And I say, death to a tyrant and good ridince!!!!
AT&T hangs up - and few are sorry to say goodbye
Op/Ed - USATODAY.com
AT&T possesses a history that goes back to Alexander Graham Bell, but few people are likely to mourn its demise as an independent company. It was an overbearing monopoly before its breakup, and a largely inept competitor ever since. Not since its early days has it been much of an innovator.
AT&T's sale for $16 billion to SBC Communications, announced Monday, is loaded with irony. The company, once so powerful it was known as "Ma Bell," was swallowed by one of the "Baby Bells" spun off in the 1984 breakup. The child was more successful than the parent.
Even more telling is the price AT&T went for. In today's world, $16 billion is a pittance. Last week, Procter & Gamble agreed to pay almost four times as much for a medicine chest of sundries known as the Gillette Company.
SBC will keep the AT&T brand name, which is well known outside of SBC's region - indeed, all around the world. For business customers in particular, the AT&T name is still valuable.
But the company SBC is buying, subject to approval by regulators, is a shell of its former self. It's no longer dominant, no longer greatly feared by competitors.
For much of its history, AT&T was the quintessential monopoly. It had no competition for local service, no competition for long-distance service and offered people few reasons to like it. Its customers could choose whatever color telephone they wanted, the saying went, so long as it was black.
Since its breakup, however, AT&T has done little but lose market share to rivals and watch as long-distance prices plummeted.
Not that Ma Bell didn't try to compete and reinvent itself. Over the past 20 years, it has been a veritable whirling dervish of acquisitions and spin-offs as it tried to find a niche in the rapidly changing world of telecommunications. It got into the wireless business in 1994 only to bail out last year. It put together the largest cable network, only to sell it to Comcast. At one point, it saw a future in cash registers and bought NCR.
In the process of making all of these transactions, the company churned through CEOs. It was always in motion, but never quite arrived. While competitors found ways to thrive in such industries as wireless and cable, AT&T never could. Even NCR prospered once it was let go.
In a way, AT&T died long ago and spread its ashes to the winds. Today, bits and pieces of what was once Ma Bell can be found in a dizzying array of concerns, among them SBC, BellSouth, Verizon, Cingular, Comcast, Lucent, Qwest, Agere and Avaya.
AT&T was once, arguably, the USA's most powerful company. Soon it will be no more than a division of one of its spin-offs. It's unlikely, though, that anyone but history buffs will really miss it.
AT&T hangs up - and few are sorry to say goodbye
Op/Ed - USATODAY.com
AT&T possesses a history that goes back to Alexander Graham Bell, but few people are likely to mourn its demise as an independent company. It was an overbearing monopoly before its breakup, and a largely inept competitor ever since. Not since its early days has it been much of an innovator.
AT&T's sale for $16 billion to SBC Communications, announced Monday, is loaded with irony. The company, once so powerful it was known as "Ma Bell," was swallowed by one of the "Baby Bells" spun off in the 1984 breakup. The child was more successful than the parent.
Even more telling is the price AT&T went for. In today's world, $16 billion is a pittance. Last week, Procter & Gamble agreed to pay almost four times as much for a medicine chest of sundries known as the Gillette Company.
SBC will keep the AT&T brand name, which is well known outside of SBC's region - indeed, all around the world. For business customers in particular, the AT&T name is still valuable.
But the company SBC is buying, subject to approval by regulators, is a shell of its former self. It's no longer dominant, no longer greatly feared by competitors.
For much of its history, AT&T was the quintessential monopoly. It had no competition for local service, no competition for long-distance service and offered people few reasons to like it. Its customers could choose whatever color telephone they wanted, the saying went, so long as it was black.
Since its breakup, however, AT&T has done little but lose market share to rivals and watch as long-distance prices plummeted.
Not that Ma Bell didn't try to compete and reinvent itself. Over the past 20 years, it has been a veritable whirling dervish of acquisitions and spin-offs as it tried to find a niche in the rapidly changing world of telecommunications. It got into the wireless business in 1994 only to bail out last year. It put together the largest cable network, only to sell it to Comcast. At one point, it saw a future in cash registers and bought NCR.
In the process of making all of these transactions, the company churned through CEOs. It was always in motion, but never quite arrived. While competitors found ways to thrive in such industries as wireless and cable, AT&T never could. Even NCR prospered once it was let go.
In a way, AT&T died long ago and spread its ashes to the winds. Today, bits and pieces of what was once Ma Bell can be found in a dizzying array of concerns, among them SBC, BellSouth, Verizon, Cingular, Comcast, Lucent, Qwest, Agere and Avaya.
AT&T was once, arguably, the USA's most powerful company. Soon it will be no more than a division of one of its spin-offs. It's unlikely, though, that anyone but history buffs will really miss it.
