dcpatti

More like paying alimony without the wedding or honeymoon because you told everyone that your almost-partner was a complete and undesirable mess that couldn't support themselves and that you would be doing the world a favor by marrying them out of pity. The crux of both AT&T's and t-mobile's arguments were that t-mobile would fail anyway. If I were the t-mobile CEO I wouldn't want my potential merger partner going on the public record with that assessment of me if I didn't have some insurance. All these company financials and business models can be positioned in ways that make the same numbers look great or downright scary; before the DOJ stepped in, both AT&T and t-mobile knew that their best chances were tied to making t-mobile look like a loser (which to me says they knew they were in a shaky position with the merger plans all along). T-mobile didn't want to risk being labelled as a loser with nothing to help them stay afloat if the merger didn't go through, and probably wouldn't have tried to merge if this insurance clause wasn't in the picture.