Without its complete market control, AT&T floundered and attempt to assert authority in other segments of the telecommunication industry. Cell service had been a part of AT&T since 1984. Divestiture upped the importance of AT&T wireless and more focus was brought to bear on this type of service. In the early and mid 1990s, AT&T also invested heavily in cable television; however, falling revenues from long distance service ultimately forced AT&T to sell off its cable TV interests (Dodd, 2005). AT&T suffered because it had been significantly broken apart by the Modified Final Judgment. Additionally, increased competition for long distance service from CAPs and later CLECs cut into the lucrative profits formerly gleaned from long distance subscribers. Without monopolistic control and facing falling revenues, the AT&T of the pre-1984 era was a distant memory by the time the Telecommunications Act of 1996 was signed into law.

             4. Define and describe a RBOC.

             The divestiture process in 1984 was designed to break up AT&T's near monopolistic grip on the telecommunications industry in the United States. This meant, first and foremost, that AT&T's local telephone networks had to be broken up into separately run providers and carriers. RBOCs were the result. Following divestiture, AT&T's 22 local telephone companies were spun off and reorganized. The reorganization process divided the local telephone companies into seven geographic zones in the country. These were called the Regional Bell Operating Companies, or RBOCs for short (Dodd, 2005). As a rule, RBOCs retained some of the same authority they had as direct subsidiaries of AT&T. All were allowed continued use of the Bell logo. This was important for continuity purposes. In addition, each RBOC could sell local and toll service within their geographic zone, though they were not permitted to sell interstate long distance plans to consumers.