1
00:00:03,520 --> 00:00:07,040
Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. I'm June Grosso. Every

2
00:00:07,120 --> 00:00:09,680
Speaker 1: day we bring you insight and analysis into the most

3
00:00:09,720 --> 00:00:12,200
Speaker 1: important legal news of the day. You can find more

4
00:00:12,240 --> 00:00:16,160
Speaker 1: episodes at the Bloomberg Law Podcast, on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud,

5
00:00:16,280 --> 00:00:20,200
Speaker 1: and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcasts. It's a novel

6
00:00:20,320 --> 00:00:23,360
Speaker 1: trial that will determine the players in the nation's wireless

7
00:00:23,440 --> 00:00:26,680
Speaker 1: market whether that market will have the current four carriers

8
00:00:26,800 --> 00:00:30,080
Speaker 1: or drop to three. Thirteen states, led by New York

9
00:00:30,120 --> 00:00:33,280
Speaker 1: and California, are suing to block the twenty six point

10
00:00:33,320 --> 00:00:37,040
Speaker 1: five billion dollar merger of T Mobile, the third largest carrier,

11
00:00:37,280 --> 00:00:40,520
Speaker 1: and Sprint, the fourth largest, arguing that it will drive

12
00:00:40,600 --> 00:00:44,440
Speaker 1: up prices, reduce the level of service, and violate antitrust laws.

13
00:00:45,000 --> 00:00:48,080
Speaker 1: The Justice Department in the Federal Communications Commission gave their

14
00:00:48,120 --> 00:00:51,040
Speaker 1: blessings to the deal after the companies agreed to make

15
00:00:51,120 --> 00:00:54,279
Speaker 1: some concessions. Joining me as Spencer Waller, a professor at

16
00:00:54,280 --> 00:00:57,280
Speaker 1: Loyola University Law School and director of the Institute of

17
00:00:57,320 --> 00:01:01,360
Speaker 1: Consumer Antitrust Studies, is it on precedented for the states

18
00:01:01,400 --> 00:01:04,120
Speaker 1: to reject a settlement by the Feds and sue to

19
00:01:04,200 --> 00:01:07,880
Speaker 1: block the merger. It's not unprecedented, but it's very very

20
00:01:07,959 --> 00:01:09,800
Speaker 1: rare that the Streame Court for a long time has

21
00:01:09,800 --> 00:01:12,880
Speaker 1: said that the States operate independently from the Feds in

22
00:01:12,920 --> 00:01:15,080
Speaker 1: the antitrust area, and they can challenge things that the

23
00:01:15,120 --> 00:01:18,160
Speaker 1: Feds don't challenge at all, or that they settle in.

24
00:01:18,200 --> 00:01:20,680
Speaker 1: The States believe that they have a have a strong case,

25
00:01:20,720 --> 00:01:23,320
Speaker 1: but it's been few and far between. By and large,

26
00:01:23,680 --> 00:01:26,440
Speaker 1: the States prefer to work with either the FTC or

27
00:01:26,480 --> 00:01:29,280
Speaker 1: the do J and work together in a coalition to

28
00:01:29,360 --> 00:01:33,080
Speaker 1: attack mergers of this kind. How can removing a low

29
00:01:33,120 --> 00:01:37,440
Speaker 1: cost rival from a highly concentrated industry not have a

30
00:01:37,480 --> 00:01:43,800
Speaker 1: negative effect on competition? What T Mobile sprints argument at trial? Well,

31
00:01:44,040 --> 00:01:46,479
Speaker 1: you know, it's tough. T Mobile has played a really

32
00:01:46,560 --> 00:01:49,640
Speaker 1: unprecedented role in the cell phone industry as the maverick,

33
00:01:49,720 --> 00:01:52,400
Speaker 1: as the disruptor, as the one that not only was

34
00:01:52,440 --> 00:01:56,360
Speaker 1: aggressively competing on price and service and some other things,

35
00:01:56,400 --> 00:01:59,240
Speaker 1: but also was the carrier in particular that was keeping

36
00:01:59,520 --> 00:02:01,680
Speaker 1: a T and T and Verizon on their toes and

37
00:02:01,720 --> 00:02:05,080
Speaker 1: forcing them to respond and kind in numerous markets. So

38
00:02:05,280 --> 00:02:07,680
Speaker 1: the theory is strong. It was part of why prior

39
00:02:07,720 --> 00:02:10,680
Speaker 1: acquisitions of the mobile were challenge It was part of

40
00:02:10,720 --> 00:02:14,000
Speaker 1: why this particular murder was of great concern four years

41
00:02:14,000 --> 00:02:16,680
Speaker 1: ago under the Obama administration. The best I can tell

42
00:02:16,720 --> 00:02:20,040
Speaker 1: you is they're positioning this as a merger that would

43
00:02:20,040 --> 00:02:23,080
Speaker 1: create a strong number three and allow them to better

44
00:02:23,120 --> 00:02:25,280
Speaker 1: compete with A T and T and Verizon. That is

45
00:02:25,320 --> 00:02:28,600
Speaker 1: the story that they're pitching in their documents and their

46
00:02:28,639 --> 00:02:32,200
Speaker 1: testimony and trial. When the FEDS gave their blessing to

47
00:02:32,280 --> 00:02:37,880
Speaker 1: the merger, they required certain concessions. What were those concessions

48
00:02:37,919 --> 00:02:41,560
Speaker 1: that led the FEDS to say, Okay, this deal can

49
00:02:41,600 --> 00:02:44,880
Speaker 1: go through. It's not unusual for the FEDS to approve

50
00:02:44,919 --> 00:02:48,040
Speaker 1: a deal subject to restructuring. It is more often. You

51
00:02:48,040 --> 00:02:51,040
Speaker 1: could imagine, let's say, take supermarkets. If there's a merger

52
00:02:51,080 --> 00:02:54,040
Speaker 1: that creates a very highly concentrated local market, you could

53
00:02:54,040 --> 00:02:56,839
Speaker 1: sell off some supermarkets to another national chain and keep

54
00:02:56,880 --> 00:03:01,040
Speaker 1: things roughly the same. What's unusual about this deal is

55
00:03:01,160 --> 00:03:05,600
Speaker 1: that the divestitures are this rickety package of assets, spectrum,

56
00:03:05,840 --> 00:03:09,840
Speaker 1: legal rights, and other things. So basically, the two companies

57
00:03:09,880 --> 00:03:13,040
Speaker 1: are being forced to or agreed to spin off their

58
00:03:13,080 --> 00:03:17,200
Speaker 1: prepaid cellular plans to dish Um, the satellite TV provider

59
00:03:17,560 --> 00:03:21,120
Speaker 1: that does own some spectrum and has some plans to

60
00:03:21,240 --> 00:03:24,760
Speaker 1: enter the cell phone market. In addition, there's some spectrum transfers.

61
00:03:24,800 --> 00:03:28,400
Speaker 1: There is provision of services so that the new dish

62
00:03:28,919 --> 00:03:32,560
Speaker 1: cell phone entity can use the facilities of the two

63
00:03:32,600 --> 00:03:34,920
Speaker 1: merging parties so that all the calls can be completed.

64
00:03:35,240 --> 00:03:39,560
Speaker 1: That's basically the package. And this is really a lot

65
00:03:39,600 --> 00:03:42,360
Speaker 1: differently than just selling off some supermarkets and having a

66
00:03:42,360 --> 00:03:45,520
Speaker 1: new operator. This is getting someone who's not been in

67
00:03:45,520 --> 00:03:48,680
Speaker 1: the business before and will be dependent on the very

68
00:03:48,720 --> 00:03:50,960
Speaker 1: parties who are merging in order to compete with these

69
00:03:51,000 --> 00:03:54,000
Speaker 1: parties and with the two large carriers that are already

70
00:03:54,360 --> 00:03:59,040
Speaker 1: dominating the market. So on Tuesday, the States presented company

71
00:03:59,160 --> 00:04:03,040
Speaker 1: internal and analysis done before reaching the agreement with Sprint,

72
00:04:03,160 --> 00:04:06,240
Speaker 1: showing the deal as a way to reduce competition and

73
00:04:06,360 --> 00:04:11,880
Speaker 1: raise prices. But while on the stand, Deutsche Telecomms chairman

74
00:04:12,360 --> 00:04:16,000
Speaker 1: testified that sell customers will see lower prices if the

75
00:04:16,000 --> 00:04:19,120
Speaker 1: deal goes through. He said, we commit that prices are

76
00:04:19,160 --> 00:04:24,400
Speaker 1: going down in this market. So how does a judge decide, Well,

77
00:04:24,560 --> 00:04:26,440
Speaker 1: just you know, as a former trial lawyer, all I

78
00:04:26,440 --> 00:04:29,040
Speaker 1: can tell you is documents that were written, you know,

79
00:04:29,120 --> 00:04:33,039
Speaker 1: contemporaneously to before litigation and you know by the parties

80
00:04:33,080 --> 00:04:35,520
Speaker 1: in the ordinary course of their business are are just

81
00:04:35,560 --> 00:04:37,520
Speaker 1: you know, it's very traditional evidence, no matter what kind

82
00:04:37,560 --> 00:04:39,640
Speaker 1: of a case. And it's very compelling because no one

83
00:04:39,720 --> 00:04:42,160
Speaker 1: is looking over their shoulder. Uh, They're going about their

84
00:04:42,160 --> 00:04:44,640
Speaker 1: business and they're talking to each other presumably in in

85
00:04:44,640 --> 00:04:48,039
Speaker 1: in candor. And that's very different than um testimony on

86
00:04:48,080 --> 00:04:51,320
Speaker 1: the stand after a complaint has been filed. The judge

87
00:04:51,360 --> 00:04:52,919
Speaker 1: is going to have to weigh that, Uh, this is

88
00:04:52,920 --> 00:04:54,880
Speaker 1: not a jury trial. The judge gets to decide what

89
00:04:55,040 --> 00:04:58,760
Speaker 1: is credible and what is convincing. And I think having

90
00:04:59,000 --> 00:05:01,880
Speaker 1: these documents are are very helpful to the state's case,

91
00:05:02,200 --> 00:05:05,400
Speaker 1: although it is not by itself the end of the case.

92
00:05:05,440 --> 00:05:10,200
Speaker 1: They will need other testimony from the companies, from competitors,

93
00:05:10,240 --> 00:05:14,480
Speaker 1: from customers, from expert witnesses that talk about the effects

94
00:05:14,520 --> 00:05:17,040
Speaker 1: of this further consolidation of a market where there are

95
00:05:17,040 --> 00:05:20,119
Speaker 1: only four national players. This will go down to three

96
00:05:20,440 --> 00:05:24,080
Speaker 1: plus the possibility that Dish will eventually become to some

97
00:05:24,120 --> 00:05:27,119
Speaker 1: extent of a fourth player coming back into the market.

98
00:05:27,440 --> 00:05:30,520
Speaker 1: The judge takes all this into consideration, but is he

99
00:05:30,600 --> 00:05:34,360
Speaker 1: going to have to rely most on what analysts say

100
00:05:34,440 --> 00:05:39,719
Speaker 1: is going to happen. Well, normally speaking, companies don't get

101
00:05:40,000 --> 00:05:42,920
Speaker 1: a free pass because they promised not to raise prices. Uh.

102
00:05:43,000 --> 00:05:46,120
Speaker 1: What they're trying to do is predict the likely effects

103
00:05:46,160 --> 00:05:49,680
Speaker 1: will they harm or hurt consumers as the main focus

104
00:05:49,680 --> 00:05:55,200
Speaker 1: of the inquiry, and promise not backed up by other evidence, UM,

105
00:05:55,560 --> 00:05:58,119
Speaker 1: isn't by itself going to be compelling. And the States

106
00:05:58,160 --> 00:05:59,920
Speaker 1: also need more than just a couple of hot doc

107
00:06:00,040 --> 00:06:02,680
Speaker 1: meants to make their case. So both sides really have

108
00:06:02,760 --> 00:06:06,040
Speaker 1: to lay out it's a crystal ball exercise because by definition,

109
00:06:06,120 --> 00:06:08,960
Speaker 1: this deal hasn't happened yet. Both sides are trying to

110
00:06:09,000 --> 00:06:11,640
Speaker 1: look into the future and say, here's the most likely scenario.

111
00:06:12,680 --> 00:06:15,120
Speaker 1: And as you mentioned, a judge is going to make

112
00:06:15,160 --> 00:06:17,800
Speaker 1: the decision in this case, not a jury, and he

113
00:06:17,839 --> 00:06:21,000
Speaker 1: told them to skip their opening statements, trim the witness

114
00:06:21,080 --> 00:06:24,400
Speaker 1: list to avoid beating him over the head with testimony.

115
00:06:25,400 --> 00:06:28,960
Speaker 1: Explain the difference between a judge and a jury in

116
00:06:29,000 --> 00:06:32,159
Speaker 1: a case like this. Sure, UM, now I don't know

117
00:06:32,240 --> 00:06:35,800
Speaker 1: this uh judge's background, but there's two kinds of cases.

118
00:06:35,839 --> 00:06:39,600
Speaker 1: There's UH, there is a there's a jury trial where

119
00:06:39,600 --> 00:06:42,240
Speaker 1: you have either six between six and twelve jurors and

120
00:06:42,240 --> 00:06:46,160
Speaker 1: a civil case, who who you know? Get here, opening statements, here,

121
00:06:46,200 --> 00:06:49,040
Speaker 1: all the evidence to get jury instructions, get final arguments,

122
00:06:49,240 --> 00:06:50,640
Speaker 1: and then go back in the room where we don't

123
00:06:50,640 --> 00:06:54,400
Speaker 1: know exactly, uh, you know what happened, um, and then

124
00:06:54,440 --> 00:06:56,280
Speaker 1: they come out with a with a verdict that doesn't

125
00:06:56,320 --> 00:06:59,160
Speaker 1: have to be unanimous in a in most civil cases,

126
00:07:00,400 --> 00:07:03,039
Speaker 1: a bench child. This is not a case about any

127
00:07:03,080 --> 00:07:06,080
Speaker 1: asking anybody for damages. No one's going to jail. This

128
00:07:06,160 --> 00:07:07,680
Speaker 1: is just whether or not the judge will issue a

129
00:07:07,680 --> 00:07:10,920
Speaker 1: preliminary injunction stopping this transaction from going forward or not.

130
00:07:11,440 --> 00:07:15,160
Speaker 1: So the judge um will decide all this and has

131
00:07:15,200 --> 00:07:20,720
Speaker 1: to put forward um conclusions of law and findings of fact.

132
00:07:20,760 --> 00:07:23,360
Speaker 1: You know that that takes time. So the judge doesn't

133
00:07:23,440 --> 00:07:27,840
Speaker 1: need the oratory from the parties. Uh, you know in

134
00:07:28,080 --> 00:07:31,720
Speaker 1: the opening statements and the full flowery presentations that that

135
00:07:31,800 --> 00:07:33,640
Speaker 1: often go to a go to a jury. So the

136
00:07:33,920 --> 00:07:36,360
Speaker 1: judge has a fair amount of discretion in any kind

137
00:07:36,360 --> 00:07:40,240
Speaker 1: of case to streamline what amount of time and number

138
00:07:40,280 --> 00:07:44,200
Speaker 1: of witnesses and documents it can be introduced in the

139
00:07:44,240 --> 00:07:46,000
Speaker 1: bench trail, and it usually goes faster because you don't

140
00:07:46,000 --> 00:07:47,320
Speaker 1: have to worry about the jury. You don't have to

141
00:07:47,320 --> 00:07:49,560
Speaker 1: send the jury out when there's a legal argument. You

142
00:07:49,640 --> 00:07:53,960
Speaker 1: don't have to have arguments about evidence and uh, and

143
00:07:54,040 --> 00:07:55,400
Speaker 1: then come back, you know, with the jury in the

144
00:07:55,440 --> 00:07:58,880
Speaker 1: box to then hear whatever the the dispute of that is.

145
00:07:59,440 --> 00:08:01,720
Speaker 1: So you know, the judge has to make all the decisions.

146
00:08:01,840 --> 00:08:05,480
Speaker 1: And there are very few district court judges who have

147
00:08:05,760 --> 00:08:08,240
Speaker 1: a lot of experience with antitrust cases. They're just one

148
00:08:08,280 --> 00:08:11,640
Speaker 1: of dozens and dozens of types of cases that come

149
00:08:11,680 --> 00:08:15,200
Speaker 1: before an average federal judge. On average, each judge has

150
00:08:15,200 --> 00:08:18,680
Speaker 1: a between two and four cases, depending on where they're

151
00:08:18,680 --> 00:08:21,800
Speaker 1: sitting in how busy they are at any particular moment. Uh.

152
00:08:21,840 --> 00:08:25,160
Speaker 1: This judge has a has a distinguished background, but but

153
00:08:25,240 --> 00:08:27,440
Speaker 1: he to my knowledge that never worked in the nitrust

154
00:08:27,480 --> 00:08:30,080
Speaker 1: area in neither private practice or in government before he

155
00:08:30,120 --> 00:08:33,880
Speaker 1: became a judge. And um, you know, these are these

156
00:08:33,920 --> 00:08:36,720
Speaker 1: are tough cases and the probably it's one of the

157
00:08:36,800 --> 00:08:39,600
Speaker 1: very few ones in the nitrust area he has heard

158
00:08:39,679 --> 00:08:41,839
Speaker 1: or will ever hear in his time on the bench.

159
00:08:42,200 --> 00:08:44,560
Speaker 1: So you know, he uh, he's going to have to

160
00:08:44,600 --> 00:08:48,719
Speaker 1: go through and here some um economic expert testimony as

161
00:08:48,720 --> 00:08:52,440
Speaker 1: to what the market looks like, how competition will be affected.

162
00:08:52,880 --> 00:08:56,400
Speaker 1: Someone is going to have to introduce evidence that either

163
00:08:57,160 --> 00:09:01,520
Speaker 1: explains or debunks the efficiencies on the technological progress that

164
00:09:01,600 --> 00:09:03,760
Speaker 1: the party's claim is going to result from this deal,

165
00:09:04,440 --> 00:09:06,320
Speaker 1: and then the judge who will have to in short

166
00:09:06,440 --> 00:09:10,000
Speaker 1: order issue his ruling, although that wouldn't necessarily come from

167
00:09:10,000 --> 00:09:12,280
Speaker 1: the bench at the end of the trial itself. Thanks

168
00:09:12,320 --> 00:09:17,240
Speaker 1: Spencer that Spencer Waller of Loyola University Law School. Thanks

169
00:09:17,240 --> 00:09:20,520
Speaker 1: for listening to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can subscribe

170
00:09:20,520 --> 00:09:23,800
Speaker 1: and listen to the show on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, and

171
00:09:23,840 --> 00:09:28,320
Speaker 1: on bloomberg dot com slash podcast. I'm June Grosso. This

172
00:09:28,679 --> 00:09:29,360
Speaker 1: is Bloomberg