"Logan Shaw" wrote in message
...
Jim wrote:
Gary Heston wrote:

And now SBC is hiding behind the AT&T logo to get away from _their_
recent record of poor customer support. They've also sucked in
BellSouth, the local Baby Bell, which doesn't have the best of
histories.

in 1984 judge Green spoke and divestiture of AT&T happened. now AT&T
seems to be recollecting their baby bells..

AT&T Corporation basically no longer exists, at least not in the
same sense it once did. In the mid-1990's, it spun off Bell Labs
and called it Lucent. It then spun off AT&T Wireless (cell phone
division). The company that remained was still AT&T (and they
still sold cable television service and long distance service,
and even local phone service in some markets), but in 2006,
SBC purchased AT&T Corp. The company now calling itself "AT&T"
is really the same company that was SBC Corp.

To put this in terms of NYSE stock symbols, T spun off two things,
then SBC bought the remaining part of T, then SBC changed its name
to 'T' since it now had the rights to use that name.

So, AT&T is not recollecting the baby bells. One of the baby
bells collected AT&T.

Yep- one of the surviving baby bells ate mama bell, and then ate one of its
siblings. They had all been eating each other for years. I used to have
ameritech for an ISP, until SBC ate them and the service went to hell, so I
jumped to the ATT-branded ISP. Now SBC ate that, and the service is again on
a downward slope.

I think Qwest is the only surviving intact baby bell, IIRC. Once sbc-att
eats them, we are back where we started, plus several of the larger
independents and numerous ma'n'pa carriers have also been assimilated.
Maybe the 'new' att's logo should be a be a borg cube, not that modified
deathstar?

aem sends...