FCC says new material means it needs more time to assess TMUS/Sprint merger

The US Federal Communications Commissions has indefinitely extended the amount of time it will take to sign off the country’s operator mega-merger.

Referring to an ‘informal shot clock’ of 180 days in which to assess the pros and cons of T-Mobile US and Sprint permanently hooking up, the FCC announced in a letter that it is being paused. The only stated reason is the submission of new material from TMUS that significantly alters the criteria by which the FCC will make its assessment, thus requiring more time.

“Today we are pausing the Commission’s informal 180-day transaction shot clock in this proceeding,” opens the letter. “Additional time is necessary to allow for thorough staff and third-party review of newly submitted and anticipated modeling relied on by the Applicants.

“Each of three separate developments require more time. First, on September 5, 2018, the Applicants submitted a substantially revised network engineering model… The newly-provided network engineering model is significantly larger and more complex than the engineering submissions already in the record.

“Further, in an August 29, 2018 exparte meeting, T-Mobile executives Mike Sievert and Peter Ewens described T-Mobile’s reliance on a business model, titled Build 9,’ which apparently provides the financial basis for the projected new network buildout. The Commission did not receive Build 9, and third parties did not have access to it, until September 5. Build 9 therefore requires further review.

“Finally, T-Mobile recently disclosed that it intends to submit additional economic modeling in support of the Applications, beyond that strictly responsive to the various economic analyses in the Petitions to Deny. This new economic modeling will also require additional time for review.”

So, in essence, TMUS recently decided to offer up a bunch more material in support of the merger and the FCC needs more time to review it. Seems fair enough. “The clock will remain stopped until the Applicants have completed the record on which they intend to rely and a reasonable period of time has passed for staff and third-party review,” concludes the letter. How long that reasonable period of time will be is unclear.