8 ms·
Having already built the infrastructure, it's odd that they would just abandon all of those users who cannot use DirecTV either because they're in a multi-unit
by DrScump 11y ago
Having already built the infrastructure, it's odd that they would just abandon all of those users who cannot use DirecTV either because they're in a multi-unit dwelling or otherwise lack clear view to their satellite slots.
- jdmichal 11y agoFrom the article: > "To realize the many benefits of our DirecTV acquisition, we are leading our video marketing approach with DirecTV," said Brad Burns, an AT&T spokesman. "However, our first priority is to listen to our customers and meet their needs, and if we determine a customer will be better served with the U-verse product, we offer attractive and compelling options."
- jldugger 11y agoNot only do I not know what that means, I'm pretty sure the person who said it doesn't either.
- jdmichal 11y agoI don't understand the confusion. It reads pretty straight-forward: They will lead with DirecTV, but if that's not going to work for the customer, they will then offer U-verse.
- jldugger 11y agoThe customer should be the one determining that, not AT&T, right? Because I'm pretty sure what that blockquote _means_ is "we'll look at which service would bill them more, and eliminate the less profitable option for them."
- bloaf 11y agoIts not clear from the article what they're doing for internet access going forward. It sounds like the may actually be increasing the bandwidth, since they no longer have to deliver TV channels on the same line as the internet. What really surprised me, though, was that DirecTV was actually growing. I thought there was a trend towards watching TV shows via the internet and away from traditional cable/satellite.
- dragonwriter 11y ago> What really surprised me, though, was that DirecTV was actually growing. I thought there was a trend towards watching TV shows via the internet and away from traditional cable/satellite. DirecTV is probably largely cannibalizing other traditional cable/satellite (AT&T has been very heavily promoting it and offering big incentives since they purchased it); there's nothing inconsistent between DirecTV growing while the overall cable/satellite market is shrinking.
- deelowe 11y agoI think DirectTV is stealing dish customers. I doubt Dish's consumer offering will be around much longer. It's got so bad that they are going to be releasing a set top that supports netflix this year.
- rhino369 11y agoIt's probably just cheaper to lose those customers than run two separate TV distribution networks. Plus I bet the future of satellite TV is "satellite" over the internet. I had DirectTV's NFL sunday ticket this past season. SlingTV is already doing it. IF I were DirectTV I'd get into that game yesterday.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- jeffdubin 11y agoU-Verse TV is basically just that -- except it's only over AT&T's Internet. They run it like a cable TV system, but it's really just IPTV. But what happens if they lose a satellite or two? Haven't we been told that it's only a matter of time before an errant satellite crashes into another, causing widespread damage via domino effect? I bet they'll dearly miss their FTTH subscribers at that point!
- labster 11y agoYou're thinking of Kessler syndrome: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome No, we haven't been told it's inevitable, as it is highly evitable with tracking and controlled descent. Eventually we'll be able to shoot down space junk with frickin laser beams ("ablate" it) and it will be a complete nonissue.
- gscott 11y agoI do not like the Direct TV DVR interface. The DVR interface for U-Verse is much better.