|
 With both cable and mobile phone operators grappling with slowing
growth, speculation has intensified recently about potential
takeovers of No. 4 wireless service provider T-Mobile US Inc and No.
2 cable service provider Time Warner Cable Inc.
Some possible buyers, including Sprint Corp and Comcast Corp, may
face headwinds in convincing U.S. regulators that their deals would
improve competition.
"The Obama administration definitely is more skeptical of large
corporate combinations... They are concerned about the effects of
market concentration on consumers," said Robert McDowell, who
stepped down as the senior Republican member of the Federal
Communications Commission earlier this year.
"It's not an impossible wall to climb over but it is a high wall
nonetheless," said McDowell, now a visiting fellow at the nonprofit
Hudson Institute in Washington.
The Obama administration's pro-consumer tack could threaten deals
that eliminate big competitors within an industry, such as a Sprint
bid for T-Mobile or a Comcast bid for Time Warner Cable. Regulators
could, on the other hand, welcome transactions that bolster new
entrants, such as one combining satellite TV service provider Dish
Network Corp with T-Mobile, experts say.
"Dish/T-Mobile, from a regulatory standpoint, it would be a
slam-dunk," said Stifel analyst David Kaut.
All the companies mentioned in this story declined comment.
Sources earlier told Reuters that Dish is considering making a bid
for T-Mobile next year, potentially setting the stage for a new
bidding war with Japan's SoftBank Corp, which owns 80 percent of
Sprint.
Comcast Corp and smaller rival Charter Communications Inc and Cox
Communications Inc are all circling No. 2 U.S. cable provider Time
Warner Cable.
WIRELESS MARKET CONCENTRATION
Sprint and T-Mobile executives have argued that the wireless market
would be much healthier with a stronger third competitor that could
better challenge the leading players, Verizon Communications Inc and
AT&T Inc.
AT&T and Verizon Wireless have roughly a third of the U.S. wireless
customers each, while Sprint and T-Mobile have a third between them,
according to Roger Entner of Recon Analytics.
Both FCC and Justice Department chiefs have signaled they will take
a hard line in scrutinizing consolidation bids.
"We have a responsibility at this agency to protect competition that
exists and promote competition in those areas where it doesn't," new
FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler, in the past a cable and wireless lobbyist,
told reporters earlier this month.
The FCC, in an annual report released in March, said competition in
the wireless industry is "highly concentrated." Similarly, the
Justice Department's assistant attorney general for antitrust,
William Baer, has described the industry as "not uniformly
competitive."
"The Department believes it is essential to maintain vigilance
against any lessening of the intensity of competitive market
forces," Baer told the FCC in a filing in April related to an
upcoming auction of low-frequency airwaves.
The government's rejection of AT&T's $39 billion plan to buy
T-Mobile from Deutsche Telekom in 2011 remains the biggest shadow
looming over big communications deals.
T-Mobile, which is 67 percent-owned by Germany's Deutsche Telekom,
was hemorrhaging customers at the time AT&T sought to buy it. But
this year, T-Mobile started to add subscribers and its new service
plans have also forced AT&T and other rivals to offer cheaper and
more flexible packages.
[to top of second column] |
Roe Equity Research analyst Kevin Roe agreed that T-Mobile and
Sprint, now under Japan's SoftBank, have better balance sheets and
stronger networks than before.
"Neither company deserves any pity. They did two years ago but no
longer," he said of the No. 3 and No. 4 providers.
Some antitrust experts pointed to the U.S. Airways and American
Airlines merger to form the world's largest airline as a sign of
hope for big deals. Regulators ultimately allowed that combination
to proceed but only after the two companies agreed to divest gate
slots at key airports, including in Washington and New York.
Similarly, McDowell said if regulators were to approve the
Sprint/T-Mobile deal, it would carry "extraordinary conditions and
divestitures."
CABLE DEALS
In cable, antitrust experts say that a Time Warner Cable merger with
a smaller competitor, such as Charter or Cox, raises fewer red flags
than a deal with market leader Comcast.
Time Warner Cable has 12 million video customers, or 12 percent of
the U.S. households that pay for TV access. Charter and Cox have
around 4 million each, while Comcast has over 22 million.
Antitrust experts say a Comcast deal cannot be ruled out either, but
could mean sacrifices from the merging companies, potential
divestitures or agreement to other stipulations.
The fear with a cable deal is that it may create a company powerful
enough to withhold content from other distributors, such as
satellite TV or Internet video streaming sites.
Agreeing to license content to competitors could resolve that issue,
as Comcast did when it bought NBC in 2011, said Robert Doyle of the
law firm Doyle, Barlow and Mazard PLLC.
The Justice Department may also worry that the power of a
Comcast/Time Warner combination could depress prices paid to
content-providers, which are on the rise.
Together, Comcast and Time Warner Cable would have "a tremendous
amount of bargaining power" against studios and other channels as
Comcast also owns NBC Universal, Entner said.
"I think that theory is going to get a lot of traction," said
Matthew Cantor of the law firm Constantine Cannon.
(Reporting by Alina Selyukh and Diane Bartz in Washington and Sinead
Carew, Liana B. Baker and Nicola Leske in New York; editing by
Christian Plumb and Andrew Hay)
[© 2013 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2013 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
 |
