TELECOM Digest OnLine - Sorted: Re: Cingular - AT&T ?

Re: Cingular - AT&T ?

John Levine (
11 May 2007 00:46:15 -0000

> What I don't understand is that I thought the old AT&T cellular
> carrier didn't have such a great reputation, but Cingular did.

Right. AT&T spun off quite a lot of "we don't care, we don't have to"
into ATTWS.

> Given that, and as you say all the branding work, I don't see how
> renaming Cingular into "at&t" makes sense.

Seems pretty stupid to me, too. I expect they think there will long
term benefits in giving the whole company the same name.

> While we're on the subject, after divesture whatever happened to Bell
> Canada and Cincinnatti Bell, of which I believe AT&T didn't own very
> much.

It's been a long time since AT&T owned any of Bell Canada. It's quite
healthy, and remains the dominant telco in eastern Canada. Their
holding comapny BCE has bought a variety of other stuff, notably the
Globe and Mail which is Canada's largest newspaper.

After unhooking itself from AT&T, Cinci Bell made the same mistake as
Qwest, diving into the long distance market and calling itself
Broadwing, and learned the same lesson as Qwest, there's only a
financial black hole there. They spat Broadwing back out and are now
back to being a profitable regional ILEC with all the usual services
including mobile telephony and DSL.



Post Followup Article Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply
Go to Next message: Ken Abrams: "Re: Cingular - AT&T ?"
Go to Previous message: "Cellular Exchange Rate Center?"
May be in reply to: "Cingular - AT&T ?"
Next in thread: Ken Abrams: "Re: Cingular - AT&T ?"
TELECOM Digest: Home Page