<?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"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: SBC: Cingular [the brand name]  is no more</title>
	<atom:link href="http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2005/11/4635/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2005/11/4635/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2009 15:32:51 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: ian</title>
		<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2005/11/4635/comment-page-1/#comment-139806</link>
		<dc:creator>ian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2005 15:52:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uneasysilence.com/?p=4635#comment-139806</guid>
		<description>Okay, I based my facts off of the official SBC/at&amp;t press release.  I interpreted your article as saying that SBC would retain the SBC name, and Cingular alone would change over to at&amp;t.  Since the press release said nothing about the Cingular name (other than saying at&amp;t would own 60% stock share), I assumed it would remain the same.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Okay, I based my facts off of the official SBC/at&amp;t press release.  I interpreted your article as saying that SBC would retain the SBC name, and Cingular alone would change over to at&amp;t.  Since the press release said nothing about the Cingular name (other than saying at&amp;t would own 60% stock share), I assumed it would remain the same.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stephen</title>
		<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2005/11/4635/comment-page-1/#comment-137875</link>
		<dc:creator>stephen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2005 18:40:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uneasysilence.com/?p=4635#comment-137875</guid>
		<description>i personally like the new logo.
Im not much of a person  to comment on cooporate mergers and the like, but the logo, it looks nice.
I have always been an advocate of lowercase letters, and this feels like a major win to me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i personally like the new logo.<br />
Im not much of a person  to comment on cooporate mergers and the like, but the logo, it looks nice.<br />
I have always been an advocate of lowercase letters, and this feels like a major win to me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nate MC</title>
		<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2005/11/4635/comment-page-1/#comment-137689</link>
		<dc:creator>Nate MC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2005 17:29:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uneasysilence.com/?p=4635#comment-137689</guid>
		<description>I just love that at&amp;t is making a comeback. I can break out my &quot;We don&#039;t care, we don&#039;t have to&quot; T-shirt more often.

On a more serious side though, I think at&amp;t is the only one of these companies that can take on Comcast, they should&#039;ve stuck to their guns with at&amp;t broadband/cable years back it would be a whole different world. For the better? I don&#039;t know.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just love that at&amp;t is making a comeback. I can break out my &#8220;We don&#8217;t care, we don&#8217;t have to&#8221; T-shirt more often.</p>
<p>On a more serious side though, I think at&amp;t is the only one of these companies that can take on Comcast, they should&#8217;ve stuck to their guns with at&amp;t broadband/cable years back it would be a whole different world. For the better? I don&#8217;t know.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Derek</title>
		<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2005/11/4635/comment-page-1/#comment-137491</link>
		<dc:creator>Derek</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2005 15:14:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uneasysilence.com/?p=4635#comment-137491</guid>
		<description>i&#039;m not sure where exactly the facts are twisted. the name cingular is done according to whitacre [ceo]:

&lt;blockquote&gt;Asked if the company planned to drop the Cingular name in favor of the AT&amp;T brand, Whitacre said, &quot;Yes, we do.&quot;

Whitacre said AT&amp;T might still use the Cingular name in some markets. But the overall plan, he said, is to use the AT&amp;T name to market all the company&#039;s products Ã¢â‚¬â€? local, long-distance, wireless, data and video. &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techpolicy/business/2005-11-20-cingular-att_x.htm?csp=34&quot;&gt;#&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

what facts were off? cingular [the brand name] is going to be replaced with at&amp;t.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i&#8217;m not sure where exactly the facts are twisted. the name cingular is done according to whitacre [ceo]:</p>
<blockquote><p>Asked if the company planned to drop the Cingular name in favor of the AT&amp;T brand, Whitacre said, &#8220;Yes, we do.&#8221;</p>
<p>Whitacre said AT&amp;T might still use the Cingular name in some markets. But the overall plan, he said, is to use the AT&amp;T name to market all the company&#8217;s products Ã¢â‚¬â€? local, long-distance, wireless, data and video. <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techpolicy/business/2005-11-20-cingular-att_x.htm?csp=34">#</a></p></blockquote>
<p>what facts were off? cingular [the brand name] is going to be replaced with at&amp;t.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ian</title>
		<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2005/11/4635/comment-page-1/#comment-137453</link>
		<dc:creator>ian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2005 14:49:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uneasysilence.com/?p=4635#comment-137453</guid>
		<description>Eh, the facts are a little off on this one (sorry).  Cingular will remain the name of the wireless carrier, as it&#039;s technically its own independent company.  However, SBC will change its name to at&amp;t starting today.  Sucks, because I liked the SBC name and logo as it is, and it&#039;s easier to say.

&quot;On Oct. 27, SBC announced that it would adopt the AT&amp;T Inc. name following merger close. Today, the company announced that it will begin trading under the &quot;T&quot; symbol on the New York Stock Exchange on Dec. 1. In the interim, it will trade under the existing &quot;SBC&quot; symbol.

A revitalized corporate logo will be unveiled on Monday, Nov. 21, the company&#039;s first full day of operation as the new AT&amp;T.&quot;

and

&quot;The new AT&amp;T owns 60 percent of Cingular Wireless, which is the No. 1 U.S. wireless services provider.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Eh, the facts are a little off on this one (sorry).  Cingular will remain the name of the wireless carrier, as it&#8217;s technically its own independent company.  However, SBC will change its name to at&amp;t starting today.  Sucks, because I liked the SBC name and logo as it is, and it&#8217;s easier to say.</p>
<p>&#8220;On Oct. 27, SBC announced that it would adopt the AT&amp;T Inc. name following merger close. Today, the company announced that it will begin trading under the &#8220;T&#8221; symbol on the New York Stock Exchange on Dec. 1. In the interim, it will trade under the existing &#8220;SBC&#8221; symbol.</p>
<p>A revitalized corporate logo will be unveiled on Monday, Nov. 21, the company&#8217;s first full day of operation as the new AT&amp;T.&#8221;</p>
<p>and</p>
<p>&#8220;The new AT&amp;T owns 60 percent of Cingular Wireless, which is the No. 1 U.S. wireless services provider.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
