AT&T To Buy DIRECTV for $67 Billion

Status
Please reply by conversation.
I am sure there will be more lawsuits too... The lawyers will make some cash and the plaintiffs (i.e. stockholders) will get nothing of value...
 
The NFL Sunday Ticket package is only available to DirecTV subscribers, meaning millions of fans who don’t have the ability to put a satellite dish on their roofs are shut out. But that could change if AT&T succeeds in its attempt to purchase DirecTV. The Wall Street Journal reports that AT&T is floating the possibility of offering Sunday Ticket to all its wireless phone customers. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...ireless-customers/?ocid=Yahoo&partner=ya5nbcs
 
So basically Directv likes partnering with AT&T because of it's bundle service and AT&T likes Directv for it's Sunday Ticket.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Tapatalk
 
The NFL Sunday Ticket package is only available to DirecTV subscribers, meaning millions of fans who don’t have the ability to put a satellite dish on their roofs are shut out. But that could change if AT&T succeeds in its attempt to purchase DirecTV. The Wall Street Journal reports that AT&T is floating the possibility of offering Sunday Ticket to all its wireless phone customers. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...ireless-customers/?ocid=Yahoo&partner=ya5nbcs
It can also offer NFL ST to its U-Verse TV customers. It can pretty much,over time,align Directv content with U-Verse TV content so that it would be one & the same.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stargazer
AT&T and DirecTV Plead for Merger, Promising New and Improved Broadband, Video and Wireless Bundles http://blogs.barrons.com/techtrader...d-wireless-bundles/?mod=yahoobarrons&ru=yahoo AT&T defends DirecTV deal to US regulators http://www.cnbc.com/id/101753319 AT&T makes case for $48.5 billion merger with DirecTV....In statement to FCC, firm says without deal neither company can compete against rival cable giants http://www.cnet.com/news/at-t-makes-case-for-48-5-billion-merger-with-directv/ AT&T, DirecTV merger could make it harder to cut the cord http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-merger-could-make-it-harder-to-cut-the-cord/
 
Translation U-Verse is a failure because it does not generate near enough money compared to wireless...
IF you read the story, thats NOT at all what it said.

You'd be nuts to expect a limited footprint of U Verse TV to make as much as a Nationwide Wireless Cell service.
 
IF you read the story, thats NOT at all what it said.

You'd be nuts to expect a limited footprint of U Verse TV to make as much as a Nationwide Wireless Cell service.
"AT&T has world-class wireline and wireless broadband facilities, but its video service, which is available in only a minority of customer locations within AT&T’s 22-state incumbent local exchange carrier ('ILEC') region, is uneconomic and not fully competitive with cable providers," the company said.

Note that if AT&T wanted they could have U-Verse in 22 states covering a huge swatch of customers:

Although AT&T lags behind Comcast in Internet and video subscribers, it has double Comcast's overall revenue. AT&T made $128.8 billion in revenue last year compared to Comcast's $64.7 billion. Left unsaid is that AT&T bears responsibility for making U-verse available only in "a minority of customer locations," by choosing to slow down and limit its fiber deployment

They stopped building out U-Verse because they make more money by putting the money into the wireless side of their business.
 
Translation U-Verse is a failure because it does not generate near enough money compared to wireless...
It's a failure because of the technology they used. vDSL which is DSL over standard twisted pair copper cables.

This offered no expand ability. In addition in May areas AT&t's copper network is in poor shape.

If they would have followed Verizon Fios lead and went fiber to the home they would be on much better shape now.


Posted Via The FREE SatelliteGuys Reader App!
 
  • Like
Reactions: mike123abc
Gotta love how every article bashes AT&T, but they all would love to be in thier shoes.

AT&T is well known as a stock that makes money for its shareholders. It has done so in the last 15 years by under investing in its land line business and using it as a cash cow to finance the wireless division and pay great dividends. They even tried under investing in the wireless business and had a disaster on their hands when the iPhone overloaded their network. They were forced to put money a lot more money into the wireless business to salvage it. There is a good reason they have trouble competing with U-Verse - they built it as cheaply as possible, contrast that to VZ which does not have much trouble competing with FIOS.

Given AT&T's history, it is not a stretch to think they will simply use DIRECTV as a cash cow too. Again great for the stock holders, but are they really doing the consumer any good? Will AT&T ever really invest more in DIRECTV? Or will they simply manage its decline until every last cent has been extracted from it?
 
Status
Please reply by conversation.

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

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Top