AT&T-Yahoo! DSL?

October 27th, 2005 by Greg Sterling | 2 Comments

AT&T-Yahoo! DSL?

Here’s a piece in the NYTimes that says SBC will take the venerable name AT&T once the acquisition is approved.

One response: Will the AT&T brand support the kinds of Internet-age services that SBC is offering and wants to offer (i.e., IPTV)? One could argue it’s really a 19th Century brand.

Another response: It doesn’t matter. No one knows that 3M originally stood for “Minnesota, Mining and Manufacturing.” What does Google mean? What does Yahoo! mean?

I’m certainly no branding consultant, but unless there’s a truly negative consumer association with SBC (little evidence there is) it doesn’t matter whether SBC calls itself SBC, AT&T or Howard Stern (well, maybe not Howard Stern). Of course it will cost millions and millions to do the rebranding (think AT&T-Yahoo! DSL).

Ultimately, however, the perception of the consumer and the value of the brand is all about what’s going on behind the brand.

-
Greg Sterling, Local Search and Convergence Columnist - Greg Sterling is managing editor of The Kelsey Group who also writes the Local Media Journal Blog.

Comments

2 responses so far ↓

Richard Green on Nov 8, 2005 at 11:02 am

In the last few years the SBC name has become synonomous with poor customer service. Many of their call centers are in foreign countries and staffed by individuals who are difficult to understand and display a level of incompetence that is hard to believe. I think SBC is smart to adapt the AT&T name. The question is, will they ruin that?
Hector Ranirez Jr. on Jul 17, 2006 at 9:05 am

sbc is already ruining the reputation that the AT&T name had before. I Have been dealing with their DSL Internet division and I believe that their service is less than the Middle East in conflict//