The End of DIRECTV?

[CSM]

Stuart at Solid Signal Blog brought up a good point. He said that Donovan was saying AT&T doesn't need to launch anymore satellites because after they launch the T16 they will have all the capacity that they need with SatelliteTV.

Has AT&T really launched its last satellite? - The Solid Signal Blog

 

[nelson61]

Just remember, video and broadband- the group satellite TV is in accounts for only 15 percent of at&t income. And broadband is stealing from satellite.

So, when the green eye shade team in at&t look at their businesses and are deciding where to spend and where to cut, DirecTV is close to the bottom of the barrel- where the rotten apples are.

Since the day at&t bought DirecTV, the satellite guys no longer can decide their fate.


Sent from my SM-G955U1 using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[Inclined Orbit]

The only public statement from ATT is they are going away from satellites. Inside information says its a five year plan. Any comments about the satellite fleet lasting 10yrs and ATT not pulling the plug until then is pure speculation and contrary to ATT's plan.

If they ditch the satellites in 5yrs or so and the satellite fleet is still operational, they will still save a bundle shutting down uplink sites, station keeping services, warehouses, and laying off techs, engineers, IRD developers, installers, canceling dish and IRD purchases, etc. Its all about the bottom line and shareholders now.

That statement sounds like the exact opposite of what was said in the other statement.

 

[wvman]

Stuart at Solid Signal Blog brought up a good point. He said that Donovan was saying AT&T doesn't need to launch anymore satellites because after they launch the T16 they will have all the capacity that they need with SatelliteTV.

Has AT&T really launched its last satellite? - The Solid Signal Blog

The only thing saving both DISH & DirecTV right now is the fact that the broadband providers have been dragging their feet installing fiber into rural areas. Less than 3 miles from me are people getting 100mbps downloads, but they have no plans to come our way because when Verizon had this area, they let the infrastructure degrade to the point all that's here is a lot of copper spliced a zillion times that barely delievers telephone landline service.

If and when fiber gets out this way, I know a slew of people that are going to sign up, and when they do, DISH and DirecTV are out the door. Most are waiting to get the Amazon FireStick to stream their television programming. My 4K televisons have several apps, like Pluto, but they are useless when you get 0.5mbps downloads. We have no cable, DSL available, only wireless and you can see what I posted on its speed to see how well it works. $39.95 per/mont for their crappy service.

 

[Jimbo]

The only public statement from ATT is they are going away from satellites. Inside information says its a five year plan. Any comments about the satellite fleet lasting 10yrs and ATT not pulling the plug until then is pure speculation and contrary to ATT's plan.

If they ditch the satellites in 5yrs or so and the satellite fleet is still operational, they will still save a bundle shutting down uplink sites, station keeping services, warehouses, and laying off techs, engineers, IRD developers, installers, canceling dish and IRD purchases, etc. Its all about the bottom line and shareholders now.

Wouldn't they be better off to sell it instead of shutting it down ?
Someone may invest in it ... of course not like ATT did.

 

[CSM]

Wouldn't they be better off to sell it instead of shutting it down ?
Someone may invest in it ... of course not like ATT did.

Like I said in an earlier post AT&T needed DTV's customer base because with just UVerseTV they couldn't do an OTT service. They needed DTV customers for channel contract negotiations.

 

[Inclined Orbit]

ATT paid about $67.1 billion and in my opinion its worth less today. Several years prior to that numbers I saw on the table from other companies were in the $30 billion range. Who would buy it today?

Wouldn't they be better off to sell it instead of shutting it down ?
Someone may invest in it ... of course not like ATT did.

 

[Jimbo]

Like I said in an earlier post AT&T needed DTV's customer base because with just UVerseTV they couldn't do an OTT service. They needed DTV customers for channel contract negotiations.

They won't have D* if they continue to tell people that Sat is dead.
People will move on ...
Yes they have a bunch of streaming options, but they will lose many more subs if they drop it all together.

 

[Jimbo]

ATT paid about $67.1 billion and in my opinion its worth less today. Several years prior to that numbers I saw on the table from other companies were in the $30 billion range. Who would buy it today?

Of course its worth less, since day 2 they have talked about everything except Sat tv.

 

[Tampa8]

The only public statement from ATT is they are going away from satellites. Inside information says its a five year plan. Any comments about the satellite fleet lasting 10yrs and ATT not pulling the plug until then is pure speculation and contrary to ATT's plan.

If they ditch the satellites in 5yrs or so and the satellite fleet is still operational, they will still save a bundle shutting down uplink sites, station keeping services, warehouses, and laying off techs, engineers, IRD developers, installers, canceling dish and IRD purchases, etc. Its all about the bottom line and shareholders now.

Yes, you get it. Some are not getting it, not looking at from a corporation perspective. I keep seeing at&t won't shut down with many rural or others unable to get cable or good internet service. What in the history of At&t makes you think they care about keeping customers at any cost? Not even in the lucrative cell business have they done that. Ever notice they don't or rarely directly compete with Sprint or Tmobile like Verizon does? Profit drives them first and foremost. If they can make more profit ending satellite service and move forward with what they perceive is the future at a reduced operating cost that is what they will do assuming they feel there is sufficient demand for it. That I believe was done with Directv now, gauge demand, what features will be wanted etc etc.

I would look at as 10 years is about the furthest out to expect service, with something like 5 to 6 years more possible. They have been somewhat "talking down" satellite service as Jimbo says for a reason.

 

[Jimbo]

Yes, you get it. Some are not getting it, not looking at from a corporation perspective. I keep seeing at&t won't shut down with many rural or others unable to get cable or good internet service. What in the history of At&t makes you think they care about keeping customers at any cost? Not even in the lucrative cell business have they done that. Ever notice they don't or rarely directly compete with Sprint or Tmobile like Verizon does? Profit drives them first and foremost. If they can make more profit ending satellite service and move forward with what they perceive is the future at a reduced operating cost that is what they will do assuming they feel there is sufficient demand for it. That I believe was done with Directv now, gauge demand, what features will be wanted etc etc.

I would look at as 10 years is about the furthest out to expect service, with something like 5 to 6 years more possible. They have been somewhat "talking down" satellite service as Jimbo says for a reason.

The thing is, Directv Now was reasonably priced when it came out ... they want to move everyone to D* Now now ... Get rid of the Sats .. thats thier plan anyways, BUT as soon as they get a good streaming base on D*N, they go and RAISE PRICES, so now its not as good a deal as it was ...THEN 2 months later (maybe 3-4) they raised them again.

SOON they will be charging the same for D*N as they were dor Sat delivered ... THEN, the great streaming money saving deal for the subs will be gone ... don't forget that the Internet companies are gonna want some of that, so they too will be raising prices on a regularly basis ....

Looking at the long term, this Streaming thing may be great and new and all, but its gonna cost the same as the rest in the long run.

 

[nelson61]

Yes, you get it. Some are not getting it, not looking at from a corporation perspective. I keep seeing at&t won't shut down with many rural or others unable to get cable or good internet service. What in the history of At&t makes you think they care about keeping customers at any cost? Not even in the lucrative cell business have they done that. Ever notice they don't or rarely directly compete with Sprint or Tmobile like Verizon does? Profit drives them first and foremost. If they can make more profit ending satellite service and move forward with what they perceive is the future at a reduced operating cost that is what they will do assuming they feel there is sufficient demand for it. That I believe was done with Directv now, gauge demand, what features will be wanted etc etc.

I would look at as 10 years is about the furthest out to expect service, with something like 5 to 6 years more possible. They have been somewhat "talking down" satellite service as Jimbo says for a reason.

When the time comes, at&t will spin it off . It will be a much smaller company which will then probably merge with dish satellite since they are also shifting their resources to wireless services.

Sent from my SM-G955U1 using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[Tampa8]

The thing is, Directv Now was reasonably priced when it came out ... they want to move everyone to D* Now now ... Get rid of the Sats .. thats thier plan anyways, BUT as soon as they get a good streaming base on D*N, they go and RAISE PRICES, so now its not as good a deal as it was ...THEN 2 months later (maybe 3-4) they raised them again.

SOON they will be charging the same for D*N as they were dor Sat delivered ... THEN, the great streaming money saving deal for the subs will be gone ... don't forget that the Internet companies are gonna want some of that, so they too will be raising prices on a regularly basis ....

Looking at the long term, this Streaming thing may be great and new and all, but its gonna cost the same as the rest in the long run.

NO QUESTION ABOUT IT. Many posters here have preached that for a very long time. Between mergers and reliance on internet where will the real competition be? I genuinely hope DISH finds a way to survive and provide an alternative service. For me if nothing else I like the independence and reliability of Satellite I have had for years and years. And with a generator I still have service.

 

[Tampa8]

When the time comes, at&t will spin it off . It will be a much smaller company which will then probably merge with dish satellite since they are also shifting their resources to wireless services.

Sent from my SM-G955U1 using the SatelliteGuys app!

Certainly one possible scenario.

 

[Inclined Orbit]

It doesn't matter that most of us think ditching satellites or loosing rural customers is a bad idea, if ATT decides that's the best course for them then that's what will happen. ATT sniffed around DirecTV for a number of years while DTV quietly put on some dog and pony shows for them. During that time the talk within DirecTV was they wanted the the contracts for content and the customer base and less interest in the actual company. Looks like those concerns are coming true.

Yes, you get it. Some are not getting it, not looking at from a corporation perspective. I keep seeing at&t won't shut down with many rural or others unable to get cable or good internet service. What in the history of At&t makes you think they care about keeping customers at any cost? Not even in the lucrative cell business have they done that. Ever notice they don't or rarely directly compete with Sprint or Tmobile like Verizon does? Profit drives them first and foremost. If they can make more profit ending satellite service and move forward with what they perceive is the future at a reduced operating cost that is what they will do assuming they feel there is sufficient demand for it. That I believe was done with Directv now, gauge demand, what features will be wanted etc etc.

I would look at as 10 years is about the furthest out to expect service, with something like 5 to 6 years more possible. They have been somewhat "talking down" satellite service as Jimbo says for a reason.

 

[goaliebob99]

The only public statement from ATT is they are going away from satellites. Inside information says its a five year plan. Any comments about the satellite fleet lasting 10yrs and ATT not pulling the plug until then is pure speculation and contrary to ATT's plan.

If they ditch the satellites in 5yrs or so and the satellite fleet is still operational, they will still save a bundle shutting down uplink sites, station keeping services, warehouses, and laying off techs, engineers, IRD developers, installers, canceling dish and IRD purchases, etc. Its all about the bottom line and shareholders now.

Unless ATT changed their plans, (attitudes can change) I'm hearing that was scrapped and it's more like 10-12 years now before the platform is at it's end of life. It's all about saving money now, and as the contracts expire they will renegotiate those to help with the cashflow issue. This is going to be a busy year (2019) for contracts as a majority of them are being renegotiated. The current cost of the fleet is known to ATT, and how much it will cost to maintain it. They will reduce those costs by keeping everything at 99, 101, and 103 and getting rid of the other slots. Even with the sub losses, it will be a long time before they are in the negative. ATT could easily keep those subs by doing a pick 30 channels for 30 bucks type of promotion. It's going to be a mix for the next 10 years. Everyone is freaking out about satellite dieing when it's not going to. ATT's thought on this is by doing a hybrid platform they can offer everything to everyone. No matter how you get it (IP or Satellite) if it keeps you with ATT, that's a good thing for them. Yes, some platforms have benefits over others and you may have to subsidize older ones to maintain everything for everyone type of profile. What I think will happen is once ATT pays down the debt, in 5-10 years they will launch replacements to keep the bandwidth and extend the platform. They will find other uses for the satellites should space open up. Cellular over satellite will do wonders in times of emergencies as we have seen with FirstNet where they have deployed cellular towers on Satellite trucks to provide emergency communication and service. I also see them bringing Time Warner's content to the existing uplink infrastructure and ditching some expensive real estate in NYC, but who knows. I'm just speculating!

 

[wvman]

The thing is, Directv Now was reasonably priced when it came out ... they want to move everyone to D* Now now ... Get rid of the Sats .. thats thier plan anyways, BUT as soon as they get a good streaming base on D*N, they go and RAISE PRICES, so now its not as good a deal as it was ...THEN 2 months later (maybe 3-4) they raised them again.

SOON they will be charging the same for D*N as they were dor Sat delivered ... THEN, the great streaming money saving deal for the subs will be gone ... don't forget that the Internet companies are gonna want some of that, so they too will be raising prices on a regularly basis ....

Looking at the long term, this Streaming thing may be great and new and all, but its gonna cost the same as the rest in the long run.

A common gripe I hear from people subscribing to one or the other of the small dish services is how they make all these great offers to draw in new customers, and ignore their loyal customers who have been with them for years. The second most common gripe is price, and third is their claims to having 300 or more channels to get them signed up, and then the customer discovers that half or more are audio, shopping channels, PPV or a variety of junk channels they never watch.


Just in my circle of friends there are several of them paying $150 or more per/month to watch television. When you narrow it down to the 10 or 12 channels they actually watch, they're paying about $15 per/channel. Not much of a bargain when you look at it from that perspective.

 

[Jimbo]

Unless ATT changed their plans, (attitudes can change) I'm hearing that was scrapped and it's more like 10-12 years now before the platform is at it's end of life. It's all about saving money now, and as the contracts expire they will renegotiate those to help with the cashflow issue. This is going to be a busy year (2019) for contracts as a majority of them are being renegotiated. The current cost of the fleet is known to ATT, and how much it will cost to maintain it. They will reduce those costs by keeping everything at 99, 101, and 103 and getting rid of the other slots. Even with the sub losses, it will be a long time before they are in the negative. ATT could easily keep those subs by doing a pick 30 channels for 30 bucks type of promotion. It's going to be a mix for the next 10 years. Everyone is freaking out about satellite dieing when it's not going to. ATT's thought on this is by doing a hybrid platform they can offer everything to everyone. No matter how you get it (IP or Satellite) if it keeps you with ATT, that's a good thing for them. Yes, some platforms have benefits over others and you may have to subsidize older ones to maintain everything for everyone type of profile. What I think will happen is once ATT pays down the debt, in 5-10 years they will launch replacements to keep the bandwidth and extend the platform. They will find other uses for the satellites should space open up. Cellular over satellite will do wonders in times of emergencies as we have seen with FirstNet where they have deployed cellular towers on Satellite trucks to provide emergency communication and service. I also see them bringing Time Warner's content to the existing uplink infrastructure and ditching some expensive real estate in NYC, but who knows. I'm just speculating!

I like your thinking ...

 

[Jimbo]

A common gripe I hear from people subscribing to one or the other of the small dish services is how they make all these great offers to draw in new customers, and ignore their loyal customers who have been with them for years. The second most common gripe is price, and third is their claims to having 300 or more channels to get them signed up, and then the customer discovers that half or more are audio, shopping channels, PPV or a variety of junk channels they never watch.


Just in my circle of friends there are several of them paying $150 or more per/month to watch television. When you narrow it down to the 10 or 12 channels they actually watch, they're paying about $15 per/channel. Not much of a bargain when you look at it from that perspective.

Yes, I think thats a common issue, people watch what they like channel wise ...If they didn't have whatever channel, Someone would want it, so you can never win with everyone.

Many years ago I sat down with my old Cable Company list of channels and marked channels I watch regularly and those that I watch once in a while and looked at the list and it was about 25 in total. thats even the fringe watching channels ....
Then I went and looked at the C-Band side for those channels and invested in C-Band ... this was before D* was around.

People will say that you should be able to go with ala carte,, but that option is never gonna be good for the sub as you would end up paying much more for those channels due to the way channels are paid for ...
Most of those Shopping channels and "junk" channels are there because of the agreements made to watch the Channels you all Want ... those Junk channels are owned by the companies that also own the channels that you NEED.

 

[bluegras]

Good morning u guys new article from swanni this morning that you guys maybe want to read early this morning
DIRECTV & Dish: Is Satellite TV Dead?
DIRECTV & Dish: Is Satellite TV Dead? - The TV Answer Man!