Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 36 of 36
  1. #31
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: "Say goodbye, then hello to AT&T phones"

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

    True, but that seems to be a pretty safe assumption.

    In <[email protected]> on Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:15:53 -0400,
    Ralph Blach <[email protected]> wrote:

    >John,
    >
    >All this assumes that the merger will go through.
    >
    >Chip
    >
    >John Navas wrote:
    >> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/08...less_branding/>
    >>
    >> Cingular, soon to be the United States' largest cellular network,
    >> will drop the AT&T brand six months after it completes its merger
    >> with AT&T Wireless. After that, AT&T will be free to launch its own
    >> cellular services under the brand.
    >>
    >> ...
    >>
    >> By the end of the year, when the merger is expected to be completed,
    >> the two largest US cellphone carriers - Verizon and Cingular - will
    >> not only be former Baby Bells, but two synthetic brands based on very
    >> bad puns.
    >>
    >> [MORE]
    >>


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



    See More: "Say goodbye, then hello to AT&T phones"




  2. #32
    mpulis
    mpulis is offline
    Newbie

    Posts
    1

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeremy
    "Jer" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > Jeremy wrote:
    >
    > [....]
    > >
    > > Cingular never had the option to keep the AT&T brand name.
    > >

    >
    > Cingular never once indicated they ever wanted the option of keeping the
    > ATTWS moniker. They've always been adamant about rebranding the entire
    > show.
    >


    The agreement AT&T had with its spun-off subsidiary, ATTWS, was that the
    AT&T brand name could not be transferred or sold by ATTWS. That was what I
    meant when I said Cingular never had the use of the AT&T name. Actually, NO
    ONE would have been able to acquire AT&T's brands, trademarks or logos from
    ATTWS.

    Cingular is owned by SBC Communications. I am still curious as to why they
    don't standardize on the SBC name, rather than that silly moniker,
    "Cingular."
    As a former ATTWS employee, I can tell you that is is entirely correct. ATTWS at spin-off leased the brand through a specified number of years - if memory serves, I believe the lease was through 2005. At the end of that time ATTWS would either have to change their name and logo or merge with another company under their brand according to the agreement with AT&T. Furthermore, Cingular is not only owned by SBC but is a joint enterprise with BellSouth, they decided upon the a distinct moniker to keep the identity of the wireless branch separate from both parent companies.



  3. #33
    Tropical Haven
    Guest

    Re: "Say goodbye, then hello to AT&T phones"


    >>Cingular is owned by SBC Communications. I am still curious as to why
    >>they
    >>don't standardize on the SBC name, rather than that silly moniker,
    >>"Cingular."

    >
    >
    > As a former ATTWS employee, I can tell you that is is entirely correct.
    > ATTWS at spin-off leased the brand through a specified number of years -
    > if memory serves, I believe the lease was through 2005. At the end of
    > that time ATTWS would either have to change their name and logo or
    > merge with another company under their brand according to the agreement
    > with AT&T. Furthermore, Cingular is not only owned by SBC but is a joint
    > enterprise with BellSouth, they decided upon the a distinct moniker to
    > keep the identity of the wireless branch separate from both parent
    > companies.


    Which makes sense. Verizon Wirless is a joint operation between
    Vodafone and Verizon Communications.




  4. #34
    John S.
    Guest

    Re: "Say goodbye, then hello to AT&T phones"

    >>>Cingular is owned by SBC Communications. I am still curious as to why
    >>>they
    >>>don't standardize on the SBC name, rather than that silly moniker,
    >>>"Cingular."


    They are owned by SBC AND Bell South. I don't remeber the percentages but they
    won't ever be SBC Cellular or Bell South Cellular.

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



  5. #35
    Jiu JitSuperfly
    Guest

    Re: "Say goodbye, then hello to AT&T phones"


    "John S." <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > >>>Cingular is owned by SBC Communications. I am still curious as to why
    > >>>they
    > >>>don't standardize on the SBC name, rather than that silly moniker,
    > >>>"Cingular."

    >
    > They are owned by SBC AND Bell South. I don't remeber the percentages but

    they
    > won't ever be SBC Cellular or Bell South Cellular.



    60% SBC and 40% Bell South.

    --
    JJS





  6. #36
    Tropical Haven
    Guest

    Re: "Say goodbye, then hello to AT&T phones"



    John S. wrote:
    >>>>Cingular is owned by SBC Communications. I am still curious as to why
    >>>>they
    >>>>don't standardize on the SBC name, rather than that silly moniker,
    >>>>"Cingular."
    >>>

    >
    > They are owned by SBC AND Bell South. I don't remeber the percentages but they
    > won't ever be SBC Cellular or Bell South Cellular.



    I think it's something like 45% BellSouth and 55% SBC. I think Verizon
    Wireless is 55% Verizon Communications and 45% Vodafone.




Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123