I’m a cell phone geek. I’m not afraid to admit that. No, I don’t have the best one on the market, but I very much enjoy watching the new technology roll out. That’s why I’ve been very tuned into watching AT&T work with the Cingular brand after they acquired the popular cellular provider.
If you’ve followed telecommunications over the last 15 years, you’ve been able to see the twisted web of spinoffs, takeovers, mergers, and buyouts. I won’t go into it all. But Cingular being back with AT&T is nothing new. When AT&T acquired Cingular they rolled out the tagline, “Cingular is now the new AT&T”. I thought not going with the Cingular brand was risky at the time. Now, after reading BtoB Online’s article about the Cingular brand being phased out altogether, I think it’s a bad move.
AT&T is trying to create synergy among their various business units which makes sense. The bundled service plan is a major play for service providers. But, what happens to a fresh, young cellular brand in Cingular that conjures up images of the hottest new phones and the newest “unlocked” technology?
My first cell phone was with AT&T Wireless about 16 years ago. It was a Motorola brick with poor reception and a calling plan that included about 20 minutes a month. That image coupled with a stodgy, “old school” telecommunication company in AT&T leaves me wondering how I’m going to engage with that old Cingular brand.
I’ll be curious to see how this plays out for AT&T. I’m also wondering how social media will affect them. See, there is a strong and loud group of early cell phone technology adopters that rush out to buy the newest phones, play with them until their fingers bleed, and then write reviews that are plastered all over the Internet.
Will these early adopters feel the same passion for the newest AT&T phone as they did for the newest Cingular phone? Yes, it’s the same phone and same service but a much, much different brand.
UPDATE:
Doug Mitchell has a good post covering the AT&T branding as well.
Patrick — I also don’t understand the phasing out of the Cingular brand. It was young, hip and progressive. AT&T reminds me of operators and my grandmother. It seems AT&T’s “connection” to that Cingular brand is to use a little orange.
I can hear somebody at at&t now, “Throw in a little orange, I hear that’s what the kids like”. I think Alltel has taken a run to pick up where Cingular left off with their young, irreverent, sometimes stupid commercials featuring Chad. Outside of the iPhone, there is no way I would go to at&t. Too bad the US is so behind in this industry. I’ve seen the options in Europe and Asia and it makes me want to cry.
Perhaps you ought to consider the poor reputation of the Cingular brand in the areas of customer service and network performance. For example, I believe Cingular came in dead last, or close to it, in a recent _Consumer Reports_ rating of mobile service providers, as reported by their membership. And that wasn’t one isolated report — they have placed in the back of the pack in multiple CR ratings, and in other magazine surveys.
I think your reflection on AT&T being “old school” is, itself, old school. They have a reputation for technical innovation that all the carriers added together times 100 never had.
The phone/mobile _manufacturers_, not the carriers, are the sources of mobile innovation, and even the lay consumer knows this. People don’t talk about their cool Verizon phone, they talk about their cool Moto Razr or Nokia-thing or Treo or Blackberry.
The carriers are dinosaurs struggling to maintain their monopolies (e.g., “locked” cell phones), and the day is coming soon when users will be able to move freely between carriers when they want to without jumping through flaming hoops.
Matt,
Great comments! I couldn’t agree more with cellular technology being better outside of the US. I’d love to have access to some of those phones!
John — You are right about the network performance rating for Cingular. The problem for at&t is that consumers don’t look at data like that. They, in some cases, look for a brand they identify with and choose to get their phone there. Younger people identified with the Cingular brand. They were the second largest carrier in the US so they were doing something right obviously.
AT&T did have a lot of innovation, but remember they left the mobile game (when Cingular bought them) because they weren’t innovative/competitive. They used the money they make through other ventures (landlines, cable, etc.) to buy back their share.
You’re right that the manufacturers drive innovation, but the carriers are the gatekeepers to the consumers. There are plenty of outstanding phones on this planet that are simply not possible to get here in the US because either the carrier networks are ill-equipped or they simply don’t allow them over. Have you looked at what Verizon offers me for a phone? Have you seen what you can get on DoCoMo in Japan? BIG difference.
You are right about being able to move from one carrier to another in the future. I hope more competition forces that and lower rates. Who knows.
John,
Excellent viewpoints - thanks for contributing! You make some very valid points from an overall technology perspective. I went with Verizon a few years back because of those Consumer Reports that ranked them so high. You’re correct, my vision in my post did not take that into consideration - it was more phone technology focused.
Unfortunately, for the carriers their brand is also influenced by the phone technology they carry. Cingular has a reputation of staying ahead of the game there while Verizon has taken a different route.
But, I’m still not seeing the AT&T brand in the light of a technology innovator. Perhaps they are and it sounds like you have good info on that, but they’ve not done a great job of conveying that to the marketplace. Maybe upcoming marketing efforts will change my mind about that.
Thanks again for your great comments and viewpoints.
-Pat
John - You are right about the network performance rating for Cingular. The problem for at&t is that consumers don’t look at data like that. They, in some cases, look for a brand they identify with and choose to get their phone there. Younger people identified with the Cingular brand. They were the second largest carrier in the US so they were doing something right obviously.
AT&T did have a lot of innovation, but remember they left the mobile game (when Cingular bought them) because they weren’t innovative/competitive. They used the money they make through other ventures (landlines, cable, etc.) to buy back their share.
You’re right that the manufacturers drive innovation, but the carriers are the gatekeepers to the consumers. There are plenty of outstanding phones on this planet that are simply not possible to get here in the US because either the carrier networks are ill-equipped or they simply don’t allow them over. Have you looked at what Verizon offers me for a phone? Have you seen what you can get on DoCoMo in Japan? BIG difference.
You are right about being able to move from one carrier to another in the future. I hope more competition forces that and lower rates. Who knows.
You make a fair point on AT&T… I’ll concede that they haven’t done a stellar job of positioning themselves as an innovator.
And while their rate of innovation is much higher than the _carriers_, their innovation position w.r.t. _equipment manufacturers_ is a much different story.
I guess I won’t shed a tear over the Cingular brand.
[…] I m a cell phone geek. I m not afraid to admit that. No, I don t have the best one on the market… cell phone was with AT T Wireless about 16 years ago. It was a Motorola brick with poor reception… media will affect them. See, there is a strong and loud group of early cell phone technology adopters… reviews that are plastered all over the Internet. Will these early adopters feel the same passion for the newest AT T phone as they did for the newest Cingular phone? Yes, it s the same phoneRead more…cell phones […]
I remember when there was only one phone company, Ma Bell. They broke it up because it was a monoply and with no competition prices were high and service was not always that good. They broke it up for a reason. I wonder how long it will take to learn that lesson again. Consolitdation is not good for the consumer. Trust me, your choices will be limited and you will pay for every option on the phone.
Allow me to voice the cranky contrarian view:
Ma Bell service was FAR better than anything we experience today.
You had phone bills you could actually understand. Voice quality was excellent. “Can you hear me now” hadn’t been invented yet.
We had only a few phone choices, but they all worked the same. Now we have a cazillion phone choices, they are all different, when you pick up someone’s phone you don’t know how to operate it. Every phone has a cazillion features that you don’t use or need, and they all have poor voice quality.
Phones were everywhere, if you had a dime in your pocket you were connected. Now phones are everywhere, if you have a $75.00/month phone in your pocket you are connected.
When people drove their car, they usually had both hands on the wheel and weren’t carrying on a conversation with a distant party who was distracting them from driving.
OH, yes, the breakup of Ma Bell was good for us. I’ll stop here.
Lanie,
Thanks for jumping in the conversation - this topic certainly has generated some great viewpoints from readers.
John,
You certainly are on the other end of the spectrum, but as usual, I’m thankful you contributed.
rebranding is a pain in the butt for all employees involved in these mergers. First thing at&t didn’t buy cingular actually SBC bought at&t and where keeping the name. The problem now is integrating all the different companies into one company. It’s a pain in the rear