You
probably have seen one or more versions of the advertisements touting the
consumer benefits in the Sprint-TMobile merger.
While never explaining why they could not achieve pro-social goals
individually, the companies claim that collectively they can bridge the digital
divide, generate more competition and make us all proud of our 5G supremacy. The companies offer not one speck of
empirical proof that anything good actually will occur other than make it
easier for them to satisfy Wall Street and Main Street investor expectations.
I can
accept that Sprint and TMobile want to make lemonade out of their sorry
performance in the marketplace. On the
other hand, I cannot accept the unquestioning boosterism of FCC Chairman Ajit
Pai and others who ought to know better.
These government officials also offer not one piece of empirical evidence
of the “win-win” value proposition where the companies and consumers benefit
without any harm to the marketplace. I
will question their motivations, because I know these people are smart and
fully able to pose uncomfortable questions if their had incentives to do
so. Sadly, the public interest falls far
down the list when there are doctrinal, political and personal stakes involved.
Yet again “tilting
at windmills,” I offer some forward looking, but evidenced based tests for
assessing the marketplace and consumer impact of the Sprint-TMobile merger.
Status Quo Extrapolation
of Tower Sites, Available Bandwidth and Capex Versus Merged Company
Performance.
Chairman
Pai has emphasized the need to inject ostensibly non-partisan economics and empirical
data in the FCC’s ongoing oversight.
Great idea, but somehow, I do not see the swamp drained with clear-headed
analysis. On the other hand, we can do a
back of the envelop analysis that shows how empiricism works if you care to use
it. All one has to do is compile a list of current performance factors for the
two companies. How many tower sites do
the companies have individually? How
much bandwidth do they use now and how much do they have in reserve? How much
did the companies individually invest in previous years?
Surely
Chairman Pai understands the veracity and importance of these variables, even
though they too can be politicized and misrepresented. The Chairman has touted a party line that network
neutrality regulation, or at least the prospect of it in the future after completion of judicial review, creates all sorts of investment disincentives for incumbents
and market entrants alike.
So, what exactly would industry
consolidation do? It does not take any leap of faith to conclude that
measurable statistics will show a reduction relative to what two standalone,
competitors would generate. For example,
when Sirius and XM merged, over time they could reduce the total number of
satellites needed to provide service, i.e., less total bandwidth. Their operational efficiency gains generally
accrued by reducing the number of employees.
The merged company did not need two groups of lawyers, accountants,
network engineers, salespeople, etc.
Average Revenue Per
User
Even as senior management at
Sprint and TMobile would never admit it, the merger will make it easier for the
combined company to generate greater returns for shareholders and the stock
options and profit sharing for employees.
The merged company will have less need to devote sleepless afternoons
innovating, solving digital divides and enhancing the value proposition of
their service. Can anyone show me how
the combined Sirius-XM offers so much more than what either of the two prior
companies was able to offer? Bear in
mind that while one could make the argument that one or both of the digital
satellite operators might face bankruptcy, neither wireless carrier lacks sufficient
access to debt and equity financing.
Wireless
carriers in the U.S. generate some of the highest ARPUs in the world. They have declined of late, but one should
expect this outcome in a maturing industry nearing saturation and
commodification. The carriers have
responded by upselling with bundles of video, audio and other content as well
as zero rating.
What is the
likely impact on industry ARPU from the merger?
One can generate a quite likely scenario by examining revenue and profit
statistics in the broad information, communications and entertainment marketplace
as well as other industries, such as commercial aviation. Generally, industry consolidation enhances
the prospect for both revenue and profit growth. Surely the current performance of airlines, pharmaceuticals
and hospital groups offer empirical evidence of growth, arguably at the expense
of consumer welfare.
Health of MVNOs
Mobile Virtual Network Operators
provide consumers with a pre-paid, often cheaper competitive alternative to
post-paid service. As noted in the prior
blog entry, the Justice Department considers the MVNO option as important, so
much so that merger approval may be contingent on the ongoing viability of
Boost Mobile.
When
markets concentrate, facilities-based incumbents may have less incentives to “off
load” product to resellers. In the wireless
marketplace, AT&T and Verizon are less than aggressive resellers, because
they do not want to cannibalize their service.
What percentage of wireless consumers even know that AT&T owns
Cricket?
Will 3 national
wireless competitors have any interest in offloading bulk minutes of use and
bandwidth to unaffiliated vendors? Why
should they support lower priced competitors?
Out of Pocket
Consumer Costs
Anyone blessed with the
opportunity to travel abroad quickly notices 2 major differences in the
wireless experience. Consumers outside the U.S. typically pay far less for more
data and voice minutes, plus they have far more opportunities to use multiple
SIM cards options.
U.S.
carriers still manage to play cute with questions about unlocking phone even for
ones that the consumer owns and has fully paid all installments. While the number porting process has become
routine, you might find it quite difficult to simply pull out your existing SIM
card and replace it with one you purchased from a reseller. The U.S. carriers want to make switching
carriers as difficult as possible and I do not see the FCC doing anything to sanction
such behavior.
If
competition on price is rather meek in the U.S. right now, exactly what good
will result when two separate companies join forces? It does not augur well when the best that the
merged company will offer is not to raise prices for three years. Curiously, that is exactly what Sirius and XM
offered followed by sizeable rate increases and proliferating fees.
This deal
does not pass empirical tests, or one’s common sense of smell.
No comments:
Post a Comment