1. Welcome to Verizon Forums - the unofficial Verizon community! Have a question about Verizon? Click HERE to get started.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Expecting Cell Phone Forums? We recently moved Verizon specific content to VerizonForums.com. If you previously had an account on CPF, it has been transferred!
    Dismiss Notice

"A or B" side?

Discussion in 'alt.cellular.verizon' started by Bob, Jul 4, 2004.

  1. Joseph

    Joseph Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 18:46:50 GMT, "Scott Nelson - Wash DC"
    <spamcop@bnmnetworks.net> wrote:

    >You would be correct sir.
    >PAC*TEL, then Airtouch, now Verizon is on the "B" side.
    >LA Cellular, then AT&T, Now Cingular is on the "A" side.


    Don't go rushing the gun. cingular in California formerly Pac Bel is
    *not* yet an A carrier. When the acquisition of AT&T Wireless it will
    be. For now cingular is not an A or B cellular operator in
    California.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
     



    › See More: "A or B" side?
  2. Joseph

    Joseph Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 18:46:50 GMT, "Scott Nelson - Wash DC"
    <spamcop@bnmnetworks.net> wrote:

    >You would be correct sir.
    >PAC*TEL, then Airtouch, now Verizon is on the "B" side.
    >LA Cellular, then AT&T, Now Cingular is on the "A" side.


    Don't go rushing the gun. cingular in California formerly Pac Bel is
    *not* yet an A carrier. When the acquisition of AT&T Wireless it will
    be. For now cingular is not an A or B cellular operator in
    California.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
     
  3. Joseph

    Joseph Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 18:46:50 GMT, "Scott Nelson - Wash DC"
    <spamcop@bnmnetworks.net> wrote:

    >You would be correct sir.
    >PAC*TEL, then Airtouch, now Verizon is on the "B" side.
    >LA Cellular, then AT&T, Now Cingular is on the "A" side.


    Don't go rushing the gun. cingular in California formerly Pac Bel is
    *not* yet an A carrier. When the acquisition of AT&T Wireless it will
    be. For now cingular is not an A or B cellular operator in
    California.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
     
  4. Joseph

    Joseph Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 18:46:50 GMT, "Scott Nelson - Wash DC"
    <spamcop@bnmnetworks.net> wrote:

    >You would be correct sir.
    >PAC*TEL, then Airtouch, now Verizon is on the "B" side.
    >LA Cellular, then AT&T, Now Cingular is on the "A" side.


    Don't go rushing the gun. cingular in California formerly Pac Bel is
    *not* yet an A carrier. When the acquisition of AT&T Wireless it will
    be. For now cingular is not an A or B cellular operator in
    California.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
     
  5. Joseph

    Joseph Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 18:46:50 GMT, "Scott Nelson - Wash DC"
    <spamcop@bnmnetworks.net> wrote:

    >You would be correct sir.
    >PAC*TEL, then Airtouch, now Verizon is on the "B" side.
    >LA Cellular, then AT&T, Now Cingular is on the "A" side.


    Don't go rushing the gun. cingular in California formerly Pac Bel is
    *not* yet an A carrier. When the acquisition of AT&T Wireless it will
    be. For now cingular is not an A or B cellular operator in
    California.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
     
  6. Joseph

    Joseph Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 18:46:50 GMT, "Scott Nelson - Wash DC"
    <spamcop@bnmnetworks.net> wrote:

    >You would be correct sir.
    >PAC*TEL, then Airtouch, now Verizon is on the "B" side.
    >LA Cellular, then AT&T, Now Cingular is on the "A" side.


    Don't go rushing the gun. cingular in California formerly Pac Bel is
    *not* yet an A carrier. When the acquisition of AT&T Wireless it will
    be. For now cingular is not an A or B cellular operator in
    California.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
     
  7. Joseph

    Joseph Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 18:46:50 GMT, "Scott Nelson - Wash DC"
    <spamcop@bnmnetworks.net> wrote:

    >You would be correct sir.
    >PAC*TEL, then Airtouch, now Verizon is on the "B" side.
    >LA Cellular, then AT&T, Now Cingular is on the "A" side.


    Don't go rushing the gun. cingular in California formerly Pac Bel is
    *not* yet an A carrier. When the acquisition of AT&T Wireless it will
    be. For now cingular is not an A or B cellular operator in
    California.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
     
  8. Joseph

    Joseph Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 18:46:50 GMT, "Scott Nelson - Wash DC"
    <spamcop@bnmnetworks.net> wrote:

    >You would be correct sir.
    >PAC*TEL, then Airtouch, now Verizon is on the "B" side.
    >LA Cellular, then AT&T, Now Cingular is on the "A" side.


    Don't go rushing the gun. cingular in California formerly Pac Bel is
    *not* yet an A carrier. When the acquisition of AT&T Wireless it will
    be. For now cingular is not an A or B cellular operator in
    California.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
     
  9. Joseph

    Joseph Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 15:11:19 -0500, Steven J Sobol
    <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:

    >I think AirTouch was created from a cellular unit of USWest, though, right?
    >and PacTel sold to USWest...


    Airtouch was in existance before USWest. USWest cellular sold their
    cellular license to Airtouch. Of course Airtouch became part of
    Verizon Wireless.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
     
  10. Joseph

    Joseph Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 15:11:19 -0500, Steven J Sobol
    <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:

    >I think AirTouch was created from a cellular unit of USWest, though, right?
    >and PacTel sold to USWest...


    Airtouch was in existance before USWest. USWest cellular sold their
    cellular license to Airtouch. Of course Airtouch became part of
    Verizon Wireless.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
     
  11. Joseph

    Joseph Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 15:11:19 -0500, Steven J Sobol
    <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:

    >I think AirTouch was created from a cellular unit of USWest, though, right?
    >and PacTel sold to USWest...


    Airtouch was in existance before USWest. USWest cellular sold their
    cellular license to Airtouch. Of course Airtouch became part of
    Verizon Wireless.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
     
  12. Joseph

    Joseph Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 15:11:19 -0500, Steven J Sobol
    <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:

    >I think AirTouch was created from a cellular unit of USWest, though, right?
    >and PacTel sold to USWest...


    Airtouch was in existance before USWest. USWest cellular sold their
    cellular license to Airtouch. Of course Airtouch became part of
    Verizon Wireless.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
     
  13. Joseph

    Joseph Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 15:11:19 -0500, Steven J Sobol
    <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:

    >I think AirTouch was created from a cellular unit of USWest, though, right?
    >and PacTel sold to USWest...


    Airtouch was in existance before USWest. USWest cellular sold their
    cellular license to Airtouch. Of course Airtouch became part of
    Verizon Wireless.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
     
  14. Joseph

    Joseph Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 15:11:19 -0500, Steven J Sobol
    <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:

    >I think AirTouch was created from a cellular unit of USWest, though, right?
    >and PacTel sold to USWest...


    Airtouch was in existance before USWest. USWest cellular sold their
    cellular license to Airtouch. Of course Airtouch became part of
    Verizon Wireless.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
     
  15. Joseph

    Joseph Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 15:11:19 -0500, Steven J Sobol
    <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:

    >I think AirTouch was created from a cellular unit of USWest, though, right?
    >and PacTel sold to USWest...


    Airtouch was in existance before USWest. USWest cellular sold their
    cellular license to Airtouch. Of course Airtouch became part of
    Verizon Wireless.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
     
  16. Joseph

    Joseph Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 15:11:19 -0500, Steven J Sobol
    <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:

    >I think AirTouch was created from a cellular unit of USWest, though, right?
    >and PacTel sold to USWest...


    Airtouch was in existance before USWest. USWest cellular sold their
    cellular license to Airtouch. Of course Airtouch became part of
    Verizon Wireless.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
     
  17. Joseph

    Joseph Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 15:11:19 -0500, Steven J Sobol
    <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:

    >I think AirTouch was created from a cellular unit of USWest, though, right?
    >and PacTel sold to USWest...


    Airtouch was in existance before USWest. USWest cellular sold their
    cellular license to Airtouch. Of course Airtouch became part of
    Verizon Wireless.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
     
  18. Joseph

    Joseph Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 15:11:19 -0500, Steven J Sobol
    <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:

    >I think AirTouch was created from a cellular unit of USWest, though, right?
    >and PacTel sold to USWest...


    Airtouch was in existance before USWest. USWest cellular sold their
    cellular license to Airtouch. Of course Airtouch became part of
    Verizon Wireless.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
     
  19. Joseph

    Joseph Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 15:11:19 -0500, Steven J Sobol
    <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:

    >I think AirTouch was created from a cellular unit of USWest, though, right?
    >and PacTel sold to USWest...


    Airtouch was in existance before USWest. USWest cellular sold their
    cellular license to Airtouch. Of course Airtouch became part of
    Verizon Wireless.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
     
  20. Joseph

    Joseph Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 15:11:19 -0500, Steven J Sobol
    <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:

    >I think AirTouch was created from a cellular unit of USWest, though, right?
    >and PacTel sold to USWest...


    Airtouch was in existance before USWest. USWest cellular sold their
    cellular license to Airtouch. Of course Airtouch became part of
    Verizon Wireless.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
     

Welcome to VerizonForums!

Unfortunately you can't reply until you log in or sign up.


Forgot your password?