AT&T exploring Deal to sell off DIRECTV.

Nope...they operated one...it would be really stupid and unprofitable to install your own fiber when thousands of miles of fiber are already installed and ready to lease...as far as I know..directv never employed any fiber maintenance crews
About 7 or so years ago the upper management of DirecTV told me DirecTV "owned" the largest privately owned fiber ring around the entire US and showed me the map with some other documents. It was huge and branched all over the place. If DirecTV proprietary documents showed this map with these statements, then what else could it be?
 
About 7 or so years ago the upper management of DirecTV told me DirecTV "owned" the largest privately owned fiber ring around the entire US and showed me the map with some other documents. It was huge and branched all over the place. If DirecTV proprietary documents showed this map with these statements, then what else could it be?
Leased
 
  • Like
Reactions: MitchDeerfield
Let me splain...its very common for companies to own a network but lease the fiber...directv probably owned all the routers , switches and other gizmos..then just leased fiber from level 3 or somebody like that ..i don't think directv had a nationwide fiber dispatch center...probably just a noc to monitor the network...and then let the fiber vendor deal with fibercuts etc etc etc
 
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell
About 7 or so years ago the upper management of DirecTV told me DirecTV "owned" the largest privately owned fiber ring around the entire US and showed me the map with some other documents. It was huge and branched all over the place. If DirecTV proprietary documents showed this map with these statements, then what else could it be?

I've seen mention of this elsewhere in public sources, though without the map.

Maybe they owned it, but paid someone to manage the physical repair/maintenance of the fiber. If they were only leasing it one would assume they broke the lease once AT&T took over, since AT&T wouldn't need to lease fiber from third parties.
 
When ATT made the deal to acquire DirecTV, there was talk of what they might do with the DirecTV "owned" fiber ring, as ATT is in the fiber business. We all joked that ATT would screw it up since there is a big difference between cell phone and other traffic over fiber compared to broadcast video. I never heard mention of who maintained the fiber circuits but I was told DTV owned it all.

I've seen mention of this elsewhere in public sources, though without the map.

Maybe they owned it, but paid someone to manage the physical repair/maintenance of the fiber. If they were only leasing it one would assume they broke the lease once AT&T took over, since AT&T wouldn't need to lease fiber from third parties.
 
D10 is not needed, T15 could take over its national transponders at any time and it hasn't served spot beams for years.

D8 was launched well before these satellites and when they renewed its license Directv reported to the FCC it has fuel life until 2034.

None of those satellites are beyond their design life, perhaps you ought to review the math you used to add "15" to the year they were launched. When Directv has to renew their licenses hopefully they will include something in the request about their fuel life, but saying that D11 and beyond will last until 2030 is only assuming about 5 or 6 years beyond the design life.

Pretty much everything lasts longer than 5 or 6 years beyond the design life. Hell, D4S and D5 were launched almost 20 years ago with a 10 year design life and they are still up there (while D5 currently isn't being used for anything since the 110 location has been phased out, I think D4S still serves some of the MPEG2 SD spot beams at 101)
Wasn’t D4S de-orbited a year ago?
 
Wasn’t D4S de-orbited a year ago?

Maybe it did, I can't recall. AFAIK D4S and D9S have the same spot beam capability, so they could have moved its spot beams over to D9S since once T16 took over its CONUS transponders it didn't have much to do.

The only thing D9S currently provides are MPEG2 SD spot beams for locals on 101, so it doesn't matter for the long term future of Directv.
 
I see a conflict of interest in Apollo bidding. Apollo also owns numerous local TV stations that it recently agreed to terms with Dish about carriage. That means they have the potential to cut a better deal with themselves should they get ownership of DTV giving themselves an unfair advantage or even worse, denying Dish access at all (ala HBO) to those locals. I wonder how the FCC might view that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AZ. and Jimbo
I see a conflict of interest in Apollo bidding. Apollo also owns numerous local TV stations that it recently agreed to terms with Dish about carriage. That means they have the potential to cut a better deal with themselves should they get ownership of DTV giving themselves an unfair advantage or even worse, denying Dish access at all (ala HBO) to those locals. I wonder how the FCC might view that.

They won't care, that's no different than Comcast who also owns NBC which owns the biggest NBC affiliates like those in NYC and LA.
 
One thing I don't understand why wouldn't AT&T want to sell all DTV and totally get it of their books to pay down their debt? Especially if they think streaming is the future? Would AT&T still be able to get a profit off of it if another company owns DTV? How can AT&T share the customer base to get the profits and channel negotiations?
 
One thing I don't understand why wouldn't AT&T want to sell all DTV and totally get it of their books to pay down their debt? Especially if they think streaming is the future? Would AT&T still be able to get a profit off of it if another company owns DTV? How can AT&T share the customer base to get the profits and channel negotiations?
Remember, they may be losing subs left and right, they are STILL MAKING MIONEY for them.
 
One thing I don't understand why wouldn't AT&T want to sell all DTV and totally get it of their books to pay down their debt? Especially if they think streaming is the future? Would AT&T still be able to get a profit off of it if another company owns DTV? How can AT&T share the customer base to get the profits and channel negotiations?
With D* being cash-flow positive, I suspect that there is a balance point where AT&T can get a nice lump sum to pay down some debt while still enjoying the profit from owning a stake in D*.
 
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell
***

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 3)