So Why is AT&T Wireless Still Advertising?

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Wed, 03 Nov 2004 07:52:09
-0800, Scott en Aztlán <[email protected]> wrote:

>On 01 Nov 2004 03:15:11 GMT, [email protected]pamfree (John S.)
>wrote:
>
>>>If the Cingular merger is a done deal, why is AT&T still advertising
>>>"GSM America" (the ads where all the people have signal bars
>>>superimposed above their heads)? Isn't that a big waste of money?
>>
>>Probably pre-paid advertising for "X" number of spots over a "Y" period of
>>time.
>
>Like they didn't know this was coming. MONTHS ago.

They didn't have the actual date MONTHS ago.

>Like they couldn't pull the AT&T spot and replace it with a Cingular
>spot to run in those slots.

It's difficult to make changes to commercial spots at the last minute, and
probably not sufficiently important to justify the hassle, since Cingular is
continuing to market under the ATTWS brand in the short term.

This is really a non-issue.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

---

› See More: So Why is AT&T Wireless Still Advertising?

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 05:22:23 GMT, Al Klein <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 19:57:10 GMT, John Navas
><[email protected]> said in alt.cellular.cingular:
>
>>Wrong. TDMA will be maintained for years to come.
>
>Three years, in fact.

I don't know where you got three years. It's likely to remain in
place for at least seven.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

In article <[email protected]>,
Joseph <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 05:22:23 GMT, Al Klein <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 19:57:10 GMT, John Navas
> ><[email protected]> said in alt.cellular.cingular:
> >
> >>Wrong. TDMA will be maintained for years to come.
> >
> >Three years, in fact.
>
> I don't know where you got three years. It's likely to remain in
> place for at least seven.
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I don't know how Navas can always be out of the know. Cingular just
announced they are speeding up their transition to all GSM.


<http://news.com.com/Cingular+to+spee...e/2100-1033_3-
275116.html>

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Wed, 03 Nov
2004 16:54:42 GMT, Jack Zwick <[email protected]> wrote:

>I don't know how Navas can always be out of the know. Cingular just
>announced they are speeding up their transition to all GSM.
>
><http://news.com.com/Cingular+to+spee...e/2100-1033_3-
>275116.html>

"Just announced?" ROTFL! That article is dated October 30, >>2001<<


--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 08:38:58 -0800, Joseph <[email protected]>
said in alt.cellular.cingular:

>On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 05:22:23 GMT, Al Klein <[email protected]> wrote:
>>On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 19:57:10 GMT, John Navas
>><[email protected]> said in alt.cellular.cingular:

>>>Wrong. TDMA will be maintained for years to come.

>>Three years, in fact.

>I don't know where you got three years.

From someone whose pay check has an orange logo on it.

>TDMA will be maintained for years to come.
>
>Three years, in fact.
>

How did you come upon 3 years Al?


--
John S.
e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net

>>Probably pre-paid advertising for "X" number of spots over a "Y" period of
>>time.
>
>Like they didn't know this was coming. MONTHS ago.

Why does anyone care?

Sometimes people worry about the wrong issues!

--
John S.
e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net

><http://news.com.com/Cingular+to+spee...e/2100-1033_3-
>275116.html>

Phillipe - again, I ask you why don't you crawl back into your hole. The above
URL was "Published: October 30, 2001, 12:35 PM PST"

--
John S.
e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net

It is likely to remain for just a little longer than current tdma
contracts. Does any one know when they will stop offering tdma
contracts, or have they already?


Joseph wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 05:22:23 GMT, Al Klein <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 19:57:10 GMT, John Navas
>><[email protected]> said in alt.cellular.cingular:
>>
>>
>>>Wrong. TDMA will be maintained for years to come.
>>
>>Three years, in fact.
>
>
> I don't know where you got three years. It's likely to remain in
> place for at least seven.
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>