DBSTalk Forum banner

AT&T to offer streaming version of DirecTV

30K views 544 replies 61 participants last post by  James Long 
#1 ·
Same packages for the same pricing... :eek:

From a blog here:

"AT&T will be selling a 65+ channel streaming version of DIRECTV for $93 a month, an 85+ version of DIRECTV for $110 a month, a 105+ channel version of DIRECTV for $124, and a 125+ channel version of DIRECTV for $135 a month streaming online."
 
#2 ·
And also raising DirecTV Now by $10/month.
Interesting. They reported subscriber losses recently so the fix is to raise prices. This just supports my contention that cable/sat will suffer for awhile, but if they hang in there, will survive quite well.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
#3 ·
It is good to finally see some movement on this long awaited product offering. I look forward to an official release.
 
#4 ·
Same here. I have questions about 'DVR' service and 4K with the streaming version, especially if the pricing will essentially be the same.
 
#5 ·
The pricing being the same is a shock and not surprised. Shock because they stated it would be cheaper because no dish or tech was needed. Not surprised because they are obviously trying to make more money on it. As stated the dvr ability and 4K will dictate if I switch
 
#8 ·
Serious question, what is the benefit for you to switch, is it just not having the satellite on the roof and less wires? How high of a download speed would one need, forget about anything else, strictly for Directv over the internet with 2 tv's on at the same time?
 
#6 ·
Streaming technology is expensive. At best AT&T is trading installs and truck rolls for server capacity and bandwidth in their content delivery network. Since the industry doesn't report subscriber acquisition costs for streaming it is hard to put an exact cost difference between signing up a satellite customer and signing up a streaming customer. But most of the ongoing costs to the customers is simply fees passed on from the content providers. The remainder pays for the network ... whether it is satellites in the sky or content delivery via the Interenet.
 
#125 ·
This being said - if streaming costs are so expensive why are these "bright" executives at AT&T doling out such a service? They need four video products? I don't get it. I am scratching my head. This company did all kinds of streamlining at DIRECTV - yet the service is still expensive. Now they are dropping competitors from their streaming services and raising prices. Where is the FCC while AT&T is doing whatever it is doing in front of their faces. They must be asleep. I thought there were conditions to be met for having these two mergers approved. I guess those conditions and promises went out the window. Our word is our bond means nothing to AT&T.
 
#10 ·
I was just quoting the blogger.

When looking at the current satellite package pricing, it's difficult to match what he said in the article for sure. For example, the non-promotion price for 235+ channels is $124 per month (XTRA). The non-promotional price for everything (330+ channels) is $189 per month.

And these are just the fees for channels. The boxes, HD, Whole Home etc. not included.

Of course, neither of these prices include taxes and fees.
 
#15 ·
Perhaps the blogger's plus sign is bigger? This is one reason why I am looking forward to an official announcement of plans and content.

DIRECTV NOW as listed on their website is 65+ channels for $40. Add $10 to get 65+ channels for $50. The article states DIRECTV NOW Plus with 40+ channels for $50 a month and DIRECTV NOW MAX with 50+ channels for $70. That contradiction should also be worked out by getting an official announcement.
 
#24 ·
Perhaps the blogger's plus sign is bigger? This is one reason why I am looking forward to an official announcement of plans and content.
Ha, yeah, maybe. Here's a question: when DTV counts up the number of channels they offer in a package, are they counting both the HD and SD version? Maybe they're going to move to a more honest count where they don't count those duplicates. And also not count those crap channels (shopping, etc.) that actually pay to be included and no one cares about.
 
#16 ·
I wouldn't be at all surprised if the pricing is the same. Why should the pricing be lower, when the cost of content and cost of delivery aren't any lower?

The savings over satellite come from:

1) cheaper to install, because it is self-install vs. having a guy come to your house to install
2) no Genie, so presumably no $15/month advanced receiver fee

Cable/satellite have some taxes that streaming is (so far) immune from, so maybe it comes in $20/month cheaper on "list" pricing.

If anyone was thinking it would be priced like Directv Now, I don't know what you've been smoking. They lose money on Directv Now, and are planning to raise the price to make it (slightly) profitable. Given that Directv satellite is pretty profitable, coming in with an alternative that's basically identical that costs way less would be stupid - they are in business to make money, not to maximize subscribers.
 
#23 ·
If anyone was thinking it would be priced like Directv Now, I don't know what you've been smoking. They lose money on Directv Now, and are planning to raise the price to make it (slightly) profitable. Given that Directv satellite is pretty profitable, coming in with an alternative that's basically identical that costs way less would be stupid - they are in business to make money, not to maximize subscribers.
I don't think any of us, including myself, who have listened to guidance given by AT&T CEO Stephenson have thought that the upcoming streaming DTV service would cost "way less" than the traditional satellite product. But he has indicated multiple times that it should cost somewhat less to reflect lower customer acquisition costs (installation, equipment, etc.) and that, despite the lower pricing, it would actually have a higher ROI for AT&T.

If both delivery methods are to have the exact same channel packages, I've always thought it makes sense that the programming costs be the same but the overall cost for the streaming service to be less because of lower equipment/DVR/per TV fees. We might also see the satellite product begin charging a pro install fee rather than waving it, while the streaming product has free self-install. There could also be differences in terms of up-front rebates (i.e. Visa gift cards) and commitment terms between the two.

If total costs over the first 12-24 months were, say, 15% lower for the streaming version for a 2 TV household with whole-home HD DVR, that would be about in line with what I've been expecting. But we'll see. In addition to, or even instead of, offering the streaming version for a little lower price than satellite, AT&T can do other things to steer new sign-ups to the streaming version if that's their goal.
 
#20 ·
Coincidentally on March 5 I received an email from Directv with a long survey about my streaming habits, and my opinion on the features and quality of the Directv App. Timely because on March 4 they killed Out of Home streaming from the local DVR, for local and some sports channels. I let them have it.

But the questions were very specific about what I look for in streaming, comparisons to Netflix and Amazon and DTV Now.

So they are up to something.
 
#25 ·
What is also generally missing from these comparisons and in general is how many channels are real channels vs. ad channels who actually pay to be included. Obviously, some watch these channels and buy goods but need to look at real channel list to see how many real channels.
I'm amazed, as I talk to people, how many who even with a DVR don't ever skip over commercials or do similar things
 
#26 ·
My parents fall into this category. They use the DVR to record their shows, and that's it. After over 7 years with a DVR, my mom just learned a couple of months ago that you can pause/rewind live TV but doesn't see why you'd need to do that more than once or twice in your lifetime. "It's just easier" to watch the commercials on their shows, but sometimes they will FF through the commercials if they are really into the show, and the remote is handy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: the2130
#30 ·
Same here. I have questions about 'DVR' service and 4K with the streaming version, especially if the pricing will essentially be the same.
The NFL is never going to give a provider the exclusive rights that only a subset of their customers (aka only those who have a X1) will even be able to access. It would be like if DirecTV made Sunday Ticket a HS17 exclusive or if Dish got it and made it a Hopper 3 exclusive. Not to mention having the X1 requires that you also get internet from Comcast, so it isn't available to their television only subscribers who rather use fiber via their telco provider since it's faster than Comcast in many areas, or people living in areas where the X1 isn't available at all, since Comcast has a history of neglecting some acquired areas. Plus the X1 "exclusive" channels are usually limited to things that tend to be distributed OTT like Cheddar, or lesser channels who rather take the limited X1 only availability vs not being carried at all on Comcast like I24 News and some international packages, they wouldn't do it for something major like the NFL.

Not to mention, Comcast does NOT have a nationwide footprint, there will be major cities, including NYC, Dallas and most of Los Angeles, where it won't be available at all, along with other NFL cities like Buffalo, Charlotte,
Cincinnati, Cleveland, Green Bay, Indianapolis, Kansas City, New Orleans, Phoenix and Tampa. Even if they do it via iNDemand, who handles the NHL, NBA, MLB and MLS packages for digital cable and telcos, they would be at the mercy of individual systems, since there's tons of systems who still don't offer the out of market packages in HD, or don't offer out of market packages at all, including systems lagging behind on upgrades owned by the 3 major providers who co-own iNDemand Comcast, Cox and Spectrum. Not to mention to consolidate their C-Band transponder space, iNDemand recently switched to 720p only for their HD feeds, even for games that originate on 1080i networks.

The NFL is its own monster that requires dedicated feeds, so for satellite it isn't just remapping RSNs they already carry with some bonus feeds of non-carried channels. For Dish, they would need the bandwidth set aside on Sundays for 15+ additional HD feeds on both arcs and 15+ additional SD feeds for the western arc (since the NFL won't let them make the package HD only). While each cable system would need additional dedicated feeds since many systems do not support IP/switched delivery for their entire subscriber base, if they support it at all, and because of the schedule overlap iNDemand can't just repurpose their existing GAME and TEAM channels for NFL.
and how will hardware costs work?? 2 year reup to add an IP box on your own network??

Will att give you free speed boots with att fiber / att vdsl?
 
#31 · (Edited)
New Directv Now Packages. Compare Packages Account

I thought they would yank Scripps and Discovery and leave sports intact to appeal to sports viewers. Wrong. They yanked MLB Network, Tennis Channel, NHL Network, NFL Network and SNY for NY Metro viewers, Also for news fans they pulled BBC World News. The only thing they have accomplished is to rationalize the pricing amongst the various Directv platforms. Would work well if they were the only OTT provider. I can't see who these new packages would appeal to except for someone devoted to HBO and Cinemax. And that market could probably be better served elsewhere. Definitely a non-starter for sports fans.
 
#32 ·
Yep. On another site earlier today, I posted that I bet DTVN was going to drop the Viacom channels to get to these lesser channel counts, and possibly the Discovery/Scripps channels too. I was right on both counts. And, to boot, they're also dropping the AMC and A+E channels! The only overlap between these two new DTVN packages and Philo will be The Hallmark Channel.

Basically, for $40, YouTube TV offers the same stuff as the new $70 DTVN Max, except that YTTV doesn't have Hallmark Channel, HBO or Cinemax, but it does have AMC, BBA America, IFC, Smithsonian, and a few other small nets, none of which DTVN Max will have. And, oh, YTTV has unlimited cloud DVR storage for 9 months, with the ability to FF through ads on every channel except those owned by CBS (CBS, Pop and CBS Sports). Keep in mind that, for those who want it, they can add HBO separately through HBO Now for $15 or through the upcoming WarnerMedia streaming service which will basically be HBO Now plus other stuff for who-knows-what-price.

As you say, these new DTVN packages are solely for those who are devoted to HBO and would always spend money on it each month anyhow. And even some of those people may find other options more appealing, depending on specific channel preferences.
 
#35 ·
Looking at that comparison chart for DTVNow subs I can't help thinking that for the average person, going to the site and seeing that, the word that will flash in their mind quickly is "confusion"! Yes it is all laid out, but the differences between the 'new' packages and the old are stark and reinforce my thoughts that to get anything nearly as much with streaming as I get with cable/sat the cost is going to be nearly the same. And it is going to be a much worse UI to deal with than is any of the different UIs on cable/sat equipment, or at least any I've seen. Not to even mention that none of the streamers DVR functionality is anything close to what cable/sat offers.
And data caps are either on your ISP subscription now or will be. Or you could have something like Frontier's offerings that have no data caps, but also don't have very good speed offerings so it isn't an issue.
And no matter how I look and juggle what would be minimum acceptable channels for me, cable is the bargain deal out there. I'm on a bundled service of TV/Internet with Mediacom, my internet bill would be $99/month if it was the only service I had, my total bill for TV/Internet with all their channels including the big 4 Premiums and fees is $176/month. Let's say that a streamer cable/sat service was $50/month, add HBO, Cinemax, Starz, Showtime and I'm at least something more than I pay now and it is all less convenient and useful.
 
#36 ·
And it is going to be a much worse UI to deal with than is any of the different UIs on cable/sat equipment, or at least any I've seen.
Eh, I dunno. Some of those cable DVRs are pretty bad. And, just one person's opinion, but I have a friend, a woman in her mid-40s, who recently moved into a place where DTV satellite is included with a Genie DVR. She had previously been a DTVN subscriber on her Apple TV 4K. She looked at the DTV UI and was like "Wow, I like DirecTV Now on the Apple TV way better." I explained to her that she could use her new DTV user name and password, though, with Apple TV's single sign-on feature to unlock access to all the various streaming apps that go with the channels that are part of her satellite TV package. And then she can stream stuff on-demand via the Apple TV rather than mainly using the old DTV Genie. She liked that idea.

Not to even mention that none of the streamers DVR functionality is anything close to what cable/sat offers.
Well, I agree that most of these "streaming cable" (vMVPD) services have cloud DVRs that are in some way inferior to a traditional DVR. But then they have some advantages too. Consider YouTube TV's cloud DVR, which is the best of the bunch. You can record as many simultaneous shows as you want; there are no tuners and therefore no recording conflicts. You have unlimited storage space. Yes, you can only keep recordings for 9 months (unless that particular title re-airs in that 9 months and is therefore re-recorded) but I suspect 9 months is plenty of time to store stuff for the vast majority of people. And because there's unlimited storage and time-based auto-deletion, YouTube TV's DVR is very no-fuss. You simply "like" series, movies and sports teams and then all their airings get saved. Searching through all your recorded and on-demand content is easy because, well, Google is pretty good at search. There's no point in deleting anything because you don't need to free up space. (Oh, and YouTube TV offers up to six different personal profiles per account, so each member of the household can have a separate library of recordings, favorite channels, etc.)

And data caps are either on your ISP subscription now or will be. Or you could have something like Frontier's offerings that have no data caps, but also don't have very good speed offerings so it isn't an issue.
And no matter how I look and juggle what would be minimum acceptable channels for me, cable is the bargain deal out there. I'm on a bundled service of TV/Internet with Mediacom, my internet bill would be $99/month if it was the only service I had, my total bill for TV/Internet with all their channels including the big 4 Premiums and fees is $176/month. Let's say that a streamer cable/sat service was $50/month, add HBO, Cinemax, Starz, Showtime and I'm at least something more than I pay now and it is all less convenient and useful.
Yep, data caps and bundled pricing are where the broadband+TV providers have advantages versus the vMVPDs. But even still, many smaller households can use a vMVPD and stay under a 1TB data cap (which is what Comcast and AT&T impose; Charter doesn't have one). As for pricing, it all depends on exactly which channels you care about and how many TVs you need HD DVR service on. In general, the more channels you need, the more likely it is that you'll get a better deal bundling TV in with your internet service. The more TVs you need HD DVR service on, the less likely it is that you'll get a better deal bundling TV in with your internet service.

The innovations that the vMVPDs brought to the table are: skinnier, lower cost channel packages; no commitment with the ability to easily start and stop service on a monthly basis; straightforward pricing without hidden fees for broadcast channels, RSNs or HD service; the ability to watch live and recorded TV on more than one screen simultaneously for no additional charge; and the ability to use your preferred viewing devices that you own rather than big, used cable/satellite boxes.
 
#41 ·
Been waiting for this announcement and am curious to hear about four things when we get something official from ATT/DirecTV:

* Will streaming service have the 4K channels?

* Will streaming have Dolby 5.1 sound for all the same channels that satellite does?

* What will DVR capabilities be?

* Will Sunday Ticket be offered on the streaming package?

I see some definite advantages that would get me to switch from satellite service. For one, PQ is much better for me with Directv Now on an Apple TV than it is with an HR44 to the same tv. I’m guessing the streaming service will have the same feeds. Also no wiring or ugly satellite on the house and the potential to save $$$ on all of the boxes/hd fees/dvr fees although we will have to see how that all shakes out.
 
#42 ·
Been waiting for this announcement and am curious to hear about four things when we get something official from ATT/DirecTV:

* Will streaming service have the 4K channels?

* Will streaming have Dolby 5.1 sound for all the same channels that satellite does?

* What will DVR capabilities be?

* Will Sunday Ticket be offered on the streaming package?

I see some definite advantages that would get me to switch from satellite service. For one, PQ is much better for me with Directv Now on an Apple TV than it is with an HR44 to the same tv. I'm guessing the streaming service will have the same feeds. Also no wiring or ugly satellite on the house and the potential to save $$$ on all of the boxes/hd fees/dvr fees although we will have to see how that all shakes out.
Yep, those are all good questions. I don't have any definitive answers (obviously) but I can tell you the following:

The Android TV-powered STB that will be used for the forthcoming streaming version of DTV (the C71 "Osprey" box) does support 4K resolution, it outputs at 60Hz, and it can decode H.264, HEVC/H.265 and VP9, and it supports Dolby Audio as well as both the HDR10 and HLG versions of HDR.

I know support for 4K (and HDR?) was listed over a year ago as being on the road map for AT&T/DirecTV's streaming video platform (i.e. the platform that rolled out publicly with the 2.0 version of the DirecTV Now app in late spring 2018).

So, all that said, yes, I would very much expect that the streaming version of "full DirecTV" to offer the same 4K and 4K HDR content that DTV satellite offers.

As for Dolby 5.1 sound, I know that at least some channels already offer that on DTV Now. I see no reason why there couldn't or wouldn't be full Dolby 5.1 delivery on the upcoming streaming DTV service.

As for DVR capabilities -- I have no good info to provide, other than it will almost certainly use the same cloud DVR that DTV Now uses, although likely with a more desirable feature set. DTV Now provides only 20 hours of storage with a 30-day limit before auto-deletion in its cloud DVR. While the same technology (servers, software, CDNs) will be powering the cloud DVR for the upcoming streaming DTV service, I would absolutely expect its cloud DVR to be fuller featured -- maybe 200 hours of storage per account and no time-based auto-deletion?

As for NFL Sunday Ticket, who knows. It's up in the air as to whether that will be offered in the future by AT&T at all and, if so, under what terms. But I do recall the AT&T CEO saying that he foresaw the streaming version of DTV ultimately offering the full range of content now offered by DTV satellite, including Sunday Ticket. We'll see.
 
#43 ·
We have a 2TB cap here. With 2 kids that stream a lot and the wife and I working from home plus 4 cameras that record to the cloud we average about 6-800 gigs a month. I suspect by switching to streaming full time we will increase to around 1.5TB
 
#44 ·
Just because you have high caps or uncapped service, doesn't mean that your ISP won't do something to make using a particular streaming service that competes with their TV offerings easy. They are no longer bound by net neutrality, and anywhere that you have only one really good broadband option (which is much of the country) there's really nothing to stop ISPs from doing this if they see 'Directv via IP' or anything else hurting their bottom line.
 
#49 ·
ISPs may block or throttle content to protect their other subscribers. When some subscribers use more than their "fair share" it can affect other customers's traffic. Throttling and caps make sure that bandwidth is available for everyone and if there are overage charges those can be applied to increasing the ISP's connection to the Internet.
 
#50 ·
My 1T cap has been biting me in the butt for the past few months. My wife and I work from home, so we already use a large chunk of our 1T allotment. I think some of the issue is my son downloading/re-downloading games on his xBox at 75G a pop. However, with two new smart TV's, we've also been watching a lot more streaming based stuff and my normal 700-800G per month has been running in the 1.1T to 1.4T. Unfortunately in my area, Xfinity only offers a 1T plan or an unlimited plan. IIRC, the unlimited plan was another $90 a month. So for now, I'm just suffering with the extra monthly charges for overages and trying to keep the kids from streaming you-tube all night long.
 
#51 ·
Unfortunately in my area, Xfinity only offers a 1T plan or an unlimited plan. IIRC, the unlimited plan was another $90 a month. So for now, I'm just suffering with the extra monthly charges for overages and trying to keep the kids from streaming you-tube all night long.
I think you can add unlimited data to any Xfinity internet plan for an extra $50/mo. Otherwise, they'll charge you $10 for every 50GB block of data that you exceed 1TB, up to a maximum of $200 in overage fees. But they give you a 2 free "courtesy" overage months, with just a warning issued, before they start assessing any overage fees.

XFINITY Data Usage Center - FAQ
Terabyte-using cable customers double, increasing risk of data cap fees
 
#62 ·
These live streaming TV services usually have an "Are you still watching?" pop-up that appears if the viewer hasn't interacted with it for a couple of hours (no channel change, no rewind/FF/pause, etc.). And if the viewer doesn't click on the "Yes, I'm still watching!" box, then the video stream just shuts off in order not to waste your data.

Perhaps AT&T wouldn't do that with their streaming TV service if it's running over their own AT&T Fiber service but, in all other cases, I would think they would.
 
#63 ·
You have to look at all the smart phones, gaming, surfing, social media perusing and whatever devices are hooked up to the router. Most people forget about those Roku like devices, security systems, home assistant devices and the laptop or computer. That is a lot to keep going with all night bandwidth flowing to your set. I guess that 1Gbps service Verizon claims can connect 100 devices is worth getting after all. If you have a cool $200 Samolians to pay a month (according to Fred Sanford) I sure would like to see someone fulfill Verizon's claim and hook a hundred of those babies to their service. Later!
 
#68 ·
I guess that 1Gbps service Verizon claims can connect 100 devices is worth getting after all.
100 devices at 10Mbps each works. Is Verizon claiming every device can watch a HD stream at the same time?

We have a 1GB connection at work with more than 2000 PCs and other devices ... the key is that they are not all streaming HD at the same time.
 
#64 ·
So the two new packages from DirecTV Now -- which now exclude all networks from the Discovery/Scripps, Viacom, AMC, and A+E groups -- are named "Plus" and "Max". That branding strikes me as a bit odd. "Plus" sounds like something that should be a step up from, or an addition to, a more basic tier.

And then I took a look earlier today at the channel line-up for AT&T's Watch TV skinny live streaming service (which they don't advertise much -- I think it's mostly just serves as a freebie thrown in with their more expensive mobile plans). Guess what it consists of? Besides AT&T's own channels (TNT, CNN, etc.), it's exclusively composed of networks from Discovery/Scripps, Viacom, AMC, and A+E. Plus it has Hallmark Channel and Hallmark Movies & Mysteries. So the only overlap it has with the "Plus" or "Max" plans from DTVN are AT&T's own channels plus the main Hallmark Channel.

I wonder if they plan to rebrand that skinny bundle and bring it over as part of DTVN? Maybe it could be the DTVN "Starter" tier, still priced at $15. And then either the Plus or Max bundles could be added to it for an additional $50 or $70, respectively. (Never mind that consumers would be better off adding Philo for $16 to either the Plus or Max packages.)
 
#66 ·
The one sports oriented OTT I am aware of is FuboTV. It also includes news channels but not sure if it has locals. I've never tried it out myself so have no personal experience with it.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top