At 17 Aug 2007 16:29:24 -0700 Michael Wise wrote:

> > Actually, Cingular (a independant company owned by SBC and
BellSouth)
> > bought AT&T Wireless,...
>
>
> Are you sure about that? My recollection from that time frame is
that
> Cingular was merely a rebranded name for the cellular service which
SBC
> implemented shortly after the SBC/Bell South merger.

The SBC/BellSouth merger was relatively recent- it happened only last
year. Cingular was a joint venture of the two companies (SBC owned a
little more- it was 55/45 or 60/40, IIRC) and merged three cellular
systems- SBC's SBMS, BellSouth (both TDMA), and PacBell's GSM system
out west. Cingular has operated under that name since 2000.

Cingular bought AT&T Wireless in 2004 just before ATTWS was about to
lose their name- when they were originally spun off from AT&T back in
2001, they had a license to operate under the AT&T name for a certain
time period.

Ironically, just before SBC bought AT&T (the long distance company),
they (AT&T) had planned to get back into wireless as a reseller of
Sprint. (The licensing deal that let AT&T Wireless use the AT&T name
also kept AT&T LD out of the wireless biz for the same timeframe.)
One can only imagine what confusion would've happened in the
marketplace if Cingular hadn't bought AT&T Wireless- ATTWS would've
quickly had to take on a new name, followed shortly by a DIFFERENT
AT&T wireless company being launched by a different company with
different equipment!


> They may have been
> considered independent (much in the same way VZW is technically
> independent from Verizon...but in reality it was the same company
with
> the same board members.

Sort of- just like with Verizon, however, there was another partner,
in this case BellSouth, with a major interest- (Verizon Wireless is
45% owned by Vodaphone, 55% by Verizon) After the SBC/BS merger,
Cingular now has one parent.


> ATTWS existed long before SBC bought AT&T.

Yes. ATTWS was, for a long time, part of AT&T (the LD company.)

> I know, because from about
> 1994-1999 (or perhaps 1998) I and the company (Wired Magazine) I
managed
> IT and landline/wireless service for used the A-side carrier
Cellular
> One (SF Bay Area market). AT&T incorporated C1 and rebranded as
ATTWS.


> During that time, I also had accounts with Pac Bell Wireless, Nextel,


> and GTE Wireless (Wired wanting me to stay on top of who had the
best
> coverage).
>
> I'm aware of the logistical hassles incurred after the by all the
sign
> changes, but the company was known as Cingular before it became
> ATTWS.


Cingular and ATTWS were two completly separate, unrelated companies.
At least until they "merged" (Cingular acquired them) in 2004. Then
SBC (Cingular's 1/2 owner) bought AT&T (LD- not the wireless company
Cingular already bought)in 2005, followed by SBC (now called AT&T)
merging with BS in '06. (Phew!)


> > > No part of the former Pac Bell Wireless is a
> > > part of today's VZW (to my knowledge).
> >
> > I believe you're right.

Actually we were both wrong! (Explained below!)

> > how did PacTel get stuck at 1900-MHz?
>
>
> Because, at least in the SF Bay Area, C1 (which ATTWS later
acquired)
> was already using the 800 MHz TDMA and GTE Wireless was using the
800
> MHz CDMA freqs.

You're missing my point- PacBell originally had the 800MHz B license
by default (the one Verizon now owns), just for being the local
Telco. That's how it worked in the early 80s- two licenses, one for
the local Bell, and the other to the highest bidder. PacBell either
was involved with Verizon's earliest predecessor or sold their
license to them. ATTWS bought the "A" license holder there.
(Cellular One?)
>
> > Generally the incumbent landline Telco got the 800-Mhz "B"
> > (which originally stood for "B"ell, as in Ma Bell!) license unless
> > they were shortsighted enoughbto sell it to someone else in case
this
> > whole cellphone thing turned out to be a fad! ;-)
> > (US West, now Qwest, sold most of their original licenses so here
in
> > Denver, Verizon is the B carrier, and AT&T is the "A" or
"A"lternate
> > carrier.
> >
> > > Sure, it's very likely that the thread curmudgeon was a
customer of
> > > one
> > > of one of the companies now part of VZW, but that company was
not
> > > VZW.
> >
> >
> > Or perhaps he assumes the original "B" carrier there, who must
have
> > bought the license from PacTel originally, was somehow affiliated
> > with them, since PacTel effectively sold themselves out of the
> > cellphone biz until the 1900MHz PCS-band auctions years later
allowed
> > them back in. (As it did Qwest in Colorado and a large part of
the
> > midwest.)
>
> I don't know of anytime when Pac Bell offered any sort of cellular
in
> the Chicagoland (where our thread curmudgeon suggests he lives).


Dont be so sure! According to Wikipedia:

"The cellular and paging unit of Pacific Telesis, PacTel Cellular,
was spun off in 1994 into a new company called AirTouch
Communications (AirTouch), leaving Pacific Telesis with only the
landline telephone company. Senior Pacific Telesis management moved
to the new company, thus leaving a new corporate culture to run the
old Pacific Telesis. In 1999, Airtouch merged with Britain's Vodafone
Group Plc to become Vodafone Airtouch Plc. In 2000, its U.S. wireless
assets were merged with those of Bell Atlantic Corp. to form the
joint venture Verizon Wireless..."

So PacTel Wireless was spun off of Pacific Telephone and became
Airtouch, then Verizon, leaving the local Telco to start again with
PacBell who eventually became Cingular then (the new) AT&T!

Apparenty there's more inbreeding in the cellular biz than there is
in the Appalachians!


--

"I don't need my cell phone to play video games or take pictures
or double as a Walkie-Talkie; I just need it to work. Thanks for
all the bells and whistles, but I could communicate better with
ACTUAL bells and whistles." -Bill Maher 9/25/2003