throbber
The Washington Post
`
`Verizon Buys Cellular One
`
`A headline in the Nov. 16 Business section incorrectly identified the company that is being bought by Verizon
`Wireless Inc. The company is Price Communications Corp. (Published 11/17/2000)
`
`By Christopher Stern
`November 16, 2000
`Verizon Wireless Inc. has snapped up Price Communications Corp. in a $2.1 billion deal that will help the New Jersey-based
`telephone company fill a hole in its cellular business in the southeastern United States.
`
`Verizon Wireless has agreed to pay $1.5 billion in stock and assume $550 million in Price debt. The deal depends on Verizon
`Wireless, now a wholly owned subsidiary of Verizon Communications, making a public stock offering by Sept. 30.
`
`If the IPO, which has already been delayed once, fails to take place by the deadline, either party can call off the deal.
`
`Assuming the deal is completed, Price, which now markets its service under the Cellular One brand, will add 500,000 subscribers
`to Verizon, mostly in Georgia, Florida, South Carolina and Alabama.
`
`Verizon, formerly known as Bell Atlantic Corp., recently renamed itself after completing its merger with GTE Corp. It is currently
`the nation's largest wireless carrier, with 26.3 million voice and data customers.
`
`The deal comes just as the Federal Communications Commission is scheduled to auction a huge block of airwaves beginning Dec.
`12. Verizon has registered with the FCC to participate in the auction in an effort to fill regional holes in its national coverage. The
`deal relieves some pressure on Verizon Wireless to bid on spectrum in the Southeast.
`
`One source familiar with auction revenue predicted the upcoming auction could raise as much as $10 billion. Analysts have grown
`concerned about the high price some companies have been willing to pay for spectrum at auctions. Airwaves sales in Britain and
`Germany raised $80 billion for their respective governments this summer but sent the stock prices of the winning bidders down as
`investors worried the telecommunications companies had overpaid.
`
`However, subsequent auctions in Italy and Holland were less heated, possibly indicating that wireless companies had learned a
`lesson and are no longer willing to pay such high fees for airwaves licenses.
`
`Verizon Wireless spokesman Brian Wood said there are significant advantages to acquiring a company instead of bidding for
`licenses at an auction. "Obviously it's better to get a living, breathing business rather than starting from scratch," Wood said.
`
`But Verizon will face considerable additional expense in acquiring Price, which uses a different communications standard than
`Verizon.
`
`Wood said that Verizon will build a new network next to Price's existing infrastructure and, over time, convert customers to the
`new technology. Eventually, each Price customer will need a new handset to make calls.
`
`Legg Mason Wood Walker associate analyst Craig Mallitz estimates it will cost Verizon at least $100 million to convert the 500,000
`customers to the new standard.
`
` Comments
`
`Smart Mobile Technologies LLC, Exhibit 2021
`Page 2021 - 1
`IPR2022-00807, Apple Inc. et al. v. Smart Mobile Technologies LLC
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket