Alltel Deal Strengthens
Hand of Verizon Wireless
Takeover Is Valued
At $28.1 Billion;
Small Firms Pressed
By ANDREW LAVALLEE, AMOL SHARMA and CASSELL BRYAN-LOW
June 6, 2008; Page B9
Life for small cellphone
carriers just got a little tougher.
Verizon Wireless finalized
an agreement to buy Alltel Corp., the fifth-largest wireless
carrier in the U.S., in a deal valued at $28.1 billion, including the
assumption of $22.2 billion in debt. The combination helps Verizon
Wireless leapfrog AT&T Inc. to be the biggest U.S. cellphone
carrier with more than 80 million subscribers. Verizon Wireless, owned
55% by Verizon Communications Inc. and 45% by Vodafone Group
PLC, will acquire the equity of Alltel for $5.9 billion and pay off the
company's outstanding debt.
The deal, expected to
close by the end of the year, further consolidates an already top-heavy
marketplace. Verizon Wireless and AT&T between them will have 150
million customers, while the third- and fourth-ranked players, Sprint
Nextel Corp. and Deutsche Telekom AG's T-Mobile USA, will lag
far behind with 52.8 million and 30.8 million, respectively. After that,
the size of the carriers drops sharply.
The smaller players will
be at a disadvantage competing with the two market leaders, which will
have the clout to win better terms from handset makers and sway the fees
carriers charge each other to handle out-of-territory calls and transfer
calls to landlines. Roaming fees are the payments carriers make to
competitors to allow their customers to make calls or use data services
outside their own territory.
Sprint, for instance,
which has roaming agreements with Alltel, may raise with regulatory
authorities concerns that Verizon could raise those roaming fees when it
gains control of Alltel, a person familiar with the matter said.
The deal is likely to be
closely reviewed by regulators. Rep. Edward Markey, chairman of the
House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, issued a
statement saying the proposed merger "merits the utmost scrutiny by
antitrust officials and telecommunications policymakers to ensure that
competition and consumers are fully protected."
The deal comes as growth
in the cellphone market has been slowing, with the proportion of U.S.
consumers owning a phone now around 80%. That slowdown, along with the
prospect of a bigger rival, could put pressure on smaller players to
merge. One possibility that has been floated is the combination of
Sprint and T-Mobile USA, although analysts said Sprint's troubles make
that unlikely. Sprint is "in the beginnings of a very long turnaround,"
said James Moorman, a wireless analyst at Standard & Poor's.
Analysts also noted the
deal could prompt two smaller wireless carriers, MetroPCS
Communications Inc. and Leap Wireless International Inc., to
consider reopening past merger talks. The two companies broke off
discussions last fall after differences over valuation.
Alltel's sale highlights
the impact of the credit crunch. It comes just seven months after the
Little Rock, Ark., carrier, which serves 13.2 million subscribers, was
taken private in a $27.5 billion buyout led by TPG's TPG Capital and a
unit of Goldman Sachs Group Inc.
While Alltel's performance
has improved since the buyout -- the company has added subscribers and
increased its margins -- the lenders on the buyout weren't able to
reduce their exposure as much as they wanted. By selling to Verizon,
which will retire the debt, the lenders can cut potential losses.
Verizon Wireless has had
its eye on Alltel for some time, having considered bidding when the
company was on the market last year. Verizon finance chief Doreen Toben
said the company didn't want to bid against private-equity companies.
Alltel, whose coverage is
based in the South and the Midwest, complements Verizon's existing
footprint by adding numerous rural markets it wasn't previously in.
"This is a perfect fit, with Alltel's high-value post-paid customer
base, its solid financials, our common network technology, and
significant, readily attainable synergies," said Verizon Chairman and
CEO Ivan Seidenberg.
Verizon Communications'
stock was up 5.4%, or $1.98, to $38.96 as of 4 p.m. New York Stock
Exchange composite trading Thursday.
The deal was endorsed by
Vodafone CEO Arun Sarin, who told investors on a conference call he
supported the deal. He said the U.S. market remained attractive because
the vast majority of the population owns cellphones and revenues for
mobile Internet access and other data traffic is growing fast.
The deal could prompt
investors to question the attractiveness of Vodafone retaining its stake
in Verizon Wireless. Verizon Communications and Vodafone talked in
recent years about a possible deal, but weren't able to agree on a price
for Vodafone's stake.
Mr. Sarin has defended his
decision to hold on to the Verizon Wireless stake, pointing to the rapid
growth in the U.S. wireless industry in the past several years. The
value of Vodafone's stake in the venture has more than doubled to as
much as $75 billion, according to one person familiar with the matter.
But, the value of Vodafone's stake will be affected as the U.S. market
becomes increasingly saturated.
Furthermore, the deal --
by raising Verizon Wireless's debt load -- may postpone the date by
which Verizon Wireless would start repaying dividends to Vodafone.
Executives at Vodafone, Newbury, England, recently had said they
expected Verizon Wireless to work down its debt by late 2009 or early
2010, at which point it could resume paying dividends.
On Thursday, Vodafone said
it could be three years after the close of the Alltel acquisition before
Verizon Wireless pays down its debt and is able to resume dividend
payments.
While the deal isn't
likely to face as much resistance as AT&T's $86 billion blockbuster
acquisition of BellSouth in 2006, which merged two of the largest
remaining landline phone companies, some officials and public-interest
groups have raised concerns.
One of them, Washington,
D.C.-based Public Knowledge, said in a statement, "With Sprint in a
weakened condition, this deal will speed the unfortunate trend of giving
consumers fewer, rather than more, choices in telecommunications
services, while giving a few companies more control over the lives of
consumers."
--Dana Cimilluca contributed to this article.
Write to Cassell
Bryan-Low at
cassell.bryan-low@wsj.com4
|