AT&T disappointed with offers for struggling DirecTV (10 Viewers)

ncted

SatelliteGuys Master
Pub Member / Supporter
Jul 4, 2004
5,091
3,422
Durham, NC
I’m just the opposite. I signed up for it at the Max level which is a really good deal. And at least for some unknown period, I can keep the deal.

And here’s the saddest part of the ATT TV fiasco. It is a great service with good channel selections, a really good app for it, best PQ and Audio and they’ve managed to market it so well they keep losing customers by the droves. This newest twist on their incompetent marketing of it isn’t going to change that IMO.
I actually thought to myself on more than one occasion: "I should try this now, before they change it again." Alas, what I would have wanted to subscribe to (in theory) no longer exists.
 

MitchDeerfield

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Pro
Feb 1, 2016
867
485
Florida
I’m just the opposite. I signed up for it at the Max level which is a really good deal. And at least for some unknown period, I can keep the deal.

And here’s the saddest part of the ATT TV fiasco. It is a great service with good channel selections, a really good app for it, best PQ and Audio and they’ve managed to market it so well they keep losing customers by the droves. This newest twist on their incompetent marketing of it isn’t going to change that IMO.
They were losing way too much money on ATT TV Now. And it was taking too many customers away from their ATT TV and DirecTV premium services.

Now ATT TV will do damage to DirecTV, because of its lower prices and no two-year contract. That is why they are so anxious to part ways with DTV.
 

slice1900

SatelliteGuys Pro
Feb 14, 2015
1,400
603
IA
They think that AT&T TV is the future of the company. They spend a lot of money advertising that service, but very little for DirecTV, which they are desperately trying to sell.

It is pretty clear that HBO Max is the future of TV for AT&T, and AT&T TV is no different than Directv - just a different way to deliver MVPD.
 
  • Like
Reactions: reddice

lparsons21

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 17, 2009
9,696
7,735
Herrin, IL 62948
How does it do on data. I assume you would be hitting caps fairly quick.

Actually not too bad. I have a 2TB cap and haven’t hit that yet. If I stay away from 4K streams I’m usually just under 1TB of use, with the 4K streams I actually end up doing I’ve hit 1.3Tb on occasion.
 

lparsons21

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 17, 2009
9,696
7,735
Herrin, IL 62948
They were losing way too much money on ATT TV Now. And it was taking too many customers away from their ATT TV and DirecTV premium services.

Now ATT TV will do damage to DirecTV, because of its lower prices and no two-year contract. That is why they are so anxious to part ways with DTV.

There are no indications yet on how they’ve done with their ATT TV contract streaming service as there isn’t anyone that has hit the 1st year anniversary when the price jumps up. IMO, I suspect there will be lots of cancellations when that finally occurs. As the highest price live streaming service out there I doubt it will survive in its present form.
 

Juan

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Sep 14, 2003
26,229
5,729
Moscow Russia
Based on your linked article and looking a ATT TV’s website, it has a couple of things wrong.

ATT TV non-contract service does not include the ATT TV device but you can buy one. That is different from the previous ATT TV Now service where you couldn’t buy one at all nor did one come with the service.

ATT TV has both a contract 2-year service and a non-contract service with differing prices for the subscription levels offered. The non-contract has 3 levels available, the contract has more levels, notable Total and Premier. The contract service comes with one ATT TV box for ‘well qualified subscribers’ and also offers additional ones with 0% financing or upfront payment.

IMO, ATT TV insists on offering the most confusing mish-mash presentation compared to any other streaming service. This has been true since day one and continues unabated.

Note that the current contract offering does not include the $200 rebate of just yesterday therefore it is also a cost increase without saying so. :(
Thats left over from the days they were a monopoly in the phone biz..take it or leave it mentality
 

NashGuy

SatelliteGuys Pro
Mar 24, 2009
782
337
Nashville, TN USA
l thought it was a bit odd when I read the other day that AT&T TV Now is essentially being folded into the main AT&T TV product, as a contract-free lower-featured version of the service. It's been pretty obvious for awhile now that AT&T TV Now was fading away (no marketing, dwindling subs) but management was saying in the first half of 2020 that it would eventually be absorbed into HBO Max, as a live TV add-on to the core SVOD (similar to the way Hulu works). That new service tier was supposedly going to arrive on HBO Max in 2021.

AT&T strategy seems to be in a constant state of flux, and who can really make heads or tales of it anymore. But a recent piece posted on another thread here said that a potential buyer for DirecTV wants to acquire all of AT&T's MVPD services, including Uverse TV and AT&T TV too. If that's true, then it makes sense to collapse AT&T TV Now into AT&T TV rather than into HBO Max (which AT&T is holding onto and focused on as their main video play for the 2020s as opposed to any MVPD).

I noticed that AT&T's newer, skinnier set of channel packages (Plus and Max) are no longer being sold anywhere. They were the main set pushed on AT&T TV Now but were also available as unadvertised options on AT&T TV and DirecTV. Not any more. (Oddly, I also noticed that the legacy Xtra package is now available only on AT&T TV with a 2-yr contract. It's not available without a contract nor is it being sold at all any more on DirecTV.)

Who knows, maybe we'll see them bring Plus and Max back as add-ons for HBO Max in a few months. Or maybe they're permanently dead and AT&T will soon be getting out of the MVPD business forever.
 

Juan

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Sep 14, 2003
26,229
5,729
Moscow Russia
Att is caught between being a traditional satellite/ cable company and a stand alone streaming app(hulu)...trying to use traditional csble packages in a new fangled streaming environment..they should just buy a successful streaming company and be done with it
 

lparsons21

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 17, 2009
9,696
7,735
Herrin, IL 62948
Att is caught between being a traditional satellite/ cable company and a stand alone streaming app(hulu)...trying to use traditional csble packages in a new fangled streaming environment..they should just buy a successful streaming company and be done with it

I almost agree with you. But then I think ATT may have just been too early when pulling the trigger on bringing a premium level service to a market that was more interested in the cost savings and that was willing to give up some things to accomplish that.

But now, with the live streamers with a lot of channels and a wide range of content having their prices up to around the $70/month mark while not appreciably making their service better, may be the right time. We’ll know going forward.

Frankly I think the mistake they made with this contract vs non-contract version is making the included DVR space too small for the non-contract service. If they had chosen 50 hours vice the 20 hours it would be a useable amount and with the expanded DVR option would allow those that need more to pay for it. 20 hours just won’t cut it for most IMO.
 

ncted

SatelliteGuys Master
Pub Member / Supporter
Jul 4, 2004
5,091
3,422
Durham, NC
Att is caught between being a traditional satellite/ cable company and a stand alone streaming app(hulu)...trying to use traditional csble packages in a new fangled streaming environment..they should just buy a successful streaming company and be done with it
Technically, they did: Warner Media had HBONow at the time of the acquisition.
 

NashGuy

SatelliteGuys Pro
Mar 24, 2009
782
337
Nashville, TN USA
Frankly I think the mistake they made with this contract vs non-contract version is making the included DVR space too small for the non-contract service. If they had chosen 50 hours vice the 20 hours it would be a useable amount and with the expanded DVR option would allow those that need more to pay for it. 20 hours just won’t cut it for most IMO.

AT&T and Comcast are direct competitors in lots of markets for both broadband and cable TV. Tracking both over the past few years, it seems pretty clear that they take note of each others' pricing and policies.

And with this new system in place for AT&T TV, they're even closer to how Comcast's Xfinity TV is structured: your TV package comes without any boxes -- you can use their app on your devices for no cost, or you can rent their X1 boxes for $5/mo each. The Xfinity TV service comes with HD channels and 20 hours of cloud DVR included but you can increase your hours of cloud DVR storage for an additional fee (150 hours for $10/mo; in some markets, I think they also offer 300 hours for $20/mo). Additionally, you can score a discount if you take an optional 1 or 2-yr contract for the service when you sign up.

AT&T TV is better in that you purchase their boxes outright, so that after 24 months, you're no longer paying the $5/mo fee, whereas Comcast just rents them to you. Also, the extra $10/mo takes you from 20 to 500 hours of cloud DVR storage on AT&T TV, not just 150 hours, although on AT&T TV your recordings expire after 90 days while they last a year with Comcast. (But AT&T TV allows for unlimited simultaneous recordings and Comcast limits you to 6, I think.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: comp9

nelson61

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Dec 8, 2007
6,738
5,636
Where it's Warm
quarterly report is out. Again ugly

1611779628298.png
 

CSM

SatelliteGuys Pro
Aug 28, 2015
1,050
228
Chesterfield, MO
HBO/Max did a lot better than DTV and UVerseTV. AT&T TV not AT&T TV Now added a little bit. This makes me wonder if AT&T wants to get down to just HBO/Max?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

  • Juan
  • CSM
Top