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
1136 replies to this topic

#826 OFFLINE   Rich

Rich

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 22,071 posts
  • LocationPiscataway, NJ
Joined: Feb 22, 2007

Posted 26 June 2014 - 10:31 AM

What he's saying there is not at all wrong, I don't know why you guys find it so humorous.

 

Today Directv can't bundle, because they only deliver TV service. AT&T can't bundle very effectively, because they only have TV service in a small area. Combining the two will improve their ability to bundle, and therefore be more competitive with cable providers who have been very effective in winning customers via bundling.

 

I'm sure there were a lot of half truths (at best) during the hearing, but this wasn't one of them.

 

What about all the good folks who don't want bundling?  I certainly don't.  

 

Rich



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

#827 OFFLINE   Rich

Rich

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 22,071 posts
  • LocationPiscataway, NJ
Joined: Feb 22, 2007

Posted 26 June 2014 - 10:38 AM

Allowing DirecTV plus AT&T to compete more effectively together than they can separately is not the same as exerting a downward pressure on prices generally. For one thing, they can only do a full triple play bundle to those households where AT&T can provide broadband. Even if they extend wireless broadband it won't cover the entire country, and it remains to be seen if wireless broadband can be delivered at a speed and a cost that is competitive with the alternatives. In a few specific cases the statement might be true, but on a national basis it won't move prices one penny.

 

From our experience, AT&T can't supply a decent cell phone signal (I know some of you get good signal strength, but we don't and I can compare it to Verizon's superb cell phone network at any time, since my wife has a company supplied iPhone with AT&T service).  The ONLY times I've had a conversation with her that came across as clearly as Verizon to Verizon were all the times she called me from Europe.  Far as I'm concerned, AT&T doesn't meet its subscriber's needs now, it's gonna get better with the proposed merger?

 

Rich



#828 OFFLINE   Diana C

Diana C

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 2,028 posts
  • LocationNew Jersey
Joined: Mar 30, 2007

Posted 26 June 2014 - 11:20 AM

My experience is identical...I have an AT&T iPhone from work, but our personal cell service is with Verizon.  In my experience AT&T doesn't have enough capacity in their network, resulting in severely overcrowded cells.  At Newark airport, for example, you can get 5 bars but be unable to place call because the cell is maxed out.

 

But that is a New York Metro area problem.  In many other parts of the country AT&T service is quite good.  When I am at my client in Maryland I get 4 to 5 bars with AT&T and virtually no signal at all from Verizon.  In Massachusetts I get good service from both.

 

I think the real issue with the idea of wireless broadband is not so much reliability of service as it will be cost and capacity.  What kind of throughput will the customer get, and at what cost?  Extending even wireless broadband into really rural areas is awfully expensive.  They will either have to charge a lot more to rural customers than they charge urban ones, or else spread the cost out across all customers.  Either way, I don't see how that lowers any prices.


Dish Network Customer from 9/1998-11/2001
DirecTV Customer 10/2001 - 7/2014

FiOS TV/TiVo Customer since 6/2014
Moderator, DBSDish.com 1999-2000
Co-Founder and Administrator, DBSForums.com 2000-2006

Current setup:
DirecTV: HR34-700 (1TB) / HR24-100 (1TB) / HR24-500 (1TB) / HR21-700 (320GB) / HR21-100 (1TB) / 2 H25s / C41-500 / SWiM16 / Nomad / CCK

FiOS: 2 Tivo Roamio Pros (6 TB total) / 5 Tivo Minis attached via MOCA


#829 OFFLINE   fleckrj

fleckrj

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 1,235 posts
  • LocationCary, NC
Joined: Sep 04, 2009

Posted 26 June 2014 - 11:59 AM

Verizon and Sprint have an advantage over AT&T and T-Mobile for wireless in most areas of the country based on the frequencies they are assigned.  It is all about physics and has very little to do with the way the companies are run.



#830 OFFLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 16,791 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 26 June 2014 - 12:09 PM

DirecTV ARPU: $100.16 (1Q 2014)
Time Warner ARPU: $148.70 (2013)
Comcast ARPU: $151.30 (2013)
AT&T UVERSE Triple Play Customer ARPU: $170.00

With the cable companies and AT&T offering bundles including non-television services I'd expect the prices to reflect the Internet and phone portion of their sales. But AT&T is already higher than Comcast and Time Warner ... and for TV only DirecTV isn't inexpensive. The companies with the highest prices merging is supposed to bring prices down? :confused:


Possibly the fact that uverse tv costs are far higher than directv's? Not just in contracts but also in upkeep of infrastructure that's a set price that has to be shared among however many customers they have. ;)

#831 OFFLINE   Rich

Rich

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 22,071 posts
  • LocationPiscataway, NJ
Joined: Feb 22, 2007

Posted 27 June 2014 - 09:04 AM

My experience is identical...I have an AT&T iPhone from work, but our personal cell service is with Verizon.  In my experience AT&T doesn't have enough capacity in their network, resulting in severely overcrowded cells.  At Newark airport, for example, you can get 5 bars but be unable to place call because the cell is maxed out.

 

But that is a New York Metro area problem.  In many other parts of the country AT&T service is quite good.  When I am at my client in Maryland I get 4 to 5 bars with AT&T and virtually no signal at all from Verizon.  In Massachusetts I get good service from both.

 

I think the real issue with the idea of wireless broadband is not so much reliability of service as it will be cost and capacity.  What kind of throughput will the customer get, and at what cost?  Extending even wireless broadband into really rural areas is awfully expensive.  They will either have to charge a lot more to rural customers than they charge urban ones, or else spread the cost out across all customers.  Either way, I don't see how that lowers any prices.

 

Stuart explained the reason my wife's cell phone works so well in Europe.  If we had the same infrastructure in the States we wouldn't (why is there an "L" in wouldn't?) have these problems.  I think what Stuart's explanation boiled down to was Europe allows for more cell towers than we do and they are different in some way.  

 

Why we don't have enough cell towers defeats me.  I can walk one short block and be on River Road, which parallels the Raritan River and is considered an historic area.  But the historic area has really high utility poles lining one side of the road. When you really look at River Road, the utility poles (which I rarely even notice anymore) are right there to be seen and they aren't pretty.  Would a couple cell towers actually make any difference?  Probably.  We have a group of people that live in the historic district that go nuts every time someone tries to build something or use a home as a place of worship, stuff like that.  

 

So, Europe does it right and we do it wrong.  What's wrong with us?  Can we really be this stupid?

 

Rich



#832 OFFLINE   fleckrj

fleckrj

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 1,235 posts
  • LocationCary, NC
Joined: Sep 04, 2009

Posted 27 June 2014 - 10:03 AM

 

So, Europe does it right and we do it wrong.  What's wrong with us?  Can we really be this stupid?

 

 

We want good cell phone coverage, but we do not want to see a cell tower.  Homeowners pressure local governments to ban towers in their neighborhoods, so we all suffer.  It is the "not in my back yard" thing.  In Europe, towers are put where they are needed - not where they can only offend the people without any political clout.



#833 OFFLINE   dennisj00

dennisj00

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 9,089 posts
  • LocationLake Norman, NC
Joined: Sep 27, 2007

Posted 27 June 2014 - 11:44 AM

Or worse, the towers that are 'disguised' as TREES . . . 75' higher than the canopy and a really bad looking tree!



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!


#834 OFFLINE   Herdfan

Herdfan

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 6,131 posts
  • LocationTeays Valley, WV
Joined: Mar 18, 2006

Posted 27 June 2014 - 04:10 PM

Or worse, the towers that are 'disguised' as TREES . . . 75' higher than the canopy and a really bad looking tree!

 

Saw my first one of those in Vegas.  It didn't really help.


My Setup

 

 


#835 ONLINE   Laxguy

Laxguy

    Never say 'never'.

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 14,115 posts
  • LocationWinters, CA, between Napa and Sacramento
Joined: Dec 02, 2010

Posted 27 June 2014 - 04:31 PM

Or worse, the towers that are 'disguised' as TREES . . . 75' higher than the canopy and a really bad looking tree!

Now if it were surrounded by growing greenery, that'd be another story. A matte brown or camo on regular towers may be better than the "tree" look, regardless how painted... Or maybe they should just go for the 'Transformer' look (as in the kids movie, not electric ones.)


"Laxguy" means a guy who loves lacrosse.

#836 OFFLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 16,791 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 28 June 2014 - 12:26 AM

Or worse, the towers that are 'disguised' as TREES . . . 75' higher than the canopy and a really bad looking tree!


The ones in our area are pretty good, especially a few of the palm tree ones we have.

The best ones are probably the ones they are starting to put at churches. They look like a small tower with a steeple roof, and the antennas are under the roof so you see nothing but what looks like a regular building. Those are very smart IMHO.
  • Rich likes this

#837 OFFLINE   Drucifer

Drucifer

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 8,387 posts
  • LocationNY Hudson Valley
Joined: Feb 12, 2009

Posted 28 June 2014 - 12:35 AM

Or worse, the towers that are 'disguised' as TREES . . . 75' higher than the canopy and a really bad looking tree!

 

Yep, there is one here in Cold Spring, NY. It is not much higher then the trees around it.


DREW
Do it Right, Do it Once
LR: HR34-7, Bsm: HR24-1, Den HR24-2, MB: HR24-5, Kit: H25-5
PrimeStar '95, DirecTV  '00


#838 OFFLINE   Tom Servo

Tom Servo

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 953 posts
Joined: Mar 07, 2007

Posted 28 June 2014 - 01:59 AM


Why we don't have enough cell towers defeats me.  I can walk one short block and be on River Road, which parallels the Raritan River and is considered an historic area.  But the historic area has really high utility poles lining one side of the road. When you really look at River Road, the utility poles (which I rarely even notice anymore) are right there to be seen and they aren't pretty.  Would a couple cell towers actually make any difference?  Probably.  We have a group of people that live in the historic district that go nuts every time someone tries to build something or use a home as a place of worship, stuff like that.  

 

What I don't understand is why more utility companies don't seek to rent their pylons to wireless providers.  There's a few places up around Memphis where cell arrays are hung on high tension power pylons.  A little pipe extends up above the power lines and the array sits up there.  It's no more ugly than having high tension lines running through your area so it's a pretty smart approach to hiding the cell site. 

 

Of course, I'm a radio/RF nerd so the idea of a stack of antennas on a monopole behind a business or in a neighborhood doesn't bother me in the slightest.  And I consider myself very lucky that my current Verizon wireless service is great at home because there's a fairly tall self-supporting lattice tower across the highway from my subdivision.  I get a good -65 dBm on the 1x/RTT (voice) band and around -79 dBm on the LTE (700 MHz) band.  The signals were actually stronger last year, before they built more houses between me and the tower, and before Verizon tweaked the array and added the XLTE (1700 MHz AWS) patch antennas.

 

I'd be willing to suck it up and bundle cellular with AT&T if it meant a DirecTV discount, I suppose, but there's no nearby tower so my signal would be sub-optimal.  And I'm not convinced that their very recent LTE rollout is anything special.  Last I heard they had backhaul issues with CenturyLink and were topped out at 2 Mbps download speeds on their HSPA+ 3G network.  Unless that issue is remedied, LTE won't mean bupkis to speeds.  It'll be hard for them to beat the 52 Mbps download speed I get here at home or the average 12-14 Mbps I see elsewhere.



#839 OFFLINE   longrider

longrider

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 3,409 posts
  • LocationElizabeth, CO
Joined: Apr 21, 2007

Posted 28 June 2014 - 10:12 AM

Around here they get rather creative to hide the towers, this is a rural area and there are several that look like the windmill section of a wind driven water well.  There is a church with three crosses on a hill behind the church, and one person has a really fat flagpole.  As i get into town any building taller than 3 or 4 stories has antennas on the roof.

 

I would have no issue even with a plain cell tower, I really don't get the whole thing that anything to do with technology is an eyesore.  If you think nature your house is an eyesore but that is OK??? However the satellite dish, OTA antenna, A/C condenser, etc all must be hidden (yes, I know about OTARD but the law is not the issue here it is the thinking of people)  The fact I can see what I need to use modern tech is a non-issue to me


  • Rich likes this
My Setup

#840 OFFLINE   Rich

Rich

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 22,071 posts
  • LocationPiscataway, NJ
Joined: Feb 22, 2007

Posted 28 June 2014 - 10:13 AM

We want good cell phone coverage, but we do not want to see a cell tower.  Homeowners pressure local governments to ban towers in their neighborhoods, so we all suffer.  It is the "not in my back yard" thing.  In Europe, towers are put where they are needed - not where they can only offend the people without any political clout.

 

What's worse, a well constructed cell tower or a brand new utility pole that's out of plumb (we have a lot of that here, apparently the lowest bidders on road jobs don't use levels)?  I'll take a nice looking cell tower over a leaning utility pole anytime.

 

Rich



#841 OFFLINE   Rich

Rich

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 22,071 posts
  • LocationPiscataway, NJ
Joined: Feb 22, 2007

Posted 28 June 2014 - 10:14 AM

Or worse, the towers that are 'disguised' as TREES . . . 75' higher than the canopy and a really bad looking tree!

 

We have them.  Damn near ran off the road the first time I saw one.  

 

Rich



#842 OFFLINE   Rich

Rich

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 22,071 posts
  • LocationPiscataway, NJ
Joined: Feb 22, 2007

Posted 28 June 2014 - 10:17 AM

What I don't understand is why more utility companies don't seek to rent their pylons to wireless providers.  There's a few places up around Memphis where cell arrays are hung on high tension power pylons.  A little pipe extends up above the power lines and the array sits up there.  It's no more ugly than having high tension lines running through your area so it's a pretty smart approach to hiding the cell site. 

 

Well, there you go!  A good sensible answer.  Kudos!

 

Rich



#843 OFFLINE   Athlon646464

Athlon646464

    Hall Of Fame

  • News Hound
  • 3,018 posts
  • LocationUxbridge, MA
Joined: Feb 23, 2007

Posted 11 July 2014 - 05:46 AM

No joke - Sen. Al Franken asks regulators to 'carefully scrutinize" AT&T-DirecTV deal
 
(FierceTelecom.com) - U.S. Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) has turned his anti-merger fervor towards AT&T's proposed acquisition of DirecTV.
 
In a letter to FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler and Assistant Attorney General William Baer, Franken urged regulators to "carefully scrutinize" the deal with the viewpoint that "the combined entity will have enhanced power in virtually every corner of the telecommunications market."
 
 
al-franken-sen.jpg
Franken

1 HR34-700, 1 C31-700, 1 C41W-100, 1 WVBR0-01, 1 HR24-500

Original install on Apr. 20, 2008 - C41W & WVB self installed on Dec. 27, 2014 - HR34 & C31 installed on Aug. 24, 2013 - HR24 installed on July 23, 2010

Press any key to continue, or any other key to cancel.


#844 OFFLINE   SteveHas

SteveHas

    Hall of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 1,023 posts
Joined: Feb 06, 2007

Posted 11 July 2014 - 08:00 AM

Good, these corporate mergers done't help the consumer, or our economy as a whole. They simply eliminate competition and choice, and are driven by the markets demand for double digit growth every year.


D* Customer Since 1999

  • Dish
  • Slimline-3 SWiM 16, 
    Familyroom
  • DirecTV HR44-700  
  • Panasonic 55" TC-P55GT50 plasma HDMI/ DECA, CAT6, OTA
  • Nintendo Wii,
  • Panasonic DMP-BDT220 Blu-Ray, CAT6
  • Pioneer VSX-1120 7.1 CAT6,
  • Cambridge Sound Works Ensemble 1 - front, S300 - surround back, Center Stage - center, Polk RM7 - surround side, and Bass Cube 8
    Master Bedroom
  • DirecTV HR24-500 
  • Vizio 37" SV370XVT LCD HDMI/DECA, CAT6 - can I just take a moment to say how awesome this TV is
  • Sony BDP-BX3B Blu-Ray, CAT6
    Basement
  • Samsung 52" LNT5271 FX LCD HDMI/DECA, CAT 6, OTA
  • Sony PS3,
  • Denon AVR 2108, KEF C40
    Son's Room
  • Vizio 42" E3D420 VX LCD HDMI/DECA, CAT 6, OTA
    Network
  • Linksys EA4500 802.11N Gigabit router
  • 2 - D-Link DGS-1008G Gigabit switches
  • DirecTV Home Cinema Connection
  • DirecTV GenieGo
  • ISP: Verizon FiOs Quantum 50/35
  • Dell Studio 540 Quad Core Q8200 64 Bit, Cat6
  • 64 bit Windows 8 Home Premium w/ Windows Media Center, 8 gigs RAM, PlayOn
  • HP DV6-1243CLB Core 2 Duo T6600, 802.11N
  • 64 bit Windows 7 Home Premium, 4 gigs RAM
  • Compaq Presario SR1650NX AMD 64, Cat6
  • 64 bit Windows 8 Home Premium w/ Windows Media Center, 6 gigs RAM
  • Apple Mac Mini Intel processor, 802.11N
  • Snow Leopard, 2 gigs RAM
  • iPhone 5S
  • iPad 2
  • Both iOS 8.1
  • 3879075488.png

 


#845 OFFLINE   Drucifer

Drucifer

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 8,387 posts
  • LocationNY Hudson Valley
Joined: Feb 12, 2009

Posted 11 July 2014 - 09:41 PM

Around here they get rather creative to hide the towers, this is a rural area and there are several that look like the windmill section of a wind driven water well.  There is a church with three crosses on a hill behind the church, and one person has a really fat flagpole.  As i get into town any building taller than 3 or 4 stories has antennas on the roof.

 

I would have no issue even with a plain cell tower, I really don't get the whole thing that anything to do with technology is an eyesore.  If you think nature your house is an eyesore but that is OK??? However the satellite dish, OTA antenna, A/C condenser, etc all must be hidden (yes, I know about OTARD but the law is not the issue here it is the thinking of people)  The fact I can see what I need to use modern tech is a non-issue to me

 

Telephone/power poles are now quaint. A small town without 'em, look like they're missing something.


DREW
Do it Right, Do it Once
LR: HR34-7, Bsm: HR24-1, Den HR24-2, MB: HR24-5, Kit: H25-5
PrimeStar '95, DirecTV  '00


#846 OFFLINE   Rich

Rich

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 22,071 posts
  • LocationPiscataway, NJ
Joined: Feb 22, 2007

Posted 12 July 2014 - 08:09 AM

Telephone/power poles are now quaint. A small town without 'em, look like they're missing something.

 

Yup, also better to have the lines up on poles than buried.  Buried power lines are a disaster waiting to happen.  Remember all the really old pictures of NYC and the myriad of cables on the poles?  

 

Rich



#847 OFFLINE   txfeinbergs

txfeinbergs

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 138 posts
Joined: Nov 15, 2005

Posted 12 July 2014 - 10:55 AM

Yup, also better to have the lines up on poles than buried.  Buried power lines are a disaster waiting to happen.  Remember all the really old pictures of NYC and the myriad of cables on the poles?  

 

Rich

Are you being sarcastic? Can't tell. Lines on poles go down pretty quickly in an ice storm and heavy wind storms.



#848 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 3,532 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 12 July 2014 - 12:06 PM

Yup, also better to have the lines up on poles than buried.  Buried power lines are a disaster waiting to happen.  Remember all the really old pictures of NYC and the myriad of cables on the poles?  

 

Rich

 

You mean like these?

 

New-York-Telephone-Wires-1887-03.jpg

New-York-Telephone-Wires-1887-01.jpg

 

 

Lots of good pics of some crazy wiring in other countries at this site:

 

http://www.darkroast...drb-series.html


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


#849 OFFLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 16,791 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 12 July 2014 - 03:37 PM

Yup, also better to have the lines up on poles than buried. Buried power lines are a disaster waiting to happen. Remember all the really old pictures of NYC and the myriad of cables on the poles?

Rich


They may depend on where you are, because here in southern california' they always bury them in any new develope,nt, as they should. There is zero reason to put power above ground here, and I can't imagine why you'd want them that way in any new properly planed community.

#850 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 3,532 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 12 July 2014 - 04:40 PM

They may depend on where you are, because here in southern california' they always bury them in any new develope,nt, as they should. There is zero reason to put power above ground here, and I can't imagine why you'd want them that way in any new properly planed community.

 

I think he was being sarcastic, in reply to the suggestion that towns that have no telephone poles look like something is missing.

 

Pretty sure everywhere in the country runs utilities underground in any new development. Where I live, any neighborhood newer than about 50 years old has underground utilities.


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





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