Fred Atk>> AT&T used to do what it pleased all the time. Do you remember the >> result of that? > Good phone service and Bell Labs. > TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Touche! and all that ... But the main > trouble with that was Bell *tried* to have good PR but in fact they > sucked at it. Remember, the entire divestiture thing succeeded in > large part because Judge Harold Greene lost ten cents in a nasty, > smelly, urinated-on, busted-up, graffiti-ridden payphone booth and the > operator sassed at him and condescended to him about getting a refund > when the phone did not 'work right'. Greene was *so annoyed* by that > incident he swore that he would bust up Bell no matter what. Only a > short time later, two of the Justice Department flunkies who knew > about Greene's experience and his pre-disposition toward Bell told > their bosses they knew of the 'perfect judge' to do their > bidding. Justice, you see, was waiting for the right judge at the > right time; they did not like Bell that much either. I dare say that > had Bell been a bit more diligent in PR efforts during the late 1970's > and early 1980's they might still be around. Maybe, I am not sure. PAT]
You could well be right. Internally the place was run with high integrity and a focus on public service but that didn't come across to the public very well.
Plus, changing technology and demands for services would be hard to do in the old business model.