> 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.