It is very relavent...its not AT&T today..its at&t
Sent from my SM-G950U using the SatelliteGuys app!
Sent from my SM-G950U using the SatelliteGuys app!
But again you've dragged us back a few dozen years in history (well before today's AT&T was established) and that's not particularly relevant to the topic of the thread. Asserting that a company that is taken over comes with the entirety of its outstanding attributes (or undesirable baggage) isn't sound reasoning.
For those who have lost sight of it, the topic of the thread is that AT&T either mislead regulators about what they were going to do with the content that they acquired as part of their Warner Media acquisition or casually making liars of themselves by doing what they assured that they were not going to do. ABC, Comcast, Disney or NBC have nothing to do with it outside of them being competitors in one form or another.
But again you've dragged us back a few dozen years in history (well before today's AT&T was established) and that's not particularly relevant to the topic of the thread. Asserting that a company that is taken over comes with the entirety of its outstanding attributes (or undesirable baggage) isn't sound reasoning.
For those who have lost sight of it, the topic of the thread is that AT&T either mislead regulators about what they were going to do with the content that they acquired as part of their Warner Media acquisition or casually making liars of themselves by doing what they assured that they were not going to do. ABC, Comcast, Disney or NBC have nothing to do with it outside of them being competitors in one form or another.
[/QUOT
they all share the same people on the board of directors..thats one connection..the system is rigged..no matter what platform or what internet provider you have..you will pay for content.. nobody is really competingBut again you've dragged us back a few dozen years in history (well before today's AT&T was established) and that's not particularly relevant to the topic of the thread. Asserting that a company that is taken over comes with the entirety of its outstanding attributes (or undesirable baggage) isn't sound reasoning.
For those who have lost sight of it, the topic of the thread is that AT&T either mislead regulators about what they were going to do with the content that they acquired as part of their Warner Media acquisition or casually making liars of themselves by doing what they assured that they were not going to do. ABC, Comcast, Disney or NBC have nothing to do with it outside of them being competitors in one form or another.
As I noted in post #32, it is AT&T (all caps) once again. Visit their website and see the style they're using there.It is very relavent...its not AT&T today..its at&t
There is not a single board member common to Comcast, Disney or AT&T.they all share the same people on the board of directors..thats one connection..the system is rigged..no matter what platform or what internet provider you have..you will pay for content.. nobody is really competing
There is not a single board member common to Comcast, Disney or AT&T.
The shareholders, whether institutional or individual, don't get to make business decisions.Look at the Institutional Shareholders
That's not what you're going to find in a TESS search of the USPTO database today. The lower case logo was abandoned around 2016 for just the globe.
View attachment 143294
View attachment 143296
Subsequently they've added back the AT&T
View attachment 143297
The shareholders, whether institutional or individual, don't get to make business decisions.
So you see large shareholders participating in board meetings and making operational decisions? I'm pretty sure they get the same proxies that I do; just a lot more shares involved.Hilarious
So you see large shareholders participating in board meetings and making operational decisions? I'm pretty sure they get the same proxies that I do; just a lot more shares involved.
If you've ever voted a proxy, you'll recall that the directors are a for, against or abstain thing just like all of the other issues on the proxy. The shareholders don't choose the names that are going to appear on the proxy. In the case of AT&T, those names are chosen by the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee. Shareholders may move to have a vote to have a particular director removed but that's not the same as picking the lot.They name the board members...as in elect them
This thread has gone off the rails. I'm out.
If you've ever voted a proxy, you'll recall that the directors are a for, against or abstain thing just like all of the other issues on the proxy. The shareholders don't choose the names that are going to appear on the proxy. In the case of AT&T, those names are chosen by the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee. Shareholders may move to have a vote to have a particular director removed but that's not the same as picking the lot.
You've also implied another idea that isn't true: that the Board of Directors makes business decisions. The Board of Directors is a representative of the shareholders. They establish general policies and goals for the company rather than direct the day-to-day activities of the company. Management (CEO, CFO, CTO, COO, etc) is who manages the execution of the business, not the Board of Directors.
Yet no institutional shareholder is part of the management team that executes the daily operations of the company. Your arguments are baseless.The institutiond ARE the shareholders by a large majority
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?