AT&T TV (2 Viewers)

Register Today to see less ads! It's Free!

ty1273

On Vacation
Jul 19, 2020
51
30
Upper Midwest
Problem with Directv streaming, YouTube TV, etc. is they don't carry all the local channels in the market. At minimum maybe PBS, CW, or MyNetwork may be carried but it keeps out the indie stations. Some have local sports coverage on days for OTA viewers and not the RSN's. WGN Chicago has the Chicago Fire FC games and none of the streamers carry WGN9. Directv should stream the locals they offer over satellite.
 
Register Today to see less ads! It's Free!

NashGuy

SatelliteGuys Pro
Mar 24, 2009
920
434
Nashville, TN USA
Problem with Directv streaming, YouTube TV, etc. is they don't carry all the local channels in the market. At minimum maybe PBS, CW, or MyNetwork may be carried but it keeps out the indie stations. Some have local sports coverage on days for OTA viewers and not the RSN's. WGN Chicago has the Chicago Fire FC games and none of the streamers carry WGN9. Directv should stream the locals they offer over satellite.
Yeah, AT&T TV/DirecTV Stream currently still lacks a good number of locals that are carried on DirecTV satellite. They've got affiliates of the big 4 (ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox) pretty well nailed down but lots of smaller stations available on satellite are missing.

Now that the streaming service is explicitly being branded as the streaming version of DirecTV, maybe we'll see those channel line-up differences go away. First thing they need to do is add PBS locals, which are completely missing from the service. And they also need to add lots of stations owned by Nexstar, whose CW and MyNetwork stations, as well as their WGN Chicago, are missing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zookster

ncted

SatelliteGuys Master
Pub Member / Supporter
Jul 4, 2004
5,262
3,558
Durham, NC
Yeah, AT&T TV/DirecTV Stream currently still lacks a good number of locals that are carried on DirecTV satellite. They've got affiliates of the big 4 (ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox) pretty well nailed down but lots of smaller stations available on satellite are missing.

Now that the streaming service is explicitly being branded as the streaming version of DirecTV, maybe we'll see those channel line-up differences go away. First thing they need to do is add PBS locals, which are completely missing from the service. And they also need to add lots of stations owned by Nexstar, whose CW and MyNetwork stations, as well as their WGN Chicago, are missing.
A friend at WUNC was talking about how they were not happy with the YTTV deal. It ended up costing them a lot of time and money to get it setup. If DirecTV Stream is asking the same thing, they might be getting push back from the stations.
 

Zookster

SatelliteGuys Pro
Dec 19, 2004
4,152
916
Here and Now
A friend at WUNC was talking about how they were not happy with the YTTV deal. It ended up costing them a lot of time and money to get it setup. If DirecTV Stream is asking the same thing, they might be getting push back from the stations.
At the time, I read that once the stations have the necessary equipment to provide YTTV a live broadcast stream, it could be used by other live TV streaming services.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NashGuy

NashGuy

SatelliteGuys Pro
Mar 24, 2009
920
434
Nashville, TN USA
A friend at WUNC was talking about how they were not happy with the YTTV deal. It ended up costing them a lot of time and money to get it setup. If DirecTV Stream is asking the same thing, they might be getting push back from the stations.

At the time, I read that once the stations have the necessary equipment to provide YTTV a live broadcast stream, it could be used by other live TV streaming services.

Yeah. There was a whole mess of legal/licensing stuff that PBS, their member stations, and the various content owners had to work through before they could be live streamed. And then there were the technical logistics of stations uplinking to provide a live stream. I'm sure that required some up-front costs.

But notice that it was very soon after PBS stations joined YTTV that we saw so many of them offer live streams through the national PBS website and app, for free. At this point, I can't imagine that there would be much, if any, incremental cost in terms of time or money for a PBS station that's already providing a live stream to YTTV and/or the PBS app to extend their feed to other vMVPDs such as DTV Stream. Just a matter of striking the carriage deals. And DTV satellite and Uverse TV already have carriage agreements in place with all those stations anyhow.

So it's hard to see what the hold-up is. I predicted we'd see PBS get added to AT&T TV last year after it officially launched nationwide in March. Here we are over 16 months later and still no PBS. I'm wondering if maybe YTTV negotiated a deal to be their exclusive vMVPD partner for a certain amount of time after adding them back in Feb. 2020, which is precluding them from striking deals (and getting paid by) AT&T TV, Hulu Live, FuboTV, etc. Maybe your friend at WUNC would know.

EDIT: Actually, I don't know if local stations even need to have a special IP-based "streaming" uplink in place for AT&T TV. Doesn't that system just take whatever master feed is already being provided for DTV satellite (probably a high-bitrate MPEG-2 transport stream in 1080i or 720p) and then do a separate encoding for AT&T TV (which obviously never beams out to space but instead just streams out from their servers to the end user in 1080p or 720p H.264)? If that's true, then there's ZERO additional work or accommodations that need to be made by local stations -- PBS or otherwise -- to get added to AT&T TV if they're already carried on DTV. It would simply be a matter of striking a carriage agreement and DTV ingesting the master feed into their OTT distribution system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zookster

Zookster

SatelliteGuys Pro
Dec 19, 2004
4,152
916
Here and Now
I don't have my live local CW on AT&T TV either, though YouTube TV carries it. In San Diego, CW is a substation of the CBS affiliate, which recently bought it. I'm not sure DirecTV carries it (I assume they do), though I know for a time Dish Network couldn't be bothered with including it after the station ownership changed a few years ago.

It makes me think that with AT&T TV, it's a matter of tasking people to do the legwork to sign up these less in-demand local stations (outside the big 4 networks that carry major sports). And if there isn't a huge demand from customers, why bother? Not to mention, you can get almost everything for free anyway (on demand on a limited time basis) from PBS and CW via their respective apps. (When I sign in with a free account, I can get local PBS content as well.)

Fortunately, my CBS affiliate (the local news I mostly watch) recently launched a news app for Roku, which includes its live news broadcasts that air on CW (same news team/anchors at different times). I actually can't get CBS/CW via an indoor antenna, though I live in the middle of the city less than 10 miles from the tower and can pick up the ABC affiliate from that same tower. *sigh*
 

NashGuy

SatelliteGuys Pro
Mar 24, 2009
920
434
Nashville, TN USA
I don't have my live local CW on AT&T TV either, though YouTube TV carries it. In San Diego, CW is a substation of the CBS affiliate, which recently bought it. I'm not sure DirecTV carries it (I assume they do), though I know for a time Dish Network couldn't be bothered with including it after the station ownership changed a few years ago.

It makes me think that with AT&T TV, it's a matter of tasking people to do the legwork to sign up these less in-demand local stations (outside the big 4 networks that carry major sports). And if there isn't a huge demand from customers, why bother? Not to mention, you can get almost everything for free anyway (on demand on a limited time basis) from PBS and CW via their respective apps. (When I sign in with a free account, I can get local PBS content as well.)

Fortunately, my CBS affiliate (the local news I mostly watch) recently launched a news app for Roku, which includes its live news broadcasts that air on CW (same news team/anchors at different times). I actually can't get CBS/CW via an indoor antenna, though I live in the middle of the city less than 10 miles from the tower and can pick up the ABC affiliate from that same tower. *sigh*

Hmm. I thought the only major local station owner with whom AT&T TV lacked a carriage agreement for their CW and MyNetwork TV affiliates was Nexstar. That accounts for most of those two networks' missing locals in major markets like NYC, LA, Philly, Dallas, Houston, Washington, etc.

In San Diego, KFMB is the local affiliate for CBS, The CW, and MyNetwork TV. They're owned by Tegna. Looks like none of Tegna's local CW or MyNetwork TV stations are carried on AT&T TV, even though their big 4 affiliates are. So that puts them in the same boat as Nexstar. It's just that Nexstar has *way* more CW and MyNetwork TV affiliates than does Tegna, especially in big markets. So I guess there are at least two carriage contracts that DirecTV Stream needs to ink to fill in all their holes in terms of missing CW and MyNetwork TV locals. (Here in Nashville, our local CW and MyNetwork stations, as well as our local Fox, are owned by Sinclair. All of them are on AT&T TV.)

As for picking up KFMB via OTA antenna, well, my first thought was that it's on VHF while the ABC station on the same tower is on UHF. But actually, they're both on VHF; KFMB is on 8 and KFTV is on 10 (although it's also simulcast on UHF 20 -- is that what you're actually getting?). And both 8 and 10 broadcast with similar power. It would be pretty odd if a given antenna could get VHF 10 but not VHF 8. But it might require moving it around the room some (unless it's a bigger antenna).

At any rate, if DirecTV Stream is going to price itself a bit more expensive than competing options like YTTV, and wants to be perceived as a no-compromise premium cable TV service that happens to be delivered over the internet, then they shouldn't force their customers to use an antenna or separate apps to watch popular local stations that are typically included in cable/satellite TV packages. They need to carry the local ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, PBS, CW and MyNetwork TV station in every market across the country, just as DTV satellite has done for years. And like DTV, they should carry a national feed of ION, plus a few of the retro diginets like MeTV, Get TV, Cozi TV, Comet, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zookster

Juan

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Sep 14, 2003
27,449
6,244
Moscow Russia
Yeah. There was a whole mess of legal/licensing stuff that PBS, their member stations, and the various content owners had to work through before they could be live streamed. And then there were the technical logistics of stations uplinking to provide a live stream. I'm sure that required some up-front costs.

But notice that it was very soon after PBS stations joined YTTV that we saw so many of them offer live streams through the national PBS website and app, for free. At this point, I can't imagine that there would be much, if any, incremental cost in terms of time or money for a PBS station that's already providing a live stream to YTTV and/or the PBS app to extend their feed to other vMVPDs such as DTV Stream. Just a matter of striking the carriage deals. And DTV satellite and Uverse TV already have carriage agreements in place with all those stations anyhow.

So it's hard to see what the hold-up is. I predicted we'd see PBS get added to AT&T TV last year after it officially launched nationwide in March. Here we are over 16 months later and still no PBS. I'm wondering if maybe YTTV negotiated a deal to be their exclusive vMVPD partner for a certain amount of time after adding them back in Feb. 2020, which is precluding them from striking deals (and getting paid by) AT&T TV, Hulu Live, FuboTV, etc. Maybe your friend at WUNC would know.

EDIT: Actually, I don't know if local stations even need to have a special IP-based "streaming" uplink in place for AT&T TV. Doesn't that system just take whatever master feed is already being provided for DTV satellite (probably a high-bitrate MPEG-2 transport stream in 1080i or 720p) and then do a separate encoding for AT&T TV (which obviously never beams out to space but instead just streams out from their servers to the end user in 1080p or 720p H.264)? If that's true, then there's ZERO additional work or accommodations that need to be made by local stations -- PBS or otherwise -- to get added to AT&T TV if they're already carried on DTV. It would simply be a matter of striking a carriage agreement and DTV ingesting the master feed into their OTT distribution system.
Locast seems to be able to stream local stations with no special equipment needed by the station...one wonders why directv can't do the same thing..capture the signal from fiber or ota and convert it themselves..with the stations permission of course
 

NashGuy

SatelliteGuys Pro
Mar 24, 2009
920
434
Nashville, TN USA
Locast seems to be able to stream local stations with no special equipment needed by the station...one wonders why directv can't do the same thing..capture the signal from fiber or ota and convert it themselves..with the stations permission of course
That's the main issue -- the station's permission, which requires payment from DTV Stream for the right to carry that station as part of their channel packages.

In the case of Locast, they're just using an OTA antenna to tune in local stations and then they convert the signal to streaming. They don't have those stations' permission and they're not paying them anything. But they're getting away with it (so far) because Locast is a non-profit and they don't require payment from viewers to access those streams.

IIRC, I think Locast is relying on a point in the law governing OTA TV transmission which was originally intended to allow non-profits to erect repeater towers, like the sort used in rural areas out west, that "catch" the OTA signal from the station's own tower, at the edge of its coverage area, and then amplify the signal and beam it back out on a different frequency, thereby expanding the area in which residents can receive the station. That can be done without permission from the originating station. Locast is arguing that they're essentially doing the same thing, except their "repeater tower" is the internet.
 
Register Today to see less ads! It's Free!
Register Today to see less ads! It's Free!

Users who are viewing this thread

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

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 2)

Latest posts

Top