English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

only to have, a few decades later, it reform again? ATT, the parent company, within a few years of engulfing SBC (and, in turn, PAC Bell), is now approved to swallow Bell South. Why not just have ATT and Verizon merge and be done with it?

2006-12-29 10:13:50 · 4 answers · asked by I.M. 3 in News & Events Current Events

4 answers

Ours is not to wonder why but do do or die.

And to Pay up.

As with most things in life it was a way to get more money from every one.

Now they have another way to get more money from every one.

2006-12-29 10:25:49 · answer #1 · answered by Floyd B 5 · 1 0

At the time there were few cells phones, no cable company provided phone services, no VOIP (vonage, etc), AT&T was BOTH local and long distance for most people. This gave AT&T incredible strength in the market, zero competition for your $$.

The break-up started competition both for local and long distance services and I think the results are positive. Today the world is very different and I don't think any of us would care that much about mergers (or not) of the big local phone companies.

2006-12-29 18:44:21 · answer #2 · answered by Mario G 2 · 0 0

Good point. The purpose was to break up a monopoly, and now AT&T is on course toward becoming a monopoly again. The politicians and courts need to be consistent in their actions.

2006-12-29 18:18:52 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

she was getting to big

2006-12-30 05:02:12 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers