DirecTV Now to rebrand under AT&T TV family.
- Thread starter goaliebob99
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 159
- Views 8K
Sorry, I thought you wanted to know how fast channel changing was on the AT&T TV APP.
It doesn't matter if they are sending it out as "1080p", it is still either 720p or 1080i when it comes from the network. 1080i is easily converted to 1080p (they produce 1080i content in 1080p and interlace it) and if they are supplying Fox/ABC content as "1080p" they are upscaling it from 720p which is pointless because your TV would do it otherwise.
Sorry, I should have added that he should have said it’s upscaling to1080p. If AT&T TV is upscaling it to 1080p?
There's only one app, named AT&T TV, and it provides "both the AT&T TV and the AT&T TV Now experience," as they put it. When it launches, you just put in your AT&T-assigned user ID and password and it knows which service you have (i.e. which channel package, how much cloud DVR storage, how many simultaneous streams). The user interface is the exact same in the app regardless of which "experience" you've signed up for.
Right, that's a key advantage of using their own box as opposed to an app on a smart TV or other streaming device. Plus the fact that their own box has a remote control that's customized for use with AT&T TV. Sony will not want to strike a deal with AT&T to have their smart TVs automatically boot up with the AT&T TV UI because the great majority of the folks who buy those TVs will not be AT&T TV subscribers, so they wouldn't want that feature.
Maybe. It would simplify things to have a common codebase among all their apps. They could just take the AT&T TV app for iOS and Android mobile devices, switch out the name/logo, and restrict access to certain live channels, VOD, and cloud DVR based on how those features might differ between DirecTV and AT&T TV both for in-home and out-of-home access. All of that is simply based on the carriage contracts that AT&T has in place with the cable networks for each service, I think.
Well over a year ago, AT&T's CEO said that the UI they were developing for DirecTV Now would eventually make its way across all the company's UIs, eventually including even satellite. At that point in time, I believe the thinking was that the AT&T TV Android TV box -- model C71 -- would also serve as the next-gen replacement for the C61 Genie Mini for use with DirecTV satellite. And that's how its new UI would be introduced to satellite customers. Don't know if that's still the thinking there or not. If so, I expect that will happen in 2020, or possibly even late this year.
Here's something to watch in 2020: if we don't see the AT&T TV app getting repurposed as the new DirecTV mobile app, and we don't see the C71 getting repurposed as a replacement for the C61 Genie Mini for DirecTV, that tells me that AT&T may be looking to keep their new tech cleanly segregated away from DirecTV. Why would they do that? Because maybe they're planning to sell or spin-off DirecTV.
Here are a few other little tidbits I've seen recently, which very well could mean nothing but *could* be consistent with a plan to spin-off DirecTV. One guy said he was talking to someone at DirecTV who told him that the integration of DirecTV billing into the overall AT&T billing system has not been well received by DirecTV customers and the company was thinking about separating it back out. Also, a different guy posted on a forum this week that AT&T has taken away his bundling discount for having DirecTV on the same account as AT&T home internet service.
Lastly, whenever I went to ATT.com and entered my Nashville address and shopped for home internet service, it would always try to bundle TV with it as a second step. And it still does. But in the past, it would always offer either Uverse TV or DirecTV as the default option (it seemed to shift back and forth), with the ability to for me to easily select the other TV service if I wanted. Either way, I could get discounted bundle pricing by combining it with internet. But just this week when I tried it, the system did not at all offer DirecTV as an option to bundle with internet, only Uverse TV was offered. I could still find DirecTV with a couple clicks from the main ATT.com homepage, but it wasn't an option to combine with home internet. Furthermore, when I entered a St. Louis address -- a test market where AT&T TV just launched -- only AT&T TV was offered during the ordering process. And the "TV" icon at the top of the homepage, which used to lead to all of their different TV services, was replaced with an icon for just "AT&T TV." So AT&T has already begun cutting DirecTV out of their online sales channel.
What's next? Will they completely remove DirecTV from the ATT.com site completely and feature/sell it only via DirecTV.com? Will they stop using the AT&T icon in the DirecTV logo? Again, these signs may mean nothing but they could be the first indicators that the company is getting ready to divorce their satellite business from the rest of the company.
I don't think AT&T TV is upscaling anything. They're de-interlacing 1080i networks to 1080p before streaming them out over the internet because a lot of devices (e.g. phones, Rokus, etc.) can't handle interlaced video very well. As for the 720p networks, they're not doing anything there, just streaming them out at 720p. But then either your streaming device or your TV is going to upscale everything to either 1080p or 4K (2160p), depending on their capabilities.
I seriously hope Charlie doesn’t buy DTV. At least not for a couple of years, preferably longer if ever.
With the larger customer base, he might decide to shift current Dish customers to the lesser DTV hardware.
I’ve got tons of EHD material. Loss of that would instantly mean I’d drop satellite TV. Between Amazon Prime and free YouTube, I wonder why I keep paying.
Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys App. For now.
With the larger customer base, he might decide to shift current Dish customers to the lesser DTV hardware.
I’ve got tons of EHD material. Loss of that would instantly mean I’d drop satellite TV. Between Amazon Prime and free YouTube, I wonder why I keep paying.
Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys App. For now.
It wouldn't be worth it to convert Dish customers to Directv, or the other way around, if someone tried to merge the companies. Even if you assume they waited a few years and attrition cut the number of customers using Dish hardware to 5 million that's still five million customers that need an installer visit, and need hardware provided for them. It would cost several billion dollars, it would take quite a while to get payback on such an investment. If they waited longer, to say 2030, then it wouldn't be worth it because satellite TV itself may not have a life much past that date.
Which is why I don't think there's a chance in hell of Directv and Dish merging, whoever did the buying. The ROI just doesn't work.
Right. But if some sort of merger between the two did take place, wouldn't it make sense -- only for new installations and equipment replacements going forward -- to standardize on one set of hardware? For instance, only install DISH Hoppers and Joeys. They might have to produce a variant of those devices that differs slightly in some aspect of hardware/firmware in order to use them as replacement receivers with existing DirecTV dish and wiring, though. (You know far more about those technical specifics than I do.)
They'd install only DISH rooftop dishes and wiring, although they'd have the option of aiming the dishes at any combination of the two services' sat fleets that would provide access to the full range of channels. That would improve average signal quality and reliability among new installations. Assuming roughly equal signal levels, perhaps they would prioritize aligning new dish installations with the DTV fleet, which includes the new T-16 sat (and which, I believe, has more overall channel capacity).
For existing customers, they'd keep all of their existing hardware. Only things that might change would be the company logo in the on-screen UI, as well as the channel line-up and pricing of their package. If necessary for contractual reasons, the joint operation could still maintain separate brands and separate channel packages. New receivers might just have the Hopper or Joey name on them without saying "DISH" or "DirecTV". And regardless of which fleet(s) of sats your dish was pointed toward, you could still opt for either the DISH packages or the DTV packages since both sat fleets would carry the entire combined channel library.
There would be combined operations for installation, billing, and technical support. So even if both brands carried on with competing sets of channel packages, there would still be significant cost savings by combining certain aspects of their operations. Of course, if they completely merged into a single business rather than just having a co-operational joint venture, then they'd be eliminating their only direct competitor, which would give them greater pricing power.
Oh yes obviously they would only want to install one brand of hardware for NEW installs. They'd definitely use Directv's dish/satellites since they don't need any new satellite launches for at least a decade while Dish would, and don't have to worry about dual arcs etc. What they would decide for receiver hardware, who knows.
No chance however that "both sat fleets would carry the entire combined channel library". That didn't happen for Directv and Uverse TV, why would it happen with Dish and Directv? Directv wouldn't start showing Pac 12 Network, Dish wouldn't start showing YES; contracts wouldn't allow it. Over time as contracts came due and are renegotiated for the combined entity they probably get closer together, but they could just as likely drop those channels from the one that had it as the other getting it. Its also not clear what would be involved in splitting Directv out of the overall AT&T contracts that have been negotiated so far. Do the rates they pay companies go up? Does it trigger a renegotiation within a year of such a split? Imagine the disputes if everything on Directv came up all at once!
And sure every time there's a merger you hear about all the cost savings from combining billing, CSRs etc. What you don't hear about is all the money they have to spend to make that happen, meaning the savings are years down the road. AT&T still hasn't combined all the billing (my account is still Directv) so how many more years will that take? In the case of Directv it would cost money to disentangle the billing from AT&T and put it on a separate system, then combine that separate system with Dish's billing (probably putting Dish on that separate and brand new system since it is fewer customers to move) They save money when that's done, but it will take years to do, and then more years to pay off the cost of doing that until you can enjoy the savings. How many years of savings would there actually be, before satellite TV is no longer viable? I think the prospects for satellite TV beyond 2030 are pretty cloudy, and making an investment based on savings that don't start until the late 2020s is far from a sure thing.
No chance however that "both sat fleets would carry the entire combined channel library". That didn't happen for Directv and Uverse TV, why would it happen with Dish and Directv? Directv wouldn't start showing Pac 12 Network, Dish wouldn't start showing YES; contracts wouldn't allow it. Over time as contracts came due and are renegotiated for the combined entity they probably get closer together, but they could just as likely drop those channels from the one that had it as the other getting it. Its also not clear what would be involved in splitting Directv out of the overall AT&T contracts that have been negotiated so far. Do the rates they pay companies go up? Does it trigger a renegotiation within a year of such a split? Imagine the disputes if everything on Directv came up all at once!
And sure every time there's a merger you hear about all the cost savings from combining billing, CSRs etc. What you don't hear about is all the money they have to spend to make that happen, meaning the savings are years down the road. AT&T still hasn't combined all the billing (my account is still Directv) so how many more years will that take? In the case of Directv it would cost money to disentangle the billing from AT&T and put it on a separate system, then combine that separate system with Dish's billing (probably putting Dish on that separate and brand new system since it is fewer customers to move) They save money when that's done, but it will take years to do, and then more years to pay off the cost of doing that until you can enjoy the savings. How many years of savings would there actually be, before satellite TV is no longer viable? I think the prospects for satellite TV beyond 2030 are pretty cloudy, and making an investment based on savings that don't start until the late 2020s is far from a sure thing.
You're misunderstanding what I said. Note that I didn't say "both services would carry the entire combined channel library," I said "both sat fleets would carry" them. I choose my words carefully. Imagine a situation where, for whatever business reasons, DISH and DTV continue to exist as separate brands with separate channel packages based on separate network carriage contracts. But in all other regards there's effectively one joint venture company operating both brands. This joint venture would handle the physical distribution systems, installation, customer service and billing for both brands, allowing for significant cost savings. They'd simply uplink every channel that's carried across both brands to both satellite fleets. In that way, it wouldn't matter which fleet a given rooftop dish is pointed at, that home would be capable of choosing from either the DISH packages OR the DTV packages without an installer visit. And going forward, all new installations could be pointed at just one fleet (e.g. the DTV fleet) unless a given home's location didn't allow a good signal for that fleet while a good signal could be obtained with the other fleet.
I'm wondering if they're going to finish the integration of DTV billing into the main AT&T system or if they're holding back on it because they may reverse that whole thing. FWIW, that's what one person on the other sat forum says he was told by a DTV rep: that the billing integration has been unpopular with DTV subs and they're going to scrap the whole thing and separate DTV billing back out. Of course, if they do that, it's not because it's unpopular, it's because AT&T is planning to somehow spin-off DTV.
I think that there would be a lot of cost savings that wouldn't take long to realize if DISH and DTV had a joint operating agreement of some kind. They could quickly get their installers/repair techs up to speed on both sets of hardware (and standardize on one set going forward). Taking both services' existing billing rules and policies and entering them into the same overall billing software, that could then interface with the same web engine for display in user accounts on the DTV and DISH websites, shouldn't be a big deal. Surely there's off-the-shelf enterprise software that can handle that. Integrating DirecTV billing into AT&T's system has been huge because it involves integrating user IDs and passwords and allowing for bundling discounts across multiple products. None of that would apply in a single system that houses two totally separate products: DTV and DISH. They might use a single web engine to power both brands' websites but they would still have separate sites, with separate user IDs and passwords for current customers.
They could maintain separate upper-level CSR teams for each service but have a common cross-trained first-line CSR team that could answer basic questions for both services and both sets of hardware.
As for as the engineers who handle the uplinks and other operational aspects of the DBS distribution system, I would think lots of those jobs could be eliminated, with engineers taking on responsibilities of both systems.
Not really practical. Dish doesn't have anywhere close to the bandwidth Directv does so they can't carry all the HD channels Directv does - let alone all the 4K ones assuming we ever see any. And Directv doesn't have spot beams for a dozen markets that Dish carries so they can't provide locals for customers in those markets.
So no, the idea of "choose whatever hardware you want and you can have either service" is not going to fly.
Sorry, you still haven't really disproven the concept.
First, if all newly installed dishes for both DTV and DISH were by default pointed toward DTV's sats (which would be the obvious scenario for a few reasons), then those customers could still have access to ANY channel package from either brand given that there's apparently plenty of bandwidth on DTV's sats to add in whatever few additional HD and SD channels that are part of the DISH system that aren't part of the DTV system.
And I'm skeptical that DISH's sat fleet doesn't have a bit of spare capacity to add at least a few of the channels that are carried by DTV but not DISH. (Think of the space that got freed up when the HBO and Cinemax channels got dropped. And now it looks like maybe the Fox RSNs could be gone for good?) So while a customer with a rooftop dish pointed at the DISH sats might not be able to subscribe to the largest top-level DTV channel package (and/or all of DTV's add-on packs), they should still be able to subscribe to the lower and mid-level DTV packages (which almost completely overlap with DISH anyhow).
So, all in all, I think it could work, from an operational standpoint. Everything outside of that is just a matter of business contracts.
You do realize they'd have to add HBO/Fox RSNs BACK in order to make your "both systems carry all channels" dream come true, right? So you can't count that space that's been "freed up" due to disputes.
Dish has basically fewer than two Ku satellites per arc carrying national transponders. Even if you round up and assume they had two full satellites carrying national transponders that's only 64 Ku transponders. Directv has 32 Ku transponders (currently only 26 are national but the rest will be by the time any merger scheme could happen) 68 Ka transponders (and 36 RB transponders but we'll ignore those) The Ka transponders have 50% more bandwidth (36 MHz versus 24 Mhz) so Directv has 134 Ku equivalent transponders - more than double Dish's bandwidth, and that's after I generously rounded them up to 64 national transponders which is probably 30% too high. The real number could be 3x the bandwidth.
Fairly Certain with regards to dish design and angles(nevermind the different LNB's) you arent pointing any Dish Dish at Directv sats and getting anything
Last edited:
Similar threads
