Posted on 03/04/2006 10:22:21 PM PST by HAL9000
Excerpt -
AT&T Inc. is nearing the acquisition of BellSouth Corp. for roughly $65 billion, people familiar with the situation said Saturday evening. A deal could be announced as early as Monday, these people said.~snip~
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
As you may know the split was a money grab by the likes of Sprint and MCI who exploited the desire of people to pay cheap long distance.
Well the reason for that was because you had cheap phone service that was made up by the little nickel and dime leasing services.
We use a method called ESM to gauge employee performance. You're given a set amount of time to compelte a task. If you take 25% or more of that alotted time per job you're going to end up with punish work.
Not true. The technology was somethign that would eventually come. It's like saying had the US not won WW2 we'd never have solid state electronics.
SWBT has been the buyer of all of the other bells is a merged with... that is why SBC (Southwestern Bell Corp) emerged as the name even here in California... In the new merger, they chose to go with the off ma bell name of ATT... SBC was clearly the prominent and larger corporation... the guys running SBC are the guys running the New ATT..
Here's a blurp from the SBC Merger website...
SBC To Acquire AT&T, Creates Premier, Global Provider
The $16 billion transaction creates a company with robust, high-quality network assets, both in the United States and around the globe, and complementary expertise and capabilities. It will have the resources and skill sets to innovate and more quickly deliver to customers the next generation of advanced, integrated IP-based wireline and wireless communications services.
Well, they'd have to be crazy to let you go. Good luck.
You're paying more to take your phone with you at all times not matter how far away from home you are.
You don't think that's worth the 100% jump? I do.
Besides I got a home phone with unlimited long distance and two cell phones(family plan) and pay about the same as you do.
I call that progress.
Maybe the breakup did help, but the main factor was the Carterfone decision.
I'm the one who said Ed Whitacre - your boss - is a criminal who belongs in prison. Furthermore, he was more responsible for prolonging the recession after 9/11 than anyone else. He is an evil bastard.
Hey, folks.
VoIP via cable internet.
Problem solved.
They can get rid of enough people through attrition or enhanced retirement offers. There have not been massive layoffs in the company as a result of merging SBC with ATT. Where there are redundancies, though, there will be job losses.
SBC stood for SBC. It didn't stand for Southwestern Bell Corporation. It was felt a One Bell Center that Southwestern Bell was too much of a regional name. SBC was chosen to give the corporation a name with a national reach. In fact, One Bell Center's name was changed to SBC Center.
I believe the full name was SBC Communications Corporation. At least it did when I retired from the Southwestern Bell Telephone subsidiary.
Right. Why not just blame him for 9/11 while you're at it? BTW, I'm sure it will pain you to hear that he was named Executive of the Year in Texas and that his company is the Most Admired Telecommunications company in the world.
Can't make a comparison, I had a land line in Las Vegas years ago and piad 9.00/Month. And the $100/month is how many minutes, any free minutes and so on.
The long DX cariers subsidized the local providers to different degrees. Telephone rates in Chicago are still terrible and always have been, for example.
A land line in Anchorage was always about 25/30/month, with any features at all, closer to 45 plus your LD costs.
Now I have a cell for 55/month, 450 day min which can be LD and free evening and weekend min - in essence, free LD on weekends when I make most of my calls. I save about 25/month and have a cell phone to boot.
YMMV
Dr Johnny Fever - he worried about the "telephone police"
Yes, we've all seen those circle-jerk polls where utility execs take turns being the 'man of the year'.
THe telcos are in the midst of a major chage in technology - going from circuit switched equipment like the 5ESS or DMS 10 to a soft switch environment - the expense is now software and software engineerers (and OSP) vs 6 million dollar 5ESS platforms.
Add pushing DSL, Pay per view and so on and you see a very capital heavy investment period coming up - the down side is fewer and fewer workers will be needed.
Oh, and when a disaster hits your area, count on no phone service (other than cell service) for a loooong time - are the phones up in NO?
OSP plant costs are skyrocketing as local govt or utilities stick it to the telcos for right of way to lay new lines - the list can be very long.
Have fun
SBC is a result of Southwestern Bell becomeing more than a regional player...
Southwestern Bell Corporation was one of the seven original Regional Bell Operating Companies, or "Baby Bells." The company — a holding company for Southwestern Bell Telephone Company — was a result of U.S. antitrust action against AT&T in 1983. AT&T had adopted the name Southwestern Bell for its local operations in Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri, Kansas, and Arkansas in April 1920. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 allowed Southwestern Bell to become a national telephone provider, and it subsequently bought fellow Baby Bells Pacific Telesis and Ameritech, as well as independent Bell System franchise SNET.
SBC Corporate Logo, 1997–2001
SBC Corporate Logo, 1995–1997; 2001–2005In 1995, Southwestern Bell Corp. changed its name to SBC Communications, Inc at its annual meeting of stockholders in Denver. The company stated that "SBC" no longer stood for anything. SBC then proceeded to acquire fellow baby bell Pacific Telesis, the Regional Bell operating company serving Nevada and California, in 1997, and former independent Bell System franchise SNET(Southern New England Telephone) in. SBC then told the FCC that it would allow competitors access to local markets where it had had a monopoly if the FCC would allow them to acquire Ameritech. The FCC agreed and in May 1998, SBC and Ameritech, the Regional Bell operating company serving Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin, announced merger plans. After making several organizational changes (such as the sale of Ameritech Wireless to GTE) to satisfy state and Federal regulators, the two merged on October 8, 1999. The FCC later fined SBC Communications $6 million for failure to comply with agreements made in order to secure approval of the merger
At the time of the AT&T merger, SBC provided local telephone service in 13 states (Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, Wisconsin) and long distance service to 10 million customers, and owned 60% of mobile phone provider Cingular. Cingular acquired AT&T Wireless in 2004, making Cingular the largest mobile phone service in the United States, with over 50 million subscribers. (Fellow Baby Bell BellSouth owns the other 40% of Cingular.) The company was also a large American Internet Service Provider, and the largest DSL provider in the US, with more than 5.1 million DSL lines in late 2005.
The company formerly traded on the NYSE as "SBC".
Just the facts.... One Baby Bell, Southwestern Bell changes name to SBC Communications and buys other baby bells and then eventually buys att..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.