On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 7:59:51 PM UTC-4, Phil Kane wrote:   
   > On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 15:04:32 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:   
   >   
   > >MTA isn't unique in this.  Even though Verizon supposedly   
   > >replaced the old Bell names, in the fine print, the old   
   > >name of Bell Telephone Company of ..." continued to appear   
   > >for many years after Vz came along.   
   >   
   > Many communication companies still exist for legal purposes such as   
   > licensing and even though they have been absorbed by larger mergers.   
   > Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company is an example, even though   
   > after the Bell System divestiture it was absorbed sequentially into   
   > the Pacific Bell Company, Southwest Bell Company, and finally AT&T.   
   >   
   > Verizon as a telephone company (in contrast to the mobile cellphone   
   > company of the same name) used to be NYNEX which used to be New York   
   > and New England Telephone Company which was a post-divestiture merger   
   > of NY Telephone Company and New England Bell Telephone.   
      
   Verizon was originally NYNEX and Bell Atlantic, then acquired   
   GTE (the big "independent" telephone company).  Vz spun off a lot   
   of smaller exchanges to Frontier and others.   
      
      
      
      
   > :Little by little, AT&T is soldering the old Ma Bell System back   
   > together.   
      
   It is far, far from the old Ma Bell.  The old Bell System   
   was interested in quality service.  The new carriers are   
   interested in strictly profit and screw the public.   
      
   Verizon has been the subject of countless reports of how   
   they've just walked away from customers they pledged to   
   support.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)