It has definitely not been a smooth ride for AT&T lately. The bid for T-Mobile and the ruined relationship with U.S. regulators have given executives a hard time lately and issued worries that the bad decision making will continue. Perhaps to this extent AT&T has decided to make some executive changes, but kept Ralph de la Vega as new Chief Strategy Officer.
Ralph de la Vega is the president and CEO of AT&T Mobility, a title that has been extended at the end of this month, so he will continue to serve in those two roles for AT&T Mobility and Consumer Markets. The extension of the title implies de la Vega will focus on AT&T’s mobile markets, including smartphone services, which remains the strongest growth factor for the company.
Ralph de la Vega wasn’t the only change in the executive chain that AT&T announced on its quarterly earnings this week. John Stankey was named on the newly created position of Group President and Chief Strategy Officer. He’s been with the company for 27 years, but his new status in the company will be more important now.
The new ranking means he will “be responsible for developing the roadmap to maximize future growth opportunities”. It includes “corporate development, addressing long-term wireless capacity needs, capital allocation strategies and identifying the best strategic paths for low-growth and non-strategic assets”.
Andy Geisse is also among the newly appointed executives. Geisse was named Senior Executive Vice President for AT&T Business and Home Solutions. He will continue to serve the business segment, but will also lead the Home Solutions team focused on U-verse®.
AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson said: “We have an outstanding group of the industry’s best technology executives focused on the biggest growth opportunities. We’ll continue to deliver for our customers, owners and the communities we serve”.
In 2011, in December, soon after the U.S. regulators disapproved of the T-Mobile bid, Stephenson said that although the AT&T Mobile transaction was expected to “receive careful, considered and fair analysis”, he felt that “the preliminary FCC Staff Analysis offers none of that. The document is so obviously one-sided that any fair-minded person reading it is left with the clear impression that it is an advocacy piece, and not considered analysis”.