The court let T-Mobile buy Sprint because Sprint completely sucks

#News(General) [ via IoTGroup ]

Headings…
The court let T-Mobile buy Sprint because Sprint completely sucks
Share this story
INTRODUCTION
AT&T AND VERIZON
SPRINT: DOES IT SUCK OR SUCK THE MOST? A LEGAL CONCLUSION
DISH NETWORK: DEFINITELY GOING TO BUILD A NETWORK, WE THINK
T-MOBILE IS THE BEST, AND JOHN LEGERE IS A DREAMBOAT

Auto extracted Text……

After a lengthy trial, a federal court ruled in favor of allowing T-Mobile and Sprint to merge yesterday, along with a complicated scheme to turn Dish Network into the fourth national wireless carrier over several years.
But the decision itself is extremely surprising: Judge Victor Marrero of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York basically decided that the various data and experts put forward by the 10 state attorneys general who sued to stop the merger weren’t worth taking seriously and that he would decide for himself whether T-Mobile and Dish seemed like cool companies worth trusting.
And… it turns out that Judge Marrero thinks CEO John Legere and the rest of T-Mobile’s executives are extremely cool and smart and that Dish Network is definitely trustworthy and that everything is going to work out great.
Hey, Judge Marrero: what do you think of Sprint’s network?
It’s honestly a little cute and heartwarming that Judge Marrero thinks a government lawyer will be able to police how well T-Mobile treats Dish Network as an MVNO customer.
They cited several statements made over time by executives of Defendants for the broad point that building a mobile wireless network would be one of many “stupid bluffs” by Ergen, and that he would merely build a “meaningless thin network so that he doesn’t get in trouble with the FCC.” Combining these statements regarding DISH’s behavior and history with the fact that developing a mobile wireless network is generally a time- and capital-intensive effort, Plaintiff States suggested that DISH’s network would be, in the words of one DT official, “something the lawyers can use, but not something customers can use.” The Court is not persuaded that this evidence carries the weight that Plaintiff States ascribe to it

Read More..
AutoTextExtraction by Working BoT using SmartNews 1.02976805238 Build 26 Aug 2019