<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Cingular Vs AT&#38;T: The Name Game</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gigaom.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gigaom.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/</link>
	<description>Tracking the Internet Evolution</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2008 09:06:31 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=MU</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: BNET Intercom &#187; AT&#38;T&#8217;s Branding Blunders on BNET</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49182</link>
		<dc:creator>BNET Intercom &#187; AT&#38;T&#8217;s Branding Blunders on BNET</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2007 22:51:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49182</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;[...] why is AT&#38;T getting rid of the Cingular name, which set the company back an estimated $4 billion to build? Apparently there is some new gadget called the iPhone coming out soon, and AT&#38;T wants [...]&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] why is AT&amp;T getting rid of the Cingular name, which set the company back an estimated $4 billion to build? Apparently there is some new gadget called the iPhone coming out soon, and AT&amp;T wants [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GigaOM &#187; See ya Cingular, yo AT&#38;T</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49181</link>
		<dc:creator>GigaOM &#187; See ya Cingular, yo AT&#38;T</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2007 16:40:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49181</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;[...] phase of its rebranding efforts from Cingular to AT&#38;T, does make us pause. The Cingular brand, which Om says it cost nearly $4 billion to build-up, just fell into the dustbin of the rare well-known and now retired brand [...]&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] phase of its rebranding efforts from Cingular to AT&amp;T, does make us pause. The Cingular brand, which Om says it cost nearly $4 billion to build-up, just fell into the dustbin of the rare well-known and now retired brand [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Antkne</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49180</link>
		<dc:creator>Antkne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Feb 2007 07:35:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49180</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;I confess that I did not thouroughly read through all these posts. The last post hit a lot of unknown fact.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;While the public was being informed that the 'new' COM, Cingular had AQUIRED ATT's network (the oldest and largest nationwide network, the roaming network) it was actually ATT that had controlling interest in Cingular.
It would appear, now, as though it was all a scheme to return from the ashes of bankruptcy without going anywhere, really.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Ma Bell is steadfast to reunify her grip on telcom. Viva VoIP!!&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I confess that I did not thouroughly read through all these posts. The last post hit a lot of unknown fact.</p>
<p>While the public was being informed that the &#8216;new&#8217; COM, Cingular had AQUIRED ATT&#8217;s network (the oldest and largest nationwide network, the roaming network) it was actually ATT that had controlling interest in Cingular.<br />
It would appear, now, as though it was all a scheme to return from the ashes of bankruptcy without going anywhere, really.</p>
<p>Ma Bell is steadfast to reunify her grip on telcom. Viva VoIP!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patrick</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49179</link>
		<dc:creator>Patrick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2007 04:02:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49179</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;I've got news for all of you&#8230;Cingular has always been AT&#38;T.  &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The execs that have been running Cingular for the past 7 years were all part of the wireless companies from Bell South and SBC (and later AT&#38;T Wireless).  Most of the execs from the wireless companies from SBC and Bell South came from the SBC and Bell South telephone companies.  Those telephone companies were all part of the "old AT&#38;T" before the Bell breakup of the mid-80's.  &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;All the stuff you loved about the Cingular brand (the "jack", rollover minutes, raising the bar) was developed and desiged by guys from SBC and Bell South (and their ad agencies) as part of a brillianty calculated effort to grab as much youth market share as possible.  Why, you ask?  Because their next aquisition target was AT&#38;T Wireless, which at the time boasted a huge base of enterprise wireless customers.  &lt;/p&gt;

1 consumer youth brand + #1 enterprise brand = #1 wireless company.

&lt;p&gt;That merger was eventually designed, executed, and paid for by (drumroll please) SBC and Bell South.  In other words, the new AT&#38;T. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Now, since the "old AT&#38;T" has merged back with SBC and Bell South (and thus Cingular) to form the "new AT&#38;T", all the executives are now reunited under one brand name.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve got news for all of you&#8230;Cingular has always been AT&amp;T.  </p>
<p>The execs that have been running Cingular for the past 7 years were all part of the wireless companies from Bell South and SBC (and later AT&amp;T Wireless).  Most of the execs from the wireless companies from SBC and Bell South came from the SBC and Bell South telephone companies.  Those telephone companies were all part of the &#8220;old AT&amp;T&#8221; before the Bell breakup of the mid-80&#8217;s.  </p>
<p>All the stuff you loved about the Cingular brand (the &#8220;jack&#8221;, rollover minutes, raising the bar) was developed and desiged by guys from SBC and Bell South (and their ad agencies) as part of a brillianty calculated effort to grab as much youth market share as possible.  Why, you ask?  Because their next aquisition target was AT&amp;T Wireless, which at the time boasted a huge base of enterprise wireless customers.  </p>
<p>1 consumer youth brand + #1 enterprise brand = #1 wireless company.</p>
<p>That merger was eventually designed, executed, and paid for by (drumroll please) SBC and Bell South.  In other words, the new AT&amp;T. </p>
<p>Now, since the &#8220;old AT&amp;T&#8221; has merged back with SBC and Bell South (and thus Cingular) to form the &#8220;new AT&amp;T&#8221;, all the executives are now reunited under one brand name.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Strategic Name Development Product Naming Blog</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49178</link>
		<dc:creator>Strategic Name Development Product Naming Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jan 2007 15:48:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49178</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Brand Naming: Cingular Bounces Out&#8230;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Looks like AT&#38;T is going to ditch the Cingular name after its recent acquisition of the company and, even more egregious for some, it will get rid of the amusing Cingular orange “jack;” (one blogger calls it the “Cingular bouncy guy.”) Accordin&#8230;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Brand Naming: Cingular Bounces Out&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>Looks like AT&amp;T is going to ditch the Cingular name after its recent acquisition of the company and, even more egregious for some, it will get rid of the amusing Cingular orange “jack;” (one blogger calls it the “Cingular bouncy guy.”) Accordin&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kimber Watts</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49177</link>
		<dc:creator>Kimber Watts</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Sep 2006 17:17:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49177</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;When I think of AT&#38;T I think of my grandparents and parents..(nothing new and fresh whatsoever)..Cingular is hip and much more appealing to the younger crowd who is much more interested in the newest technology possible&#8230;Yea AT&#38;T does have a history with the name&#8230;but my grandparents don't even have a cell phone, they are not going to be name brand loyal to cell service&#8230;If Cingular changes name I'll be more likely to change wireless service&#8230;and probably will!&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When I think of AT&amp;T I think of my grandparents and parents..(nothing new and fresh whatsoever)..Cingular is hip and much more appealing to the younger crowd who is much more interested in the newest technology possible&#8230;Yea AT&amp;T does have a history with the name&#8230;but my grandparents don&#8217;t even have a cell phone, they are not going to be name brand loyal to cell service&#8230;If Cingular changes name I&#8217;ll be more likely to change wireless service&#8230;and probably will!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kent</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49176</link>
		<dc:creator>kent</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Aug 2006 14:58:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49176</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Hey everyone.  This is part of a massive plan by the Telco's around the world to OWN the Internet!  Think I'm kidding.  Ever heard of the 3GPP?  How about IETF?  The former is the third generation Project Partnership. They are sending requirements to the IETF.  The latter is the Internet Engineering Task Force composed of engineers, not politicians or businessmen.  The agenda for 3GPP is to harness the Internet to make money.  Check out this link:
http://www.nerdylorrin.net/jerry/politics/Warrantless/WarrantlessBKGND.html&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey everyone.  This is part of a massive plan by the Telco&#8217;s around the world to OWN the Internet!  Think I&#8217;m kidding.  Ever heard of the 3GPP?  How about IETF?  The former is the third generation Project Partnership. They are sending requirements to the IETF.  The latter is the Internet Engineering Task Force composed of engineers, not politicians or businessmen.  The agenda for 3GPP is to harness the Internet to make money.  Check out this link:<br />
<a href="http://www.nerdylorrin.net/jerry/politics/Warrantless/WarrantlessBKGND.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.nerdylorrin.net/jerry/politics/Warrantless/WarrantlessBKGND.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49175</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Jul 2006 05:50:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49175</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;i am so angry about this change. Completely furious. I am so used to Cingular Wireless; Raising the Bar. at&#38;t -- your world: delivered just doesn't sound right. at&#38;t itself does not sound right. It's not just a name.. It's a name, a title, a jack, a slogan altogether. It was the phone company.. It was Cingular Wireless. Everything about CiNGULAR was amazing. Their slogan and especially their jack. It was everywhere. Outside of Cingular stores were huge blow up jacks that you can hug and take pictures with. Everytime you turn on your phone or shut it off, there he is!- saying hello, telling you to be courteous. He's just so interactive. Cingular's colors are amazing, unique, and rememberable. Orange and Blue. They spent so much time making Cingular what it is. And now they want to leave it. Yeah, the service won't change, but the whole look of it will. Can you imagine blow up globes outside of at&#38;t stores? Can you imagine a dancing globe everytime you shut down your phone, telling you to be safe and wishing you a great day. Can you imagine the new commercials? T-Mobile has the lady, Verizon has the man, Cingular has the jack, and now.. at&#38;t has what? a globe on their commercials? Think about it -- at&#38;t wireless offering ROLLOVER. at&#38;t wireless with the least dropped calls. it's just not the same. My bill will never be orange and blue again. Cingular is flawless i just don't understand. Their slogan picture is absolutely amazing. The jack standing next to Cingular Wireless - right under is the magnificent, raising the bar with 5 reception bars right next to that. They spent so much money and time with Cingular. Making the air-filled jacks, putting up posters everywhere, making the stores all orange.. I just can't imagine having at&#38;t in a couple of months. Opening up my phone and seeing at&#38;t is just depressing. I know that many of you think it's just a name, nothing else but as you can see many other people have different views. A while ago Cingular even said they were happy with their name and now apprently it's leaving. I still can't believe it. When the change becomes absolutely final and there is no more cingular.com and my bill shows up blue, I won't view cellphones the same way. Cingular was the company. at&#38;t just doesn't cut it. my 2 cents and im out.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i am so angry about this change. Completely furious. I am so used to Cingular Wireless; Raising the Bar. at&amp;t &#8212; your world: delivered just doesn&#8217;t sound right. at&amp;t itself does not sound right. It&#8217;s not just a name.. It&#8217;s a name, a title, a jack, a slogan altogether. It was the phone company.. It was Cingular Wireless. Everything about CiNGULAR was amazing. Their slogan and especially their jack. It was everywhere. Outside of Cingular stores were huge blow up jacks that you can hug and take pictures with. Everytime you turn on your phone or shut it off, there he is!- saying hello, telling you to be courteous. He&#8217;s just so interactive. Cingular&#8217;s colors are amazing, unique, and rememberable. Orange and Blue. They spent so much time making Cingular what it is. And now they want to leave it. Yeah, the service won&#8217;t change, but the whole look of it will. Can you imagine blow up globes outside of at&amp;t stores? Can you imagine a dancing globe everytime you shut down your phone, telling you to be safe and wishing you a great day. Can you imagine the new commercials? T-Mobile has the lady, Verizon has the man, Cingular has the jack, and now.. at&amp;t has what? a globe on their commercials? Think about it &#8212; at&amp;t wireless offering ROLLOVER. at&amp;t wireless with the least dropped calls. it&#8217;s just not the same. My bill will never be orange and blue again. Cingular is flawless i just don&#8217;t understand. Their slogan picture is absolutely amazing. The jack standing next to Cingular Wireless - right under is the magnificent, raising the bar with 5 reception bars right next to that. They spent so much money and time with Cingular. Making the air-filled jacks, putting up posters everywhere, making the stores all orange.. I just can&#8217;t imagine having at&amp;t in a couple of months. Opening up my phone and seeing at&amp;t is just depressing. I know that many of you think it&#8217;s just a name, nothing else but as you can see many other people have different views. A while ago Cingular even said they were happy with their name and now apprently it&#8217;s leaving. I still can&#8217;t believe it. When the change becomes absolutely final and there is no more cingular.com and my bill shows up blue, I won&#8217;t view cellphones the same way. Cingular was the company. at&amp;t just doesn&#8217;t cut it. my 2 cents and im out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Justin</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49174</link>
		<dc:creator>Justin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Jun 2006 17:28:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49174</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;I think of AT&#38;T I think of professional. For many years they were the only wireless carrier to have. EVERY business professional in the country used their product.  I think of the "one rate" plan that changed long distance forever. It was the most reliable of any of the wireless companies.  Put it simply they worked and that is what people wanted.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Verizon Wireless took over when AT&#38;T went up for sell. If you look now, Verizon wireless is the prominent carrier for business professionals because - IT WORKS!  &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;If you are trying to appeal to the hip and the young you are looking at the wrong place to make money. Why is Blackberry so big? because it is a solution for business. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;I'm all for the "OLD" AT&#38;T (pre 2000) service and network. Make it work and people don't care about a hip logo!&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think of AT&amp;T I think of professional. For many years they were the only wireless carrier to have. EVERY business professional in the country used their product.  I think of the &#8220;one rate&#8221; plan that changed long distance forever. It was the most reliable of any of the wireless companies.  Put it simply they worked and that is what people wanted.</p>
<p>Verizon Wireless took over when AT&amp;T went up for sell. If you look now, Verizon wireless is the prominent carrier for business professionals because - IT WORKS!  </p>
<p>If you are trying to appeal to the hip and the young you are looking at the wrong place to make money. Why is Blackberry so big? because it is a solution for business. </p>
<p>I&#8217;m all for the &#8220;OLD&#8221; AT&amp;T (pre 2000) service and network. Make it work and people don&#8217;t care about a hip logo!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Karl Barnhart</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49173</link>
		<dc:creator>Karl Barnhart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 May 2006 21:06:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49173</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Death to Jack?&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Careful transition required in AT&#38;T’s acquisition of BellSouth&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Born from a JV between SBC &#38; BellSouth, Cingular Wireless quickly became the first mobility brand to be relevant to the next generation of communications customers. It was distinctive, approachable, cool. And with its roll-over minutes concept, it wasn’t AT&#38;T.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;But soon it will be AT&#38;T. Soon the friendly “jack” will be gone. Cingular will be re-branded AT&#38;T Wireless when AT&#38;T completes its acquisition of BellSouth.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The re-branding of Cingular and the loss of equity in the Cingular brand must be carefully considered. There is significant risk in confusing and then losing customers (Wait: I was an AT&#38;T Wireless customer. Then I was a Cingular customer. Now I’m an AT&#38;T Wireless customer again. But I didn’t switch carriers. Forget it: I’m calling Verizon.) and disregarding millions of dollars of brand equity.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;This is not to say that Cingular should remain a stand-alone brand. Cingular needs to become part of the AT&#38;T brand. But it should be a careful transition. AT&#38;T has an historic opportunity to transition the equity in Cingular to the AT&#38;T brand, in the process making the AT&#38;T brand more relevant and more modern. A massive, over-night switch to AT&#38;T Wireless would be a mistake.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Karl Barnhart
Managing Director
CoreBrand
kbarnhart@corebrand.com&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Death to Jack?</p>
<p>Careful transition required in AT&amp;T’s acquisition of BellSouth</p>
<p>Born from a JV between SBC &amp; BellSouth, Cingular Wireless quickly became the first mobility brand to be relevant to the next generation of communications customers. It was distinctive, approachable, cool. And with its roll-over minutes concept, it wasn’t AT&amp;T.</p>
<p>But soon it will be AT&amp;T. Soon the friendly “jack” will be gone. Cingular will be re-branded AT&amp;T Wireless when AT&amp;T completes its acquisition of BellSouth.</p>
<p>The re-branding of Cingular and the loss of equity in the Cingular brand must be carefully considered. There is significant risk in confusing and then losing customers (Wait: I was an AT&amp;T Wireless customer. Then I was a Cingular customer. Now I’m an AT&amp;T Wireless customer again. But I didn’t switch carriers. Forget it: I’m calling Verizon.) and disregarding millions of dollars of brand equity.</p>
<p>This is not to say that Cingular should remain a stand-alone brand. Cingular needs to become part of the AT&amp;T brand. But it should be a careful transition. AT&amp;T has an historic opportunity to transition the equity in Cingular to the AT&amp;T brand, in the process making the AT&amp;T brand more relevant and more modern. A massive, over-night switch to AT&amp;T Wireless would be a mistake.</p>
<p>Karl Barnhart<br />
Managing Director<br />
CoreBrand<br />
<a href="mailto:kbarnhart@corebrand.com">kbarnhart@corebrand.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe Drumgoole</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49172</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe Drumgoole</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 May 2006 23:47:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49172</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Funny conversation, from a European (aka Irish) perspective. Nobody knows any of the baby bells from a hole in the ground in Europe (or anywhere else in the world) but just about everybody has heard of AT&#38;T.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The brand that created UNIX, and created the idea of a low cost, utility carrier that the rest of the worlds PT&#38;T companies strived to  emulate is not something to discard lightly. Especially if you are planning to launch your service in Europe, Africa or Asia.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Funny conversation, from a European (aka Irish) perspective. Nobody knows any of the baby bells from a hole in the ground in Europe (or anywhere else in the world) but just about everybody has heard of AT&amp;T.</p>
<p>The brand that created UNIX, and created the idea of a low cost, utility carrier that the rest of the worlds PT&amp;T companies strived to  emulate is not something to discard lightly. Especially if you are planning to launch your service in Europe, Africa or Asia.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert Berger</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49171</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert Berger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 May 2006 21:05:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49171</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Let them change it back to the deathstar'd AT&#38;T. Then bring back Ernestine Tomlin as the spokeswoman: &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;(http://www.lilytomlin.com/video/tv/LaughIn1969/ern2veedle122969/ern2veedle.html
and most importantly:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;http://www.lilytomlin.com/video/Ernestine/SNL&lt;em&gt;1976/SNL&lt;/em&gt;1976.html) &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;"We don't care, We don't have to; We are The Phone Company"&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Then lets watch them remonopolize everything and bring Telecom innovation to a crawl.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Then lets watch as they get taken apart again in our lifetime. What a waste. Of course by then, the rest of the world would have blown by us as we dwaddle in the corporate-monopolism/religious-fundamentalism, abandoning entreprenaurial innovation, science and engineering.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let them change it back to the deathstar&#8217;d AT&amp;T. Then bring back Ernestine Tomlin as the spokeswoman: </p>
<p>(http://www.lilytomlin.com/video/tv/LaughIn1969/ern2veedle122969/ern2veedle.html<br />
and most importantly:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.lilytomlin.com/video/Ernestine/SNL" rel="nofollow">http://www.lilytomlin.com/video/Ernestine/SNL</a><em>1976/SNL</em>1976.html) </p>
<p>&#8220;We don&#8217;t care, We don&#8217;t have to; We are The Phone Company&#8221;</p>
<p>Then lets watch them remonopolize everything and bring Telecom innovation to a crawl.</p>
<p>Then lets watch as they get taken apart again in our lifetime. What a waste. Of course by then, the rest of the world would have blown by us as we dwaddle in the corporate-monopolism/religious-fundamentalism, abandoning entreprenaurial innovation, science and engineering.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49170</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 May 2006 12:23:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49170</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Who gives a ____ about ANY telcoms brand? At least at the consumer level, we are talking about a commodity service here. Price, quality of service, and quality of customer service are the only thing that mater. At this point, I deal with the the company that annoys me the least.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Who gives a ____ about ANY telcoms brand? At least at the consumer level, we are talking about a commodity service here. Price, quality of service, and quality of customer service are the only thing that mater. At this point, I deal with the the company that annoys me the least.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anthony</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49169</link>
		<dc:creator>Anthony</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 May 2006 01:50:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49169</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;I always liked Cingular better. Seems like a waste after all that branding for Cingular.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I always liked Cingular better. Seems like a waste after all that branding for Cingular.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ved</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49168</link>
		<dc:creator>Ved</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 May 2006 22:48:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49168</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;AT&#38;T reminds me of monopoly, paying $2/minute for International calls. So I'd go for Cingular.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>AT&amp;T reminds me of monopoly, paying $2/minute for International calls. So I&#8217;d go for Cingular.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: indieseattle</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49167</link>
		<dc:creator>indieseattle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 May 2006 18:26:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/05/03/cingular-vs-att-the-name-game/#comment-49167</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;My 2 cents after reading all the comments&#8230;mostly all valid, except for the one that baby boomers respect the AT&#38;T brand. Too many negative assns to say that's true. Granted, the Cingular name is newer, cooler, has better flow, however, not sure anyone actually thinks about what AT&#38;T stands for (i.e., Telegraph) and it's still a strong brand--around the world. Not sure Cingular would work well as a sub-brand; there's a trade-off between money you'd save promoting 1 brand vs. 2, and how much traction you'd get making Cingular an MVNO. Having worked for AT&#38;T Wireless, it seems to me that many decisions aren't made for good marketing reasons, but for managing the stock price. So perhaps the decision to go with AT&#38;T was more about the investment community than anything else -- good for short-term gain; perhaps not always the best for the long-term.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My 2 cents after reading all the comments&#8230;mostly all valid, except for the one that baby boomers respect the AT&amp;T brand. Too many negative assns to say that&#8217;s true. Granted, the Cingular name is newer, cooler, has better flow, however, not sure anyone actually thinks about what AT&amp;T stands for (i.e., Telegraph) and it&#8217;s still a strong brand&#8211;around the world. Not sure Cingular would work well as a sub-brand; there&#8217;s a trade-off between money you&#8217;d save promoting 1 brand vs. 2, and how much traction you&#8217;d get making Cingular an MVNO. Having worked for AT&amp;T Wireless, it seems to me that many decisions aren&#8217;t made for good marketing reasons, but for managing the stock price. So perhaps the decision to go with AT&amp;T was more about the investment community than anything else &#8212; good for short-term gain; perhaps not always the best for the long-term.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
