave 3 carriers in Lubbock as well).
Here in West Texas that would eliminate one carrier dropping it to 3 competitors (4 in Lubbock but T-Mobile does not have significant presence that would effectively leave 3 carriers in Lubbock as well).
...
could be true.
i know sprint isnt over the cap, however, according to analysts they said that there would possibly be some divestitures in some rural markets we will see though. (ie for the merger, not sure about alamosa)
where does alamosa serve?
i know sprint isnt over the cap, however, according to analysts they said that there would possibly be some divestitures in some rural markets we will see though. (ie for the merger, not sure about alamosa)
where does alamosa serve?
...
TX, NM, AZ, OK, NC, SC, MO, KS, AR, OR, WA, WI, UT, CA and IL.
http://www.alamosapcs.com/footprint_map_2.html »
They serve many smaller markets where they are #3 and Nextel is #4 carrier wise (along with the two cellular providers). Eliminating them would reduce competition below standards previously established by the FCC and Justice Dept. While we have PCS providers in the region, only T-Mobile is deployed and offers commercial service in Lubbock and Western Wireless in Amarillo. Western is agressive in Amarillo but T-Mobile's only retail outlets here are National Retail. Their only agent locations closed last year.
Now, Verizon is not in this region. Perhaps they could scoop up some Alamosa licenses? I don't know how difficul...
(continues)
http://www.alamosapcs.com/footprint_map_2.html »
They serve many smaller markets where they are #3 and Nextel is #4 carrier wise (along with the two cellular providers). Eliminating them would reduce competition below standards previously established by the FCC and Justice Dept. While we have PCS providers in the region, only T-Mobile is deployed and offers commercial service in Lubbock and Western Wireless in Amarillo. Western is agressive in Amarillo but T-Mobile's only retail outlets here are National Retail. Their only agent locations closed last year.
Now, Verizon is not in this region. Perhaps they could scoop up some Alamosa licenses? I don't know how difficul...
(continues)
...
thanks for the alamosa information. well if they dont control more then 50 percent in those markets, then it wouldnt matter.
verizon could perhaps get into that region, but im not sure they would want to.. they could buy alamosa assets, but i belive that would be up to sprint, not sure however.
with regarding nextel selling of licenses, that wont happen. as explained earlier they are 10mhz under the 90mhz cap. (they have 80mhz obviously) thus; no spectrum/licenses divestitures, however, as i mentioned earlier they do control more then 50 percent in many of the rural markets and thus they will probably/possibly divest in some of those rural markets.
verizon could perhaps get into that region, but im not sure they would want to.. they could buy alamosa assets, but i belive that would be up to sprint, not sure however.
with regarding nextel selling of licenses, that wont happen. as explained earlier they are 10mhz under the 90mhz cap. (they have 80mhz obviously) thus; no spectrum/licenses divestitures, however, as i mentioned earlier they do control more then 50 percent in many of the rural markets and thus they will probably/possibly divest in some of those rural markets.
...
Do you know how much Nextel owns in West Texas? That would include MSA in Lubbock, Midland/Odessa, Amarillo and RSA TX1-TX8 (I think).
...
im not quite sure or familiar with that market and nextel's holdings in west TX, but like i keep on saying to you, there will be no spectrum/licenses divestitures.
...
There will be if Alamosa is purchased by Sprint and Sprint/Nextel is combined to a threshold not allow by Justice. They made it very clear that competition must be preserved. In a market where the number of providers goes from 7 to 6 it isn't a big deal. To go from 4 to 3 is very scrutinized.
That is what I am curious about.
That is what I am curious about.
...
perhaps..
"There will be if Alamosa is purchased by Sprint and Sprint/Nextel is combined to a threshold not allow by Justice. "
is that a fact?
anyway... its enough talk for today lets continue tomorow. i appreciate the convo.
but we will probably see some sub divestitures not spectrum.
ok take care and have a great day!
"There will be if Alamosa is purchased by Sprint and Sprint/Nextel is combined to a threshold not allow by Justice. "
is that a fact?
anyway... its enough talk for today lets continue tomorow. i appreciate the convo.
but we will probably see some sub divestitures not spectrum.
ok take care and have a great day!
...
That's why I was curious about Nextel's spectrum here. I wanted to add that to what Alamosa holds and compare to divestitures with Alltel/Western and Cingular/AT&T.
And I am pretty bored 🙂
And I am pretty bored 🙂
...
Yea, that’s true. again, like I said, I don’t know what Nextel holds in that market, however, you could email or call IR for both Nextel partners and/or Nextel to have you question be answered.
Att/cingular was way over the cap and they had over 50 percent of ownership in a few markets that is why they divested.
With Alltel/western, I believe they had to divest their licenses because they were over the cap in the rural markets.
I think that you would be right that Alamosa and/or some sprint affiliates in the rural markets would be forced either 1. Subscriber divestitures or 2. Licenses divestitures, but I don’t feel that Nextel/sprint would have to divest anything. (Just the affiliates would, in my opinion)
Att/cingular was way over the cap and they had over 50 percent of ownership in a few markets that is why they divested.
With Alltel/western, I believe they had to divest their licenses because they were over the cap in the rural markets.
I think that you would be right that Alamosa and/or some sprint affiliates in the rural markets would be forced either 1. Subscriber divestitures or 2. Licenses divestitures, but I don’t feel that Nextel/sprint would have to divest anything. (Just the affiliates would, in my opinion)
...
