 SmokeyI'd rather be skiing Premium Member join:2003-05-20 Wild West |
Smokey
Premium Member
2005-Jan-31 9:23 am
SBC or ATT?I'm taking bets, what name will they choose? I'm laying it all on ATT. | |
|
 |  icp1 Premium Member join:2000-10-13 Saint Louis, MO |
icp1
Premium Member
2005-Jan-31 9:25 am
Re: SBC or ATT?said by Smokey:I'm taking bets, what name will they choose? I'm laying it all on ATT. I'll take that bet. It will be SBC and Eddie Whitacre will still be CEO. | |
|
 |  |  tomkb Premium Member join:2000-11-15 Tampa, FL |
tomkb
Premium Member
2005-Jan-31 9:28 am
Re: SBC or ATT?said by icp1:said by Smokey:I'm taking bets, what name will they choose? I'm laying it all on ATT. I'll take that bet. It will be SBC and Eddie Whitacre will still be CEO. I'll take that bet also, AT&T will just fade away. | |
|
 |  |  rbb join:2000-09-17 Fairfax Station, VA |
rbb to icp1
Member
2005-Jan-31 10:14 am
to icp1
said by icp1:said by Smokey:I'm taking bets, what name will they choose? I'm laying it all on ATT. I'll take that bet. It will be SBC and Eddie Whitacre will still be CEO. When Nation's Bank acquired Bank of America, they ditched their own name and became Bank of America. Why? Because more people knew who Bank of America was, despite Nation's Bank being larger. I go with AT&T. Note to Lily Tomlin - time to bring back Ernestine.... | |
|
 |  |  |  NPGMBR join:2001-03-28 Arlington, VA |
NPGMBR
Member
2005-Jan-31 10:19 am
Re: SBC or ATT?I agree. Think about Worldcom, who took the name and reputation of it's subsidiary MCI. | |
|
 |  |  |  N10Cities Premium Member join:2002-05-07 0000000 ·World Lynx
·Cox HSI Asus RT-AC87
|
to rbb
said by rbb:said by icp1:said by Smokey:I'm taking bets, what name will they choose? I'm laying it all on ATT. I'll take that bet. It will be SBC and Eddie Whitacre will still be CEO. When Nation's Bank acquired Bank of America, they ditched their own name and became Bank of America. Why? Because more people knew who Bank of America was, despite Nation's Bank being larger. I go with AT&T. Note to Lily Tomlin - time to bring back Ernestine.... Old Laugh-In Fan, huh? I loved that skit! | |
|
 |  |  |  Geminimind Premium Member join:2003-12-20 Sacramento, CA |
to rbb
SBC is way bigger than ATT. it is like completing the cigular at&t merge. we bought the wireless company lets buy it all | |
|
 |  tiger72SexaT duorP Premium Member join:2001-03-28 Saint Louis, MO |
to Smokey
they'll probably take SBC. They've done a ton of advertising over the past couple years about what "SBC" stands for. They'll probably do what Cingular did and just change the logo a bit. | |
|
 |  |  SmokeyI'd rather be skiing Premium Member join:2003-05-20 Wild West |
Smokey
Premium Member
2005-Jan-31 9:28 am
Re: SBC or ATT?Ah, but think on a global scale? When people think of long distance, they think of AT&T. The amount of money spent on that name recognition is hard to pass on. | |
|
 |  |  |  | |
Re: SBC or ATT?When I think of "long distance", I think of buggy whips. | |
|
 |  |  |
 |  |  | |
to tiger72
They will drop the Bell and Telegraph and become their true moniker,
SCAT | |
|
 |  |  sbc @dsl.emhril.ameritech |
sbc to tiger72
Anon
2005-Feb-2 10:17 pm
to tiger72
To your response "They've done a ton of advertising over the past couple years about what "SBC" stands for." I will tell you what SBC stands for "SILLY BITCH COMPANY"! My spouse works for them and it was a great company when it was Ameritech! I bet it will stay SBC! | |
|
 |  2 edits |
to Smokey
said by Smokey:I'm taking bets, what name will they choose? I'm laying it all on ATT. Lay it all on ATT and I think you are going to wake up broke one morning! SBC bought ATT, not vice~versa. SBC is a huge company in its own right that isn't going to give up their name and go with the name of a smaller acquisition. I think you will see at the very most, that ATT may remain as ATT and just become a wholly owned subsidiary of SBC. More that likely however, in my opinion, is that SBC will just absorb the ATT infrastructure and the ATT as you know it will just go away. | |
|
 |  |  reub2000 Premium Member join:2001-12-28 Evanston, IL |
reub2000
Premium Member
2005-Jan-31 9:37 am
Re: SBC or ATT?RTFA
"With regard to the company name, Whitacre said, "We value the heritage and strength of the AT&T brand, which is one of the most widely recognized and respected names throughout the world, and it will certainly be a part of the new company's future."" | |
|
 |  |  |  icp1 Premium Member join:2000-10-13 Saint Louis, MO |
icp1
Premium Member
2005-Jan-31 9:51 am
Re: SBC or ATT?said by reub2000:RTFA "With regard to the company name, Whitacre said, "We value the heritage and strength of the AT&T brand, which is one of the most widely recognized and respected names throughout the world, and it will certainly be a part of the new company's future."" There's a difference between using the brand name and the name of the company. I still say SBC will be the company name, though obviously they may choose in some markets to use "SBC AT&T Global" or something like that as a brand for certain services. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  | |
schlechtj
Anon
2005-Jan-31 10:42 pm
Re: SBC or ATT?AT&T it will be. SBC has been buying up the other baby bells (first Pacific Bell then Ameritech) and now it has the chance to get the US and world wide known name rather than its locally known name. Those commercials where they told you what SBC was played in the Ameritech area when they took over. Now, when they buy the other bells, they won't have to advertise. Every one will say "Oh, AT&T is back in business". | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  NaiiritaLupus Premium Member join:2002-12-20 Splendora, TX |
Naiirita
Premium Member
2005-Feb-5 1:13 am
Re: SBC or ATT?umm i dont think SBC bought any of the baby bells. they just mearged, and created SBC. it was not a company beforehand. it is now made up of SWbell, SNET, Ameritech, and PacBell. now throw in AT&T. | |
|
 |  |  |  Jim Gurd Premium Member join:2000-07-08 Livonia, MI |
to reub2000
said by reub2000:RTFA "With regard to the company name, Whitacre said, "We value the heritage and strength of the AT&T brand, which is one of the most widely recognized and respected names throughout the world, and it will certainly be a part of the new company's future."" I expect it will be advertised something like this: "AT&T, part of the SBC global network." | |
|
 |  |  |  djrobx Premium Member join:2000-05-31 Reno, NV ·AT&T FTTP
|
to reub2000
I for one have lost trust in the ATT name. ATT might as well stand for "About To Transfer"
I had ATT Broadband Cable - Bought by Comcast. I had ATT Wireless - Bought by Cingular (SBC) I had ATT Long Distance - Bought by SBC.
I agree with the others, SBC will keep its name for its telcos. They didn't even keep the AT&T name when they merged with Cingular, which actually would have made sense, since Cingular is a relative newcomer.
I think SBC will probably use the AT&T brand name for its long distance service only. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  | |
SmileyHash
Anon
2005-Jan-31 5:16 pm
Re: SBC or ATT?They didn't even keep the AT&T name when they merged with Cingular, which actually would have made sense, since Cingular is a relative newcomer. Cingular was smart to dump the AT&T name from the wireless company, as AT&T Wireless had THE WORST reputation in the wireless industry for crappy service. Cingular wants to distance themselves as far as possible from the black stain of AT&T Wireless. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  Geminimind Premium Member join:2003-12-20 Sacramento, CA |
Re: SBC or ATT?We all know sprint was and still is the worst wireless company | |
|
 |  |  |  |  SpitefulCrowInsert Witty Tag Here Premium Member join:2003-06-04 Berkeley, CA |
to djrobx
You're misinformed on this one. The reason they didn't use the AT&T Wireless name for the company formed by the merger of Cingular and AT&T Wireless was that AT&T Wireless was a spinoff of AT&T that leased the trademark from AT&T itself. Cingular bought ATTWS just as this lease expired and AT&T was making noise about not renewing it because they didn't like the way ATTWS was performing. | |
|
 |  oliphantI Have 8 Boobies Premium Member join:2004-11-26 Corona, CA |
to Smokey
My guess is they'll keep the SBC name and add the AT&T logo (eg Boeing & McDonnell-Douglas) | |
|
 |  | |
to Smokey
SBC has already announced the new company will likely take on the AT&T name. It's a brand that's been ingrained in American culture for 120 years -- the name alone is worth $16 billion. | |
|
 |  | |
to Smokey
I think SBC will adopt the AT&T brand name. SBC sounds too cheap. | |
|
 |  |  | |
Re: SBC or ATT?They will keep SBC, the will use the AT&T name on just long distance. AT&T has been picked to death by other phone companies, the only thing SBC bought is really all of AT&T Business customers for long distance and some phone lines. | |
|
 |  telcotechIBEW 2222 Boston, MA Premium Member join:2004-09-02 united state |
to Smokey
I'll bet dollars against your donuts on that! The AT&T name has been tarnished for quite a while now. ATT lays off thousands.. ATT slams for LD service.. ATT spins off CATV\Wireless\Manufacturing\etc unit(s)..
ATT has sold off nearly every part of their business to focus on core business of whatever it was at the time. Looking back, it seemed like they were in business to go out of business! They were down to local & long distance - and recently announced they were no longer marketing their local service to residences any more due to unbundling rules changes.
50M LD customers are nice - but ATT today just doesn't *even come close* to conjuring up the images of a prebreakup AT&T. I think its more like MCI/Worldcom. | |
|
 |  |  vdiv Premium Member join:2002-03-23 Reston, VA |
vdiv
Premium Member
2005-Feb-1 12:20 pm
Re: SBC or ATT?said by telcotech:... it seemed like they were in business to go out of business!... Indeed the AT&T Executives were. Very well said! | |
|
 |  jlramirez Premium Member join:2004-10-01 Sugar Grove, IL |
to Smokey
They are keeping the AT&T name for business customers and will continue to do so as the AT&T brand is world known which they can use to market more of their service...
I can't remember where I read it, but they're keeping the AT&T name as well. | |
|
 |  | |
zooch to Smokey
Anon
2005-Feb-2 6:48 am
to Smokey
Ed won't let go of the SBC name. He also won't let go of the AT&T name. It will go down just like SNET, PBI, and Ameritech. | |
|
 |  | |
workinggirl to Smokey
Anon
2005-Feb-5 9:25 am
to Smokey
I actually have the asnwer to that question, From what I am being told sbc will merge the names and eventually drop the sbc name and use solely at&t. the reason is because at&t is a worldly known name, and since it is branded to heavily people are more likely to recognize at&t over sbc. so that we can be in more homes. | |
|
 technick Premium Member join:2000-12-16 Wheat Ridge, CO |
technick
Premium Member
2005-Jan-31 9:24 am
DeathstarAnd so the deathstar will return in all of its glory, and price fixing, and wonderful "recover fee" taxes. I hope this gets struck down federally... this can not be a good thing. | |
|
 |  ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• |
 Jameson Premium Member join:2004-05-28 united state |
Jameson
Premium Member
2005-Jan-31 9:24 am
?I thought they already did or was that just the wireless part of the corp? | |
|
 |  •••• |
 dslwanter20 years on this site Premium Member join:2002-12-16 Mineral Ridge, OH |
Here it goes.And the monopoly will continue to grow and grow. Though, as of now I believe this may be beneficial to AT&T subscribers. SBC does of course offer some of the cheapest DSL on the market. | |
|
 |  •••••• |
 | |
Name predictionParent company will have both names; probably SBC/ATT or something like that (with SBC first). Most divisions will retain their current names.
Of course, to you and I, they'll be The Phone Company, same as before 1984. (Well, except those of us in Verizon or Qwest territory. And the latter not for long) | |
|
 |  •••• |
 | |
WOWWOW there are alot of SBC Lover here. Do you sleep with you phone as well? I got 8 more months with cingular and i am making then disappear as well . I X SBC back in DEC for TW DP and never looked back DEATH to the Monopoly | |
|
 |  MrFixitCTpay it forward
join:2000-12-01 Port Charlotte, FL |
Re: WOWQuestion, how many choices do you have for cable TV or cable internet? The "death to monopoly" banter is so passe'.. | |
|
 Riss_CentaurMod'taur - - - - 4 On The Floor. MVM, join:2004-01-20 Chicago, IL |
While we are talking about mergers....Sooner or later Micro$oft will show up and buy all the phone companies...  | |
|
 |  | |
Re: While we are talking about mergers....said by Riss_Centaur:Sooner or later Micro$oft will show up and buy all the phone companies... FYI: Microsoft is not a monopoly, look to the power companies for an example of that. | |
|
 | |
This is NO "merger".......this is a buyout, subtle difference. You can stop taking bets on the name, it'll be SBC, the name recognition alone speaks for itself. ATT's name is mud, especially since the cellular train wreck. This just figures, my ATT stock went up, while my SBC stock tanked. | |
|
 |  | |
Re: This is NO "merger"....Well this buyout gives sbc's Cingular what they wanted. The name ATT Wireless. In the orginal cingular attws deal cingular got the customers the towers and everything physical but ATT got to keep the name ATT wireless. Cingular by the terms of the merger is getting to use the att wireless name and logo for a set period of time and then they have to give it back to ATT. With this news it looks like they can continue using the ATT wireless name. Unless SBC plans on carrying out ATT idea of bringing back ATTWS as a rebranded sprint pcs service.
But ATT has been a mess. They sold there cable division off to comcrap. and there Long Distance service has been under fire in the state of florida for unlaw business practices. Nothing has seem to go right for ATT lately. | |
|
 |  ricep5 Premium Member join:2000-08-07 Jacksonville, FL |
to copperdoctor
You are correct that AT&T planned to resell Sprint wireless service, but after the Cingular transition completes April 1st, they are (were?) going to call it AT&T Cellular and it was for business customers only. No consumer sales.
ATTWS will soon be gone. Long gone.
The AT&T cash cow (retail calling cards) is about to be killed. They will have to charge the Infra Tax on them which will make them too expensive. It was a great way for them to sell usage of their fully depreciated infrastructure on the cheap. No more. | |
|
 | |
IBM Next?Now that the corporate giants of the 20th century are disappearing in corporate mergers and buyouts, I wonder who will buy IBM? Maybe Bill Gates is thinking about it.  | |
|
 ltt75 join:2001-01-22 Hollis, NH |
ltt75
Member
2005-Jan-31 10:34 am
nameAlready read somewhere in Yahoo financial news that SBC will be keeping the ATT brand name as it still has value in B2B and Government industries | |
|
 Optimum1Hey Macleod, Get Offa My Ewe Premium Member join:2001-08-22 Minneapolis, MN |
Optimum1
Premium Member
2005-Jan-31 10:36 am
What's in a Name?The name of the "buyer" doesn't necessarily prevail -- this is a business, not game of "King of the Hill." They'll do what makes the most marketing sense.
When Allied Signal bought Honeywell, the new company was called Honeywell. They banked on the established brand recognition of the bigger moniker, not the bigger company.
I wouldn't be surprised with either name being used, or some blended representation of both.
I do know this: I'm ditching AT&T local and long distance ASAP... | |
|
 |  Jim Gurd Premium Member join:2000-07-08 Livonia, MI |
Jim Gurd
Premium Member
2005-Jan-31 11:25 am
Re: What's in a Name?said by Optimum1:I do know this: I'm ditching AT&T local and long distance ASAP... Off topic but for POTS I highly recommend Talk America. Good prices and the service is decent. I believe they are even building their own central offices and moving away from UNE-P to UNE-L. I'm still not ready to go VOIP. The reliability is not there. When we had the blackout in 2003 my cell phone was spotty at best and cable TV didn't work at all. My POTS line never failed for the duration of the outage. Now that's reliability!!! | |
|
 | |
QwestSo when is Verizon going to announce that they are buying Qwest?
The speculation was that SBC was going to buy them, but with this on their plate now I doubt they could do it for a couple years. | |
|
 |  | |
nycxbl
Member
2005-Jan-31 11:31 am
Re: QwestAT&T because they dont even know was SBC AT&T is binded to many immigrants and americans i only knew sbc when i came to this site and recent SBC ads w/ yahoo.com But SBC is worth jack AT&T is the best if they change it, they will lose thousands of customers. | |
|
 DrewCapuGiant Diehard join:2001-12-19 California |
TWhat I've been looking for and still haven't found is what will happen to the stock symbol "T"? It's a very prestigious thing to have a stock symbol with one letter  | |
|
 |  ronpinImagine Reality join:2002-12-06 Nirvana |
ronpin
Member
2005-Jan-31 11:53 am
Re: Tsaid by DrewCapu:What I've been looking for and still haven't found is what will happen to the stock symbol "T"? ... It'll be changed to "TT" -- for all those pissed-off pensioners who lose their health insurance and pensions. | |
|
 | |
AT&T= Old fashioned, past, olden daysIMHO when people think of AT&T the last thing they think of is "cutting edge" or technology. They think of their Grandfather's telephone company. This is not the image that SBC wants to go against cable and VOIP with. | |
|
 |  | |
schlechtj
Anon
2005-Jan-31 10:52 pm
Re: AT&T= Old fashioned, past, olden daysWhat about IBM? My great grandfather worked for them when their biggest product was the punch clock. It still works fine for them. | |
|
 ricep5 Premium Member join:2000-08-07 Jacksonville, FL |
ricep5
Premium Member
2005-Jan-31 12:04 pm
SighI had AT&T Wireless, now it's Cingular (SBC & BellSouth) I used to have Ameritech, now SBC I have AT&T CallVantage, soon to be SBC
No matter how hard I try to avoid SBC, it just keeps coming back.
Sigh, awaiting those contracts to expire so I can move on.....again! | |
|
 | ricep5 |
ricep5
Premium Member
2005-Jan-31 12:27 pm
What the Feds should requireFor what its worth....my take on what the Feds should require as part of a SBC takeover of AT&T
- All former RBOC's can sell LD to anyone nationally - SBC either divest its interest in Cingular or purchase BellSouth's share (3 years to complete) - Allow any former RBOC or CLEC to build/sell telephony infrastructure anywhere nationally - Federal Law that removes all state barriers to municipal participation in telephony like services
Wishful thinking perhaps, as if this goes through, mergermania is just around the corner. | |
|
 |  roamer1sticking it out at you join:2001-03-24 Atlanta, GA |
Re: What the Feds should requiresaid by ricep5:For what its worth....my take on what the Feds should require as part of a SBC takeover of AT&T - All former RBOC's can sell LD to anyone nationally - SBC either divest its interest in Cingular or purchase BellSouth's share (3 years to complete) - Allow any former RBOC or CLEC to build/sell telephony infrastructure anywhere nationally - Federal Law that removes all state barriers to municipal participation in telephony like services The RBOCs have been allowed to sell local and LD out-of-region pretty much since Day One -- GTE/Bell Atlantic/Verizon and of course Qwest have offered out-of-region LD for several years now, and Verizon, SBC, and BellSouth all have small CLEC operations (Verizon has a subsidiary, Verizon Avenue, that sells local phone service and in some cases broadband to residents of apartment complexes in many non-Verizon areas; SBC is a CLEC in about 30 cities around the US via its SBC Telecom subsidiary; and BellSouth now quietly serves a handful of businesses in certain towns in the Southeast that are served by Sprint, CenturyTel, etc.) As far as Cingular goes, if BellSouth buys Sprint (as I expect will happen sooner or later) SBC will almost certainly land up with 100% of Cingular. -SC | |
|
 |  ricep5 Premium Member join:2000-08-07 Jacksonville, FL |
ricep5
Premium Member
2005-Feb-1 12:28 am
The point I am making is allow any carrier to provision, invest and market services anywhere in the US now. No more "territories" as they mean nothing now. No more subsidiaries to run around regulatory fine print. No more restrictions on cross investment. Let them loose with just oversight on merger activity to make sure it doesn't become a duopoly. | |
|
 | ricep5 |
ricep5
Premium Member
2005-Jan-31 12:30 pm
Proposed Merger partnersOK, so if SBC gets AT&T, who should merge next?
BellSouth takes MCI Verizon will take Qwest Sprint takes ????? | |
|
 |  Tarmax join:2001-05-03 Fort Lauderdale, FL |
Tarmax
Member
2005-Jan-31 1:19 pm
Re: Proposed Merger partnersSprint already took Nextel. They're spent for the decade lol As far as everything else tho.. with all these mergers left and right, I believe the shit has certainly hit the fan. And don't get me started on Powell  ..lol GG Bush administration. | |
|
 David Premium Member join:2002-05-30 Granite City, IL |
David
Premium Member
2005-Jan-31 2:05 pm
Well...This is definatley a twist of events. I would have never expected this to happen. Man my predictions were way off here.
I suspected we would not buy quest, but I expected even less of AT&T.
I was definatley off. | |
|
 cghh join:2001-01-15 Milpitas, CA |
cghh
Member
2005-Jan-31 9:19 pm
What about the AT&T-SprintPCS deal?Until today anyway, the plan was for AT&T to resell SprintPCS once Cingular's rights to use the AT&T Wireless name expires in a couple of months. But with this merger, that would have SBC, the principal owner of Cingular, reselling SprintPCS. ??? | |
|
 | |
SBC employee
Anon
2005-Jan-31 10:10 pm
Survey Says...I am an SBC employee.
Word inside the Box is that the name will be changing to AT&T.
End of thread. | |
|
 |  DrewCapuGiant Diehard join:2001-12-19 California |
Re: Survey Says...said by SBC employee:
I am an SBC employee.
Word inside the Box is that the name will be changing to AT&T.
End of thread. Although I'm somewhat skeptical about that happening, it really wouldn't surprise me. SBC has always been about building its brand. They finally stopped using the SNET brand (much to the chagrin of New Englanders). The AT&T brand, although in decline the last few years, still has a history that makes up for any of its more recent shortcomings. The Death Star is pretty tough to get rid of completely  | |
|
 |  |  Tursiops_GTechnoid MVM join:2002-02-06 Brooksville, FL ARRIS TM1602
|
Re: Survey Says...I'm a New England resident (Southwestern CT.), and I dreaded the day that SBC was approved to acquire SNET. SBC Swore up-and-down to the DPUC that they would *NOT* do *ANYTHING* to change SNET, as SNET was a "Solid Company, with a Respected History of Service to their Subscribers"... THEN, when the Acquisition was finally Approved, What did SBC do next? SBC IMMEDIATELY HALTED the deployment of the Fledgeling "I-SNET" Cable ISP Service that SNET spent MILLIONS of Dollars to implement, on their "SNET Americast" CATV System (A Direct Competitor to Cablevision, BTW)... I was a SNET Americast Subscriber, and I was actually ON the waiting list for the Wide-Area Beta Test for the I-SNET Cable Modem service...  Later, SBC TERMINATED the SNET Americast CATV Service entirely, leaving Cablevision as the Effective Monopoly for CATV *and* Cable ISP Services in Southwestern CT.  Finally, SBC "De-Branded" SNET. (The Nation's Very FIRST Telephone Company is now History.)  SBC: "Scoundrels, Backstabbers, Crooks"...  -Tursiops_G. | |
|
 |
|