Whan does merger happen

[pat]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

Is this going thru. Marriage between ATTW and CINGULAR?

When?

Name of new Company?

Any anticipated deals on launch of new company?

 

[Jer]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

Pat wrote:
> Is this going thrv. Marriage between ATTW and CINGULAR?
>
> When?
>
> Name of new Company?
>
> Any anticipated deals on lavnch of new company?
>
>


I've heard from more than one inside sovrce that the alimony check will
be cvt early Sept, honeymoon to commence Oct. 1 - and their blessed
vnion will share the Cingvlar svrname. Commensvrate with the cork
popping of advlt beverages, only The Shadow knows what secret deals the
happy covple may prodvce after the sheets are lavndered.

--
jer email reply - I am not a 'ten'
"All that we do is tovched with ocean, yet we remain on the shore of
what we know." -- Richard Wilbvr

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

Most info has it happening in early 2005. No mention of any name, but I
think it will stay Cingular. Who can forecast deals in 2005 when we can't
even forecast them for September 2004. What ever happens will be the deal.

Chris

"Pat" <hotpatpar@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%LUFc.23287$KK4.957@nwrdny02.gnilink.net...
> Is this going thru. Marriage between ATTW and CINGULAR?
>
> When?
>
> Name of new Company?
>
> Any anticipated deals on launch of new company?
>
>

 

[pat]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"Jer" <gdvnn@airmail.ten> wrote in message
news:cc9bgc$4b6@library2.airnews.net...
> Pat wrote:
> > Is this going thrv. Marriage between ATTW and CINGULAR?
> >
> > When?
> >
> > Name of new Company?
> >
> > Any anticipated deals on lavnch of new company?
> >
> >
>
>
> I've heard from more than one inside sovrce that the alimony check will
> be cvt early Sept, honeymoon to commence Oct. 1 - and their blessed
> vnion will share the Cingvlar svrname. Commensvrate with the cork
> popping of advlt beverages, only The Shadow knows what secret deals the
> happy covple may prodvce after the sheets are lavndered.


A friend specvlated the new company will be called M_Life.

I svspect the new company will want to vnify the base and offer trade ins on
existing phones for the one with the new logo.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

Pat wrote:
> A friend speculated the new company will be called M_Life.
>
> I suspect the new company will want to unify the base and offer trade ins on
> existing phones for the one with the new logo.
>
>

That's rediculous. The name will be Cingular. Cingular bought ATTWS to
absorb their numbers, not create a new label. The Cingular name isn't
even that old, really. And, IF they did change names, don't count on
getting even a discount on a new phone just because their old name is on
it. I had a Southwestern Bell Wireless phone for quite a while when they
changed their name to Cingular.

 

[pat]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"Cambie" <user@example.net> wrote in message
news:N_KdnWh0v8Q5V3XdRVn2jg@giganews.com...
> Pat wrote:

> That's rediculous. The name will be Cingular. Cingular bought ATTWS to
> absorb their numbers, not create a new label. The Cingular name isn't
> even that old, really. And, IF they did change names, don't count on
> getting even a discount on a new phone just because their old name is on
> it. I had a Southwestern Bell Wireless phone for quite a while when they
> changed their name to Cingular.

If you thought my last comment was ridiculous, you're going to howl at this
one.
Two giants are getting together to become the largest US cellular company,
right?
Why would they have the name Cingular, which sounds like Singular - ONE
ENTITY?
Nope. The company known as Cingular has twice before changed its name and
will again, IMHO!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

In article <%LUFc.23287$KK4.957@nwrdny02.gnilink.net>,
"Pat" <hotpatpar@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Is this going thru. Marriage between ATTW and CINGULAR?
>
> When?
>
> Name of new Company?
>
> Any anticipated deals on launch of new company?

Not anytime soon.

Name = Cingular

Cingular hasn't yet fully integrated all the parts from its creation
from Bell South and SBC Wireless, so what will happen after merger much
later this year remains to be seen.

Likely it won't be pretty for AT&T Wireless Customers.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

In article <%V0Gc.24489$KK4.3403@nwrdny02.gnilink.net>,
"Pat" <hotpatpar@hotmail.com> wrote:

> A friend speculated the new company will be called M_Life.
>
> I suspect the new company will want to unify the base and offer trade ins on
> existing phones for the one with the new logo.

Nah, that costs money.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

In article <2d4Gc.20138$MT5.16128@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>,
"Pat" <hotpatpar@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Nope. The company known as Cingular has twice before changed its name and
> will again, IMHO!

Please produce one authoritative URL ... anywhere...
that suggests a name change.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"Pat" <hotpatpar@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%LUFc.23287$KK4.957@nwrdny02.gnilink.net...
| Is this going thru. Marriage between ATTW and CINGULAR?
|
| When?
|
| Name of new Company?
|
| Any anticipated deals on launch of new company?
|
|

It is not a merger, it is a purchase. I would think they would keep the
Cingular name just as Cingular kept it's ownname when it bought other
wireless companies.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"Pat" <hotpatpar@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2d4Gc.20138$MT5.16128@nwrdny01.gnilink.net...
|
| "Cambie" <user@example.net> wrote in message
| news:N_KdnWh0v8Q5V3XdRVn2jg@giganews.com...
| > Pat wrote:
|
| > That's rediculous. The name will be Cingular. Cingular bought ATTWS to
| > absorb their numbers, not create a new label. The Cingular name isn't
| > even that old, really. And, IF they did change names, don't count on
| > getting even a discount on a new phone just because their old name is on
| > it. I had a Southwestern Bell Wireless phone for quite a while when they
| > changed their name to Cingular.
|
| If you thought my last comment was ridiculous, you're going to howl at
this
| one.
| Two giants are getting together to become the largest US cellular company,
| right?

Wrong. Cingular bought AT&T. There is no "marriage".

| Why would they have the name Cingular, which sounds like Singular - ONE
| ENTITY?

Because Cingular bought AT&T. Why would they change their name? They didn't
with any of the other wireless companies they bought.

| Nope. The company known as Cingular has twice before changed its name and
| will again, IMHO!
|

News to me, but I won't argue it, as I have always known them as Cingular.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

Since when does someone need authoritative anything for an OPINION????
Nope, I searched for Internet rules and FAQs....no mention of anything
required for posting an OPINION.....and his post made no reference to
such facts or speculation by any source other than himself......
Please produce one authoritative URL ... anywhere....
that suggests requirements for OPINIONS.
On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 10:21:59 GMT, "Røbert M." <rmarkoff@faq.cIty>
wrote:

>In article <2d4Gc.20138$MT5.16128@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>,
> "Pat" <hotpatpar@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Nope. The company known as Cingular has twice before changed its name and
>> will again, IMHO!
>
>Please produce one authoritative URL ... anywhere...
>that suggests a name change.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

Don't know if it's written in stone but when the buyout was first announced
and Cingular won the bid, Cingular announced that the name would remain
Cingular!

 

[Joseph]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

On Mon, 5 Jul 2004 13:47:17 -0400, "Jason Cothran"
<reply@board.nomail> wrote:

>| Nope. The company known as Cingular has twice before changed its name and
>| will again, IMHO!
>|
>
>News to me, but I won't argue it, as I have always known them as Cingular.

If they do they do. Lots of companies change names multiple times and
things go on. It's sure not worth fussing about!

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

In article <NrgGc.7173$285.6041@bignews6.bellsouth.net>,
"Jason Cothran" <reply@board.nomail> wrote:

> | Two giants are getting together to become the largest US cellular company,
> | right?
>
> Wrong. Cingular bought AT&T. There is no "marriage".

Hmmmm. I guess that depends on which part of the world you're from.

In many parts of the world, that *exactly* describes a marriage.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

>A friend speculated the new company will be called M_Life.
>

I think that you will find that Cingular will be the name after the auisition
is concluded.

Keep in mind that AT&T WS had to get away from the AT&T name and logo by
contract early 2005. I think that theyt were going to use M Life as a new name
to hang their hats on. This of course prior to the Cingular buy out.

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

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

In article <GjfGc.20336$6e7.14701@nwrddc03.gnilink.net>,
"Jay A" <cajay@verizon.net> wrote:

> Don't know if it's written in stone but when the buyout was first announced
> and Cingular won the bid, Cingular announced that the name would remain
> Cingular!

Agreed, and certainly nobody has since said anything to the contrary.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

>The company known as Cingular has twice before changed its name and
>will again, IMHO!
>

No they haven't. Cingular has been Cingular since the beginning of the marriage
between SBC and Bell South.

Now, prior to that they had their individual names SBMS and Bell South Mobility
as well as Cellular One in some places (SBMS) etc.... But since Bell South and
SBC combined their cellular holdings into one company, they have always been
Cingular.

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

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

>Since when does someone need authoritative anything for an OPINION????

The original OP can have any opinion he might want. But when he says -

>The company known as Cingular has twice before changed its name and
>>> will again,

Prior to -

>IMHO!

Then he needs to be corrected. His opinion is based on a lack of knowledge
about the name being changed.

His opinion is therefore false and should be corrected before he manages to
convince anyone else that it might be more than just an opinion!

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

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-8B69A5.17533805072004@text.usenetserver.com...
| In article <NrgGc.7173$285.6041@bignews6.bellsouth.net>,
| "Jason Cothran" <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
|
| > | Two giants are getting together to become the largest US cellular
company,
| > | right?
| >
| > Wrong. Cingular bought AT&T. There is no "marriage".
|
| Hmmmm. I guess that depends on which part of the world you're from.
|
| In many parts of the world, that *exactly* describes a marriage.
|

Lol, I guess you're right. My wife says she has papers on me all the time
<wink>.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

Just so you know, the SBC name was not part of Ameritech Wireless when
Cingular was formed (actually their second choice for a name-another one was
named quickly at the merger announcement, but it was awful and wasn't
used-we laughed about it at the Eastpointe, MI Cingular store at that time
when I stopped in).

Chris

"John S." <sexyexotiche@aol.comspamfree> wrote in message
news:20040705160102.12124.00001116@mb-m01.aol.com...
> >The company known as Cingular has twice before changed its name and
>>will again, IMHO!
>>
>
> No they haven't. Cingular has been Cingular since the beginning of the
> marriage
> between SBC and Bell South.
>
> Now, prior to that they had their individual names SBMS and Bell South
> Mobility
> as well as Cellular One in some places (SBMS) etc.... But since Bell South
> and
> SBC combined their cellular holdings into one company, they have always
> been
> Cingular.
>
> --
> John S.
> e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net

 

[pat]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

Did I miss a meeting or something. This has to be a joke. Lighten up!

"John S." <sexyexotiche@aol.comspamfree> wrote in message
news:20040705173024.06789.00001032@mb-m13.aol.com...
> >Since when does someone need authoritative anything for an OPINION????
>
> The original OP can have any opinion he might want. But when he says -
>
> >The company known as Cingular has twice before changed its name and
> >>> will again,
>
> Prior to -
>
> >IMHO!
>
> Then he needs to be corrected. His opinion is based on a lack of knowledge
> about the name being changed.
>
> His opinion is therefore false and should be corrected before he manages
to
> convince anyone else that it might be more than just an opinion!
>
> --
> John S.
> e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

>Did I miss a meeting or something. This has to be a joke. Lighten up!
>

You did!

The meeting where we try to make things correct in this medium.

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

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

>
>Hmmmm. I guess that depends on which part of the world you're from.
>
>In many parts of the world, that *exactly* describes a marriage.

But here in the USA where Cingular and AT&T WS are, we don't have arranged
marriages (for the most part) nor do we own women (or other people for that
matter).

So the buying of one business by another business isn't likened to a marriage
in any way.

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

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

In article <20040705224338.16931.00000950@mb-m20.aol.com>,
sexyexotiche@aol.comspamfree (John S.) wrote:

> >
> >Hmmmm. I guess that depends on which part of the world you're from.
> >
> >In many parts of the world, that *exactly* describes a marriage.
>
> But here in the USA where Cingular and AT&T WS are, we don't have arranged
> marriages (for the most part) nor do we own women (or other people for that
> matter).
>
> So the buying of one business by another business isn't likened to a marriage
> in any way.

The world is a LOT bigger than just the USA.

The combining of two businesses is indeed likened to a marriage in many,
many respects.