> 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.
From what I remember Cinci Bell was never a Bell company, much like one on the East Coast now owned by at&t.
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
The Only Good Spammer is a Dead one!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) 2007 I Kill Spammers, Inc. A Rot In Hell Co.