Well the question is why does it not get bought out?
Bell Atlantic was very aggressive at the time, it had tried earlier to buy out a cable company (TCI, now part of Comcast) before it went after NYNEX. Perhaps here it tries to go after Bellsouth or Ameritech? Or perhaps Airtouch Communications... and I wonder if NYNEX would try to challenge SBC's takeover of Southern New England Telephone and therefore gain all of New England?
Actually, that raises a second question, which is Bell Atlantic-NYNEX Mobile- the two companies had already merged their cell-phone arms. If they remain separate, I wonder if one company will try to buy out the other's stake?
Another potential is that SBC goes after NYNEX rather than SNET, and today New England is under the iron fist of "the new" at&t... (well, one can hope "the new" at&t would be butterflied away, or at least the butterflies allow it capital letters)That would be interesting to see.
And as for Bell Atlantic: maybe Bell South would make sense.
I doubt Bell Atlantic would want to pull out... they actually held a majority interest, and NYNEX was in the minority. (Kind of like Verizon and Vodafone in Verizon Wireless today) Note that a lot of the people who run Verizon today come from NYNEX (the company has NYNEX's old New York City headquarters), so some behavior similarities can be guessed to exist- and Verizon has fairly consistently wanted to get full control of it's wireless subsidiary... I think if Bell Atlantic was willing to sell, NYNEX would want to buy. (would they have money? I would think so, at least)Well, if Bell Atlantic pulls out, then numerous other Baby Bells could try to go after Bell Atlantic's stake (and here, I'm being generous and including in Bell Canada, which technically counts as a Baby Bell since AT&T divested from them in 1956, several decades earlier before the main divesture) or it could be a joint venture with another company.
So one wonders how this will play out here... an alliance between BA(N)M and AirTouch still makes sense. You mention Bell Canada- do you think they would be interested in getting involved in the US market at this time?
Hm, a BA(N)M*-Ameritech merger however would have the issue that there's a lot of overlap between PrimeCo's licenses and Ameritech- PrimeCo could have to be sold off, most likely to the co-owner AirTouch.
An independent AirTouch would be quite interesting- a lot of networks that are part of Vodafone today or used to be were in AirTouch. In 1998 the company had partial investments in Germany, Portugal, Sweden, Belgium, Italy, Spain, Poland, Romania, Japan, South Korea, and India. (Archive.org is a very useful source here)
So in TTL, (assuming the federal government allows it), Bell Canada acquires full or more likely indirect control of Ameritech, and then merges it with NYNEX to create some new entity? There could be issues with using the name "Bell", though... I think the Bell System divestiture had an agreement where no one company could use the name Bell or the classic logo without adding the name of its subsidiary (New Jersey Bell, New England Telephone, Ohio Bell, or whatever). But I'm not sure on the details, the restrictions might have just been on the use of the logo rather than the word "Bell", so in the absence of the logo it might be alright.Well IIRC at one point Bell Canada held a stake in Ameritech, which they later sold in 1999. The last CEO, Michael Sabia, eventually forced BCE (Bell Canada's parent company) to buy back the share when he took over the position in 2002. So, I think that they would be keen to get into the US market, especially since for a while AT&T (and, for a time, Sprint) had tried to access the Canadian market (and Canada has even stricter foreign ownership regulations).
In TTL, it could be possible that that Bell Canada does not sell its stake in Ameritech - instead, it could increase it - and could attempt a purchase of NYNEX through Ameritech. This alternate NYNEX/Ameritech company could eventually adopt the Bell Canada branding of that time - including this logo:
(image removed to save space)
and probably even start selling similar services that Bell Canada has in the areas it serves. Probably to get around the foreign ownership brouhaha, it could use other means of ensuring that it stays within the law.
As for cell-phones: well, Ameritech was the first to offer cell-phone services to the general public, and I could see Ameritech buying out Bell Atlantic's stake in such a case. In addition, before SBC bought Ameritech, it's cell-phone business used CDMA (which BA(N)M, IIRC, also used), as does Bell Canada. Thus, the idea of "North American Long Distance" could happen in such a case, since the technology used is the same among three companies.
So in TTL, (assuming the federal government allows it), Bell Canada acquires full or more likely indirect control of Ameritech, and then merges it with NYNEX to create some new entity? There could be issues with using the name "Bell", though... I think the Bell System divestiture had an agreement where no one company could use the name Bell or the classic logo without adding the name of its subsidiary (New Jersey Bell, New England Telephone, Ohio Bell, or whatever). But I'm not sure on the details, the restrictions might have just been on the use of the logo rather than the word "Bell", so in the absence of the logo it might be alright.
Looking at services that Bell offers, in OTL they offer satellite TV and also had a media arm for awhile (but I think it's separate now?)... I think that an attempt to move into the media business may be blocked (or maybe not, for awhile US West had a stake in the Warner Bros. movie studio, but it was non-controlling)...
I don't like the 1993 Ameritech logo thoughWhat I was thinking would be using the Bell Canada logo itself, not necessarily the "Bell" name. Or the 1993 Ameritech logo could be used for the new entity.
Now it seems like Bell has dropped the name "ExpressVu" altogether and just calls it "Bell TV". (along with introducing the new logo, which I dislike)O, and BTW, originally ExpressVu was an attempt to bring DISH Network to Canada, and now is its own service. There was also an attempt to bring DIRECTV to Canada, and that failed after abt. 3-5 years, IIRC.
I don't like the 1993 Ameritech logo though![]()
Actually I really like the "NYNEX" name and logo, but it was unpopular at the time from some of the sources I've read and probably won't be used. My personal preference would be to try to use the Bell name in some way, shape, or form... one wonders. If Bell Atlantic drops the Bell name at some point there might be less objection to Bell Canada introducing the "Bell" name in the US, since no one will be left who uses it except for Cincinnati Bell, which is not actually a Baby Bell and so wasn't part of the settlement.
(By the way, do you think Bell Atlantic + Bell South would still buy GTE?)
Now it seems like Bell has dropped the name "ExpressVu" altogether and just calls it "Bell TV". (along with introducing the new logo, which I dislike)
No ILEC overlaps with another ILEC... However, there are GTE operations in the Southern states, but they had operations in Pennsylvania OTL and that didn't stop the merger- I think it'd be seen as a benefit for the merged company to consolidate adjacent territories.Here's the million-dollar question: Does Bell Atlantic/Bell South overlap with GTE?
The French version with the pun on the name "Bell" is kind of clever though.Which is a bummer.Such is the process that is "reorganization". IIRC the Sympatico name is also being dropped as well. I don't even like Bell's new advertising campaign (I prefer the old campaign with the beavers).
No ILEC overlaps with another ILEC...
However, there are GTE operations in the Southern states, but they had operations in Pennsylvania OTL and that didn't stop the merger- I think it'd be seen as a benefit for the merged company to consolidate adjacent territories.
The French version with the pun on the name "Bell" is kind of clever though.