AT&T Hits Brakes on UVERSE

[Scott Greczkowski]

Today AT&T Held and Investors relations webcast and make some big announcements which have seriously put on the breaks for much needed fixes and improvements for its AT&T UVERSE Service.

​

Things like being able to watch 2 HD streams in a house has been pushed back again, this time to the second quarter of 2008.

The whole home DVR which was supposed to be introduced soon has been pushed back to the 3rd quarter of 2008.

On screen caller ID has been pushed back to the 4th quarter of 2008.

For an interesting read on this we invite you to check out our friends at UVERSEUSERS.COM and check the following thread which gives you more details from todays call.

UverseUsers.com - (Disappointing) Notes from AT&T Investor Webcast​

 

[rad]

Boy, I sure wish I didn't live in an AT&T served area, this is turning into a big joke. Too bady good old boy Ed cashed out this month and will be leaving someone else to clean up this mess.

 

[rcdallas]

I have a former co-worker that went to go work for them, I had asked about the ability to watch more then 1 hd stream at one time, he thought I was crazy, aparently not. This was when he first was hired in so I still give him credibility.

Seems like they have to re-invent the wheel just to add caller id, the kicker is it's ma-bell itself. Go figure.

The neat thing I did hear about AT&T uverse as far as installation wise, they can use a phone jack, cat 5, rg-59/6, basically any kind of a wire to hook a tv up to.

 

[navychop]

Sounds like an increase in the odds of E* becoming part of Death Star.

 

[Van]

The neat thing I did hear about AT&T uverse as far as installation wise, they can use a phone jack, cat 5, rg-59/6, basically any kind of a wire to hook a tv up to.

Take that with a grain of no salt salt,

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

The neat thing I did hear about AT&T uverse as far as installation wise, they can use a phone jack, cat 5, rg-59/6, basically any kind of a wire to hook a tv up to.

This is true. Although I guess its cheaper for them to run coax from the NID then wiring the house with Cat 5.

I had better quality (and less breakups with the picture) when I switched from COAX to Cat 5.

 

[TuxCoder]

Just a minor suggestion, maybe add the word "improvements" to the end of the subject so it doesn't sound at first (to me anyway) like AT&T is halting the service (temporarily or otherwise)...

 

[datwell]

We really do need to clear up a few things...

We really do need to clear up a few things...

1) The present SouthWestern Bell conglomerate is AT&T in name only

2) Things worked under the old order (AT&T)

3) Verizon's FiOS w/Ivan, Mark, et al in the lead will ultimately win out
(my FiOS internet ROCKS)
"Smarter IS better!"

Just my 2 cents.

--Doug

 

[capt.video]

Today AT&T Held and Investors relations webcast and make some big announcements which have seriously put on the breaks for much needed fixes and improvements for its AT&T UVERSE Service.

Things like being able to watch 2 HD streams in a house has been pushed back again, this time to the second quarter of 2008.​

The whole home DVR which was supposed to be introduced soon has been pushed back to the 3rd quarter of 2008.​

On screen caller ID has been pushed back to the 4th quarter of 2008.​

For an interesting read on this we invite you to check out our friends at UVERSEUSERS.COM and check the following thread which gives you more details from todays call.​

UverseUsers.com - (Disappointing) Notes from AT&T Investor Webcast​

So the message ATTs sending is.. we still expect people to sign up & pay "real money" for their "service"...& now the question remains is how many current users will cancel after their free trial period is over.....its getting to sound like a line in that Neil Young song...."you pay for this & they give you that"

 

[s8ist]

Even though it is still not perfect and it isn't available in my area, I still remain optimistic about the technology. Right now my bills are ridiculous for E*, phone, and DSL internet. AT&T took over, but they are still offering Bellsouth's original Fastaccess service, which is inconsistent in speed and service (with the unfortunate coincidence of also being tiered), and also expensive when you combine taxes and service fees that get slapped on your local phone line (No dry DSL).

Right now with E*, I can't watch HD on my second TV anyway... I'd basically be paying less than I am now, except I'd be getting all premium channels, land line, and DSL! (on one bill too)

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

I still remain optimistic about the technology.

I am too, I feel IPTV is the future of Television.

I just feel AT&T is going about it all wrong.

 

[ocnier]

I agree with you there Scott. You'd thing they would take a que out of the verizon book, but there's too much infrastructure to replace at present. Verizon started small and is spreading slowly (but correctly) with FIOS. That's really the only way to due it.

 

[Brewer4]

I am too, I feel IPTV is the future of Television.

I just feel AT&T is going about it all wrong.

To me there is no doubt its the future as well. I completely agree they are doing the right thing but using the wrong material (copper). I think the Verizon model is better and designed for the future. AT&T's is a short term, slightly less expensive but a dated model. Its a hell of an expense to for an IPTV proof of concept.

 

[WyrTwister]

I agree with you there Scott. You'd thing they would take a que out of the verizon book, but there's too much infrastructure to replace at present. Verizon started small and is spreading slowly (but correctly) with FIOS. That's really the only way to due it.

there's too much infrastructure to replace in a short length of time

my guess is the VRAD & copper is a stepping stone

the copper system was not built in a year or two and it can not be replaced with fiber in a year or two

To my direct knowledge , VRADS have been going in for about 2-1/2 years and no where near finished

imagine how long it is / will take to replace all the copper ?

There are not enough contractors in the nation to do it all , in a short period of time

some of you need a healthy dose of reality

Wyr

 

[rad]

there's too much infrastructure to replace in a short length of time

my guess is the VRAD & copper is a stepping stone

the copper system was not built in a year or two and it can not be replaced with fiber in a year or two

To my direct knowledge , VRADS have been going in for about 2-1/2 years and no where near finished

imagine how long it is / will take to replace all the copper ?

There are not enough contractors in the nation to do it all , in a short period of time

some of you need a healthy dose of reality

Wyr

The reality, as I see it, is that time is passing AT&T by. Maybe 3 or 4 years ago when AT&T was deciding on what system to build it was a good decision. But since then more and more folks are getting one or more HDTV's and DVR's, which require more then one HD stream. Right now, and not for almost another year, will AT&T be able to provide even two concurrent HD streams, which basically makes HD DVR's useless.

And yep, V-rad's have been going up for a couple of years. I've seen V-rad's installed all over Austin for over a year, and we're not schedule to get service turned up until November this year. That's not a good return on investment with all that hardware laying around and not generating any revenue from it. And if this is as you say a stepping stone for a FTTP system how cost effective is that to install all those electronics all over the city that will need to be replaced with optical equipment?

IMHO, history will show this was one of the bigger boners made in the corporate world this decade, ranks right up there with the Edsel.

 

[Brewer4]

Here's the reality, the proof will be in MBA basics 101. Its about break points, market capture and ROI. They chose the model that in the short term will cost less but wont get the market capture or the greater ROI if they had spent more to do it right for the future. So someone sold AT&T on doing it this way because they could prove to their boses and spend less.

But if you really look at this game, its about the long term. If you cant do multiple HD streams, you lost. Maybe not in 2008 or 2009 but beyond. And back to the point of ROI, you wont get your money back because by the time you get to most neighborhoods, you brought the edsel getting 15 mpg when folks want the Hybrid. The Big 3 did the same thing. They took the money and ran when it came to gas guzzling SUV's and trucks rather than put it back in smart fuel efficient vehicles knowing that future day was going to come. They gambled and now look at where they are in relation to Toyota. They lost the game years ago and never even knew it.

Directv, cable, Dish, and Verizon are talking hundreds of HD channels and spending billions but UVerse is spending billions and lucky to do 1 HD stream. 2 sometime next year but we know how that is going to go. Look copper was great and still is but this is about building an infrastucture that is gonna work and make its money back in the future. Its not gonna take 2 or 3 years but 10+. That being said, its fiber not copper thats takes you 5 or 10 years out. They may have plans to later go fiber but they may not have a business that far out. VOIP has made great strides and if you have cable or some other future internet provider, you dont need Telcos.

I see AT&T as GM or Ford and Verizon as Honda and Directv as Toyota. They knew the game 4 years ago was HD and bet on it. So did Echostar. Now both are about to deliver and have a market capture that AT&T aint gonna take away from it. I think Verizon will but I see them more canibalizing Cable rather than sats. Where does that leave AT&T, bleeding red and holding a lot of copper in their hands.

 

[WyrTwister]

The reality, as I see it, is that time is passing AT&T by. Maybe 3 or 4 years ago when AT&T was deciding on what system to build it was a good decision. But since then more and more folks are getting one or more HDTV's and DVR's, which require more then one HD stream. Right now, and not for almost another year, will AT&T be able to provide even two concurrent HD streams, which basically makes HD DVR's useless.

And yep, V-rad's have been going up for a couple of years.




Same here .



I've seen V-rad's installed all over Austin for over a year, and we're not schedule to get service turned up until November this year.




And if it is like here , in November , there will be no where enough VRAD's installed to provide 100% coverage .




That's not a good return on investment with all that hardware laying around and not generating any revenue from it.




Very true , but the marketing people probably predict you must be at a " critical mass " in terms of the numbers of people that lie in areas that can have the service " turned on " ?




And if this is as you say a stepping stone for a FTTP system how cost effective is that to install all those electronics all over the city that will need to be replaced with optical equipment?






I can not tell you if the VRAD's will have to be replaced ? Do not know . But keep in mind , there is fiber at the VRAD . Getting the fiber to the VRAD is an inportant part of the cost . Maybe larger than the electronics in the VRAD ?

But I am wondering if the fiber at the VRAD is a potential hub for them to spider out , at a latter date . Do not know .






IMHO, history will show this was one of the bigger boners made in the corporate world this decade, ranks right up there with the Edsel.






I am not saying you are wrong . But the reality is no one is going to replace all that copper in the time period all you all are talking about . Simply not enough contractors in the nation to do it in that time period .

Wyr

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

I can not tell you if the VRAD's will have to be replaced ? Do not know . But keep in mind , there is fiber at the VRAD . Getting the fiber to the VRAD is an inportant part of the cost . Maybe larger than the electronics in the VRAD ?

Its going to be a big cost going to each and every VRAD and upgrading them to do pair bonding. And still when that happens UVERSE will only be able to offer up to 4 HD streams in a house. We are about 2 years away from seeing them start upgrading to pair bonding.

How much HD demand do you think there will be in two years?

 

[rad]

I can not tell you if the VRAD's will have to be replaced ? Do not know . But keep in mind , there is fiber at the VRAD . Getting the fiber to the VRAD is an inportant part of the cost . Maybe larger than the electronics in the VRAD ?

I am not saying you are wrong . But the reality is no one is going to replace all that copper in the time period all you all are talking about . Simply not enough contractors in the nation to do it in that time period .

Wyr

True, there's fiber going into the VRAD's, and you need the electronics for that. But there's all those line cards in DSLAM's for all those terminations that will be basically useless if/when they migrate to FTTP. Plus as Scott said, there will be an upgrade to the existing hardware to allow for pair bonding when they get around to it.

As for your labor shortage point, does it really matter since AT&T could have probably found contractors if they decided to go with FTTP back when they started this BS, and who knows, they still might be able to find them now. Mute point though since the suites in San Antonio are going to stand by their decision, how will it look to have to tell the stock holders, ah we blew a couple billion bucks on something that folks aren't buying, now we need to spend a bunch more to make it right.

 

[Brewer4]

Keep this in mind too. SNET was bought by SBC which in turn became AT&T. SNET launched a TV service about 8 or 9 years ago that failed miserably. They got some incentives from the state of Connecticut which wanted more cable competition. I think they ended up with 20 or 30,000 subscribers but it was fraught with bad marketing, limited towns and access and just couldn't compete with the cable and sat offerings. Not to say its the same thing this time around but experience has shown Telcos are not good at this. So there are technical issues to address but their track record in offering video is not good.

The reason why there are rollouts in Connecticut is that they are trying to take advantage of the backend improvements SNET made when they tried video years ago. 3rd party companies tried to use the backend lines but there are some court cases now showing AT&T has tried to limit their access and has in turn put them out of business by bogging them down in legal and accessibility.

My opinion is that I want Uverse and AT&T to succeed as competition is always a good thing. I advise companies and analyze things like this all the time and just from what I can gather from public records and my own experience and common sense, this thing is not going well so far and just doesnt look like a promising future.