Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo

AT&T Agrees to Purchase DirecTV (Was: ATT looking to buy Direct TV)


  • Please log in to reply
1199 replies to this topic

#226 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 3,880 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 13 May 2014 - 04:26 PM

What is their national wireless offering?  

 

Rich

 

They don't have one, but they have a national internet offering, so it is roughly equal nationwide double play versus nationwide double play.

 

If the FCC allows the Comcast/TWC merger to go through, look for them to try to buy Sprint, T Mobile or US Cellular in a few years to provide a true triple play.


SL5, PI-6S, SA-6AL 3xSWM16, 21 H20-100, 1 H20-600, 7 H24-700/AM21


...Ads Help To Support This Site...

#227 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 3,880 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 13 May 2014 - 04:27 PM

** Conspiracy Theory **

 

This is all a ruse to submarine the Comcast / TWC deal.

 

Stuart Sweet suggested that at the outset. It is a possibility.


SL5, PI-6S, SA-6AL 3xSWM16, 21 H20-100, 1 H20-600, 7 H24-700/AM21


#228 OFFLINE   Pepe Sylvia

Pepe Sylvia

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 156 posts
Joined: May 10, 2010

Posted 13 May 2014 - 04:28 PM

If this goes through, will the NSA have access to my DVR recordings?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:D

Do you record a lot of Al Jazeera? :ph34r:

 

:flag:

:grin:



#229 OFFLINE   jerrylove56

jerrylove56

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 428 posts
  • LocationNorth Alabama
Joined: Jun 14, 2008

Posted 13 May 2014 - 04:38 PM

The NY Times had a good article on the rumored buyout of DTV. http://dealbook.nyti...ype=blogs&_r=1



#230 OFFLINE   dennisj00

dennisj00

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 9,228 posts
  • LocationLake Norman, NC
Joined: Sep 27, 2007

Posted 13 May 2014 - 04:47 PM

If this goes through, will the NSA have access to my DVR recordings?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:D

They probably already do, but why would they want a million or so copies of what you record?


Spending to stimulate the economy as fast as the credit cards will allow!

My Setup / Weather at Lake Norman!/ Boathouse BEES
DLB, MRV, nomad, HDGUI are HERE! . . . We're DONE!


#231 OFFLINE   APB101

APB101

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 1,022 posts
  • LocationMichigan
Joined: Sep 01, 2010

Posted 13 May 2014 - 04:52 PM

If ATT buys DTV would it be because of one of these three things:

 

UVerse becomes DTV? - If this way does this mean ATT thinks UVerse TV sucks. ATT just keeps UVerse Internet and Phone bundles it with DTV?

 

DTV becomes UVerse?

 

Or they stay as two separate companies letting ATT expand and become bigger and reach more TV markets.

 

This [bolded part] is what I'm thinking would happen.

 

A deal will more than likely be made if Time-Warner and Comcast are approved. (Or however specifically this would all pan out.)

 

The DirecTV name has far more recognition that U-verse, yes, but also the distribution is easier. The other services by AT&T, like with Internet, will be appealing enough for those with DirecTV for video but with other companies for phone and/or Internet.

 

The specific programming contracts is another thing. What channels are being carried by one company but not the other. With the DirecTV platform, the name-recognition of seasonal sports and those public interest programming would be more useful than the current U-verse model. (U-verse, unlike cable companies, doesn't even carry subchannels from one designated marketing area to the next.)

 

I don't feel comfortable predicting what will or will not happen specifically with AT&T and DirecTV. But, coming back to Time-Warner Cable and Comcast, I was anticipating more companies (satellite and cable) would be on the horizon for possible deals. And this may be just the beginning of all that.



#232 OFFLINE   Alan Gordon

Alan Gordon

    Chancellor

  • Registered
  • 9,058 posts
  • LocationDawson, Georgia
Joined: Jun 07, 2004

Posted 13 May 2014 - 05:09 PM

Do you record a lot of Al Jazeera? :ph34r:

 

:flag:

:grin:

 

LOL!!  I do not.  I did add it to my Favorites list after hearing some positive things about the channel, but never viewed it yet, so no...

 

They probably already do, but why would they want a million or so copies of what you record?

 

Dude... they could see whose performances I re-watch on "American Idol" and "The Voice" thereby giving them a reasonable assumption of which artists get my votes.

 

Frightening thought, simply frightening...  :D



#233 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 3,880 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 13 May 2014 - 05:22 PM

I don't feel comfortable predicting what will or will not happen specifically with AT&T and DirecTV.

 

Why not? You aren't being graded! :rotfl:


SL5, PI-6S, SA-6AL 3xSWM16, 21 H20-100, 1 H20-600, 7 H24-700/AM21


#234 OFFLINE   Alan Gordon

Alan Gordon

    Chancellor

  • Registered
  • 9,058 posts
  • LocationDawson, Georgia
Joined: Jun 07, 2004

Posted 13 May 2014 - 05:37 PM

Why not? You aren't being graded! :rotfl:

 

I can't speak for APB101, but personally, I don't like to put a prediction out there unless I feel like there's reason for me to make said prediction. 

 

I have no predictions when it comes to AT&T/DirecTV other than AT&T discontinuing the U-Verse TV service should a buy-out happen, but that's not a particularly bold prediction.


Edited by Alan Gordon, 13 May 2014 - 05:38 PM.


#235 OFFLINE   nmetro

nmetro

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 724 posts
Joined: Jul 11, 2006

Posted 13 May 2014 - 05:58 PM

For those who remember the Bell System aka AT&T, it was a virtual monopoly. The was only one source fro telephones; you got what AT&T made and gave you. YEs, there were smaller phone companies, but AT&T, and the Bell System dominated telecom in the US. So, much so, it was broken up by the US government.

 

While we are in different times, multiple phone companies (land line and cell), multiple sources of means to obtain internet services, multiple video delivery options, etc.; media consolidation is limiting these options. A Comcast/Time Warner Merger, and an ATT&T/DriectTV merger may be too much to federal regulators to accept. 20 Years ago there were many independent cable channels, much of these channels are now owned by less than 10 companies.

 

So, At&T may have to give up something to acquire DirecTV. Just like Comcast is giving up some cable systems, to Charter, to buy Time Warner Cable I suspect U-verse may be what AT&T must give up. 

 

12 years ago the justice department did not approve a Dish/DirectTV merger because of competition and limited choice of services issues. At&T having DirecTV and U-verse may be seen in a similar fashion by the justice department. If not, then expect Dish to get acquired by Verizon who is very similar to AT&T.



#236 OFFLINE   CraigerM

CraigerM

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 282 posts
  • LocationSt. Louis
Joined: Apr 15, 2014

Posted 13 May 2014 - 07:13 PM

For those who remember the Bell System aka AT&T, it was a virtual monopoly. The was only one source fro telephones; you got what AT&T made and gave you. YEs, there were smaller phone companies, but AT&T, and the Bell System dominated telecom in the US. So, much so, it was broken up by the US government.

 

While we are in different times, multiple phone companies (land line and cell), multiple sources of means to obtain internet services, multiple video delivery options, etc.; media consolidation is limiting these options. A Comcast/Time Warner Merger, and an ATT&T/DriectTV merger may be too much to federal regulators to accept. 20 Years ago there were many independent cable channels, much of these channels are now owned by less than 10 companies.

 

So, At&T may have to give up something to acquire DirecTV. Just like Comcast is giving up some cable systems, to Charter, to buy Time Warner Cable I suspect U-verse may be what AT&T must give up. 

 

12 years ago the justice department did not approve a Dish/DirectTV merger because of competition and limited choice of services issues. At&T having DirecTV and U-verse may be seen in a similar fashion by the justice department. If not, then expect Dish to get acquired by Verizon who is very similar to AT&T.

I think it will just be the UVerse TV part, they will keep their Internet and Phone. Why buy DTV two have TV services? Is DTV in every UVerse TV market? I don't think the Government would let ATT have two TV services.


Edited by CraigerM, 13 May 2014 - 07:14 PM.


#237 OFFLINE   DCSholtis

DCSholtis

    Up The Irons!

  • Registered
  • 5,775 posts
Joined: Aug 07, 2002

Posted 13 May 2014 - 07:17 PM

I hope this doesn't mean the beginning of the end for Sunday ticket

Sent from my XT1053 using DBSTalk mobile app
Dan Sholtis
"The Raiders will be back. I have unshakable confidence, the will to win, and I just know that the fire that burns brightest in this building is the will to win. And we will win. We will win."---Al Davis. Rest In Peace, Al

#238 OFFLINE   Alan Gordon

Alan Gordon

    Chancellor

  • Registered
  • 9,058 posts
  • LocationDawson, Georgia
Joined: Jun 07, 2004

Posted 13 May 2014 - 07:36 PM

Is DTV in every UVerse TV market?

 

Only in the ones with a view of the Southern sky.  :)



#239 ONLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 17,334 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 13 May 2014 - 11:56 PM

What I don't get is why ATT needs DTV when they have a video service already? Could it be they do want to merge the two systems so they can expand? Maybe they could offer a combined triple play service where you have a number of options?

I could see DTV not needing DECA, the Wireless Cinema Connection Kit or that Wireless video bridge. You could have DTV's equipment and RVU connect to a customer's LAN with a UVerse WIFI Gateway installed. What if they combined the DTV and UVerse installers and trained them on both systems? Then that way an installer could come out with UVerse or DTV boxes and UVerse's Wifi Gateway.


You are thinking way to small. This is not about changing the deca in your house. Anything of that nature is years away anyway.

#240 ONLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 17,334 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 14 May 2014 - 12:16 AM

You think they're going to sell their RBOC business? Who is a potential buyer for that? Or are they just going to spin it off as an independent company to sink or swim?

It is highly unlikely the FCC would allow them to keep the areas they've built out to fiber and spin off only the copper. Spinning off their RBOC business would have to be an all or nothing deal. AT&T's TV offering would be Directv only, Uverse would be spun off along with the lines that deliver it.

I suppose AT&T could still see that as a good thing, they'd have a national TV offering to go with their national wireless offering and be more direct competition for a Comcast that would be essentially national.


Why do you think AT&T has only run fiber so far and is still using the copper to peoples home?

AT&T has for years been developing and working to go to a wireless system for everything. They want uverse to be wireless. Think about that for a moment and its implications. Its an interesting way to get around a lot of hurdles.

This deal is all about bandwidth. TV stations don't need two way bandwidth. Only on demand. Wireless spectrum is precious. Have a massive amount of bandwidth that can be used to offer static feeds of stations and then have a wireless system built to Handel all Internet and on demand, over the top, and Handel all your phone system.

This dumps massive layers of government red tape that now exists on all copper phone systems as well. Massive. Im Not sure that can be stated loudly enough.

It also allows AT&T to expand their full phone, (cell phone and home phone which they now have wireless ones) Internet, and TV offerings to anyone anywhere without having to worry about who owns the right away that carries the signals via wires to people's homes. It turns the concept of having to have franchise rights in areas to offer video services on its head for the traditional cable systems. While some areas have allowed more than one, how often do we actually see two carriers anywhere? It doesn't exsist.

And to be clear, AT&T isn't the only one who wants to do this. Verizon does as well. They have tested high speed home wireless Internet in several areas. The peope, that will be behind in this move is cable companies. Unless they go out and pick up sprint or mobile etc. but Verizon and AT&T both want to offer all services to everyone in the country, and I think at some point they will. In fact I wouldn't be surprised to hear a FIOS is considering buying dish talk soon so they can leverage the same kind of offerings and added bandwidth that would give to them. Although I think dish is not as well positioned to do for Verizon what DIRECTV can do for AT&T.

I think the only reason this stuff hasn't been built out just yet is they still need to get the tech right, but its coming.

A far as copper, yeah I see them spinning the company off or selling it. Verizon as I recall has successfully sold off massive parts of its copper systems in the middle of the country to some other companies. There is money in it for someone, but with the way things are changing, AT&T wants to head in a different direction long term.

This deal IMHO isn't about what it can do for the two companies in the short term, but rather the very long term.

The opportunities for scale of adding six million video customers to directv and more leverage with channels and all that stuff, that's just a secondary benefit IMHO. And those benefits may be great for some of us. Maybe I'll get the pac12 someday. :). But that wouldn't be for quite a while.

I would expect that one of the first things that would happen that we might actually see is they would merge the departments that sign contracts with channels and slowly get both companies the same channels and offereings. But we will see. But beyond that, and more opportunities to bundle services, I don't see much change for how DIRECTV does business as a whole. Especially not anytime soon or in regards to how our systems work in houses any time soon.

#241 ONLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 17,334 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 14 May 2014 - 12:26 AM

For those who remember the Bell System aka AT&T, it was a virtual monopoly. The was only one source fro telephones; you got what AT&T made and gave you. YEs, there were smaller phone companies, but AT&T, and the Bell System dominated telecom in the US. So, much so, it was broken up by the US government.

While we are in different times, multiple phone companies (land line and cell), multiple sources of means to obtain internet services, multiple video delivery options, etc.; media consolidation is limiting these options. A Comcast/Time Warner Merger, and an ATT&T/DriectTV merger may be too much to federal regulators to accept. 20 Years ago there were many independent cable channels, much of these channels are now owned by less than 10 companies.

So, At&T may have to give up something to acquire DirecTV. Just like Comcast is giving up some cable systems, to Charter, to buy Time Warner Cable I suspect U-verse may be what AT&T must give up.

12 years ago the justice department did not approve a Dish/DirectTV merger because of competition and limited choice of services issues. At&T having DirecTV and U-verse may be seen in a similar fashion by the justice department. If not, then expect Dish to get acquired by Verizon who is very similar to AT&T.


Really, the Comcast Time Warner Cable merger isn't going to change the number of people's options for cable TV. tWhat the issue is as you stated is that they own the content and the delivery system. That's what needs to be broken up. But that alone won't stop that merger, why would it?

AT&T DIRECTV are really such different companies I don't see how its in any way anti competitive. If anything it will help create a stronger competitor to Comcast and Time Warner Cable and charter and so on because of the synergies that AT&T and DIRECTV can create within themselves.

#242 OFFLINE   damondlt

damondlt

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,987 posts
  • LocationNewfoundland, Pa
Joined: Feb 27, 2006

Posted 14 May 2014 - 04:56 AM

The end for Dish how? AT&T owning Directv jumps AT&T's subscriber count by over 300%, but only bumps Directv's by 30%. So instead of roughly 50% bigger than Dish it is roughly twice the size of Dish. I don't think that's really an issue.



Dish is the one in need of a merger, that's been stated multiple times.
And your only talking about TV subscribers, Directv service will be advertised to all of ATT wireless customers, and my guess real bundle pack options.
ATT company is a Giant compared to Directv, in value and number of customers.

Dish failed at a massive much needed merger.
Dispite, its so called abundance of spectrum, They couldn't even sell that to sprint, and you think ATT cares about Dish networks Spectrum? I don't ! If they did they wouldn't be talking to Directv Right now, they would be buying the cheaper company.

ATT want and investment, a Growing investment, they aren't looking for a Spectrum dealer.
You Think Verizon is going to buy out Dish? I don't.
Tmobile may happen , but that's nothing to brag about since T Mobile is broke and has already been bought out.

Sorry But Dish has been hanging around the same Subscriber rate for years. Obviously its peaked, and Even the release of the Hopper did nothing.
They have no more Bandwidth available for anything other then a hand full of HD.
So who would buy out a company, who right off the bat needs a major overhaul?
Certainly not Verizon!

How sad is it that Directv had the same number of customer that Dish has now , 10 years ago!
Verizons Huge on the east coast, and Dish doesn't give a crap about the east coast don't see that working out.

Charlie bough a bunch of Spectrum, and nobody wants its! LOL!

Blue Ridge Communticatons

Digital HD Basic Plus, Cinemax,Showtime/TMC,Starz /Encore
Tivo T6 (Roamio Plus) Master Bedroom,Samsung 5300 40 Inch

Tivo Mini Livingroom Vizio M602i-B3 60 Inch

Tivo Mini Bedroom 2  LG 26LE5300 26 Inch
Tivo Mini Bedroom 3  Element ELEFW328 32 Inch
Cisco HD ,Bedroom office 4  Magnavox 32 inch

Arris Touchstone DG1660

Dream 60 Mbps down 3 Mbps up.

 


#243 OFFLINE   Glenee

Glenee

    Cool Member

  • Registered
  • 25 posts
Joined: Sep 22, 2007

Posted 14 May 2014 - 06:23 AM

If we think we have problems with our billing from time to time now, just wait until AT&T brings their billing department into the mix.


Once I Started Doing what I Liked, I Liked Everything Better.

#244 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 3,880 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 14 May 2014 - 06:49 AM

Dispite, its so called abundance of spectrum, They couldn't even cell that to sprint, and you think ATT cares about Dish networks Spectrum?  I don't !  If they did they wouldn't be talking to Directv Right now, they would be buying the cheaper company.

 

Its possible AT&T approached Dish first, but Ergen was not interested, but I agree that it is far from clear exactly how much value there is in Dish's wireless holdings.

 

Does anyone know the details of the spectrum Dish holds? Is it in the more attractive sub 1 GHz range that wireless companies covet, or the less desirable 1800 MHz + range? Is it the same frequencies with nationwide coverage, or a less desirable patchwork? There is a lot of difference in how valuable Dish's spectrum may be to wireless companies, depending on the details. They may have only outbid the regional carriers for the spectrum the big 2 / big 4 didn't want.

 

I saw an article yesterday that said Dish is hoping the Sprint/T Mobile deal that's being discussed falls apart, so they can made a bid for T Mobile. They can't outbid Sprint, but they can try to catch T Mobile on the rebound if Sprint's bid fails. Making some sort of use of their spectrum would be a lot easier if they, you know, owned a company that already has towers over most of the US, as it would take a decade and cost billions to do it themselves.


SL5, PI-6S, SA-6AL 3xSWM16, 21 H20-100, 1 H20-600, 7 H24-700/AM21


#245 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 3,880 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 14 May 2014 - 07:09 AM

Why do you think AT&T has only run fiber so far and is still using the copper to peoples home?

AT&T has for years been developing and working to go to a wireless system for everything. They want uverse to be wireless. Think about that for a moment and its implications. Its an interesting way to get around a lot of hurdles.

This deal is all about bandwidth. TV stations don't need two way bandwidth. Only on demand. Wireless spectrum is precious. Have a massive amount of bandwidth that can be used to offer static feeds of stations and then have a wireless system built to Handel all Internet and on demand, over the top, and Handel all your phone system.

This dumps massive layers of government red tape that now exists on all copper phone systems as well. Massive. Im Not sure that can be stated loudly enough.

 

Going wireless for everyone's internet is not practical, especially if they want to start putting everyone's Netflix habits on it. The cell system is easily over an order of magnitude away from being able to handle today's internet demand, and that demand continues to increase. Read up on how the technology works, the data rates versus the percentage of total spectrum consumed and the directionality of the antennas (i.e. how many people in a 360* radius can share the same frequency) and it is easy to calculate that the cell towers would need to be a lot more dense to support what is being done today by cable modem and DSL. It is very difficult getting permission for new towers, NIMBY abounds.

 

Sure, you can serve a limited number of people using LTE and in a year or two LTE Advanced will improve on that, but the reason it works is because comparatively few people are using it at once. If everyone using Netflix was pulling that down on their phones via cellular instead of using their home internet connection that cellular data connection will perform about as well as it does when you're tailgating with 125,000 of your closest friends in a half square mile area :) There just isn't the bandwidth for everyone to go wireless in a urban or suburban density without a lot more towers.

 

I see this as more of a way to get the FCC off their backs about the less populated or more rugged areas where they feel it is too expensive to run high speed broadband to everyone's house. Put up a few extra cell towers in the area and sell them wireless broadband, with Directv as the alternative to what they provide today with Uverse. No way are they going to try to go completely wireless. It isn't possible, at least not for at least a decade (assuming the demand for bandwidth starts to level off, and we don't replace HD streaming with holographic streaming at gigabits per second ;))


Edited by slice1900, 14 May 2014 - 07:12 AM.

SL5, PI-6S, SA-6AL 3xSWM16, 21 H20-100, 1 H20-600, 7 H24-700/AM21


#246 OFFLINE   damondlt

damondlt

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,987 posts
  • LocationNewfoundland, Pa
Joined: Feb 27, 2006

Posted 14 May 2014 - 07:12 AM

Going wireless for everyone's internet is not practical, especially if they want to start putting everyone's Netflix habits on it. The cell system is easily over an order of magnitude away from being able to handle today's internet demand, and that demand continues to increase. Read up on how the technology works, the data rates versus the percentage of total spectrum consumed and the directionality of the antennas (i.e. how many people in a 360* radius can share the same frequency) and it is easy to calculate that the cell towers would need to be a lot more dense to support what is being done today by cable modem and DSL. It is very difficult getting permission for new towers, NIMBY abounds.

Sure, you can serve a limited number of people using LTE and in a year or two LTE Advanced will improve on that, but the reason it works is because comparatively few people are using it at once. If everyone using Netflix was pulling that down on their phones via cellular instead of using their home internet connection that cellular data connection will perform about as well as it does when you're tailgating with 125,000 of your closest friends in a half square mile area :) It just doesn't work well in urban or suburban density.

I see this as more of a way to get the FCC off their backs about the less populated or more rugged areas where they feel it is too expensive to run high speed broadband to everyone's house. Put up a few extra cell towers in the area and sell them wireless broadband, with Directv as the alternative to what they provide today with Uverse. No way are they going to try to go completely wireless. It isn't possible.

I agree,
That type of Internet is expensive. And limited to your data plan.
It's a joke and Verizon offers it here in my home town already.
If that's going to be the normal, then I see them losing customers to cable for their internet needs.



Sent from my Galaxy S5

Blue Ridge Communticatons

Digital HD Basic Plus, Cinemax,Showtime/TMC,Starz /Encore
Tivo T6 (Roamio Plus) Master Bedroom,Samsung 5300 40 Inch

Tivo Mini Livingroom Vizio M602i-B3 60 Inch

Tivo Mini Bedroom 2  LG 26LE5300 26 Inch
Tivo Mini Bedroom 3  Element ELEFW328 32 Inch
Cisco HD ,Bedroom office 4  Magnavox 32 inch

Arris Touchstone DG1660

Dream 60 Mbps down 3 Mbps up.

 


#247 OFFLINE   Laxguy

Laxguy

    Never say 'never'.

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 14,649 posts
  • LocationWinters, CA, between Napa and Sacramento
Joined: Dec 02, 2010

Posted 14 May 2014 - 07:16 AM

Not possible with today's technology, but.....


"Laxguy" means a guy who loves lacrosse.

#248 OFFLINE   joed32

joed32

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,731 posts
Joined: Jul 27, 2006

Posted 14 May 2014 - 07:16 AM

If we think we have problems with our billing from time to time now, just wait until AT&T brings their billing department into the mix.

They just said yesterday that Directv management would stay in place with AT&T as the parent company.



#249 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 3,880 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 14 May 2014 - 07:20 AM

They just said yesterday that Directv management would stay in place with AT&T as the parent company.

 

Having Directv management in place doesn't imply that Directv's back office will remain intact. I would assume that it would not, but generally it is the software that is responsible for billing screw ups, not people, and it would take years to either migrate Directv's billing systems to AT&T's, or replace both with a new system.


SL5, PI-6S, SA-6AL 3xSWM16, 21 H20-100, 1 H20-600, 7 H24-700/AM21


#250 OFFLINE   je4755

je4755

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 386 posts
Joined: Dec 11, 2006

Posted 14 May 2014 - 08:40 AM

I hope this doesn't mean the beginning of the end for Sunday ticket

Sent from my XT1053 using DBSTalk mobile app

Yes, I wonder how - if at all - discussions with AT&T affect the pace and substance of DirecTV's negotiations with the NFL.






Protected By... spam firewall...And...