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

Re: Cingular - AT&T ?

John Levine (johnl@iecc.com)
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.

R's,

John

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: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com: "Cellular Exchange Rate Center?"
May be in reply to: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com: "Cingular - AT&T ?"
Next in thread: Ken Abrams: "Re: Cingular - AT&T ?"
TELECOM Digest: Home Page