DTV Now Beta Hardware Tests

Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by jborchel, Feb 13, 2019.

  1. Feb 16, 2019 #61 of 131
    NashGuy

    NashGuy Active Member

    314
    71
    Jan 30, 2014
    Nashville, TN
    I know that Netflix just pays Amazon to use their AWS cloud, at least to power part of their service, rather than streaming everything off their own servers. I don't know what AT&T is doing with DTV Now or will do with their forthcoming WarnerMedia OTT service but it might be cheapest to just go with one of the clouds operated by Amazon, Google or Microsoft rather than build their own.
     
  2. Feb 16, 2019 #62 of 131
    KyL416

    KyL416 Hall Of Fame

    5,201
    908
    Nov 10, 2005
    Tobyhanna, PA
    Except for the $100 million they recently spent on keeping the non-exclusive rights to a show that has been in non-stop syndication since the 90s for only one more year, on top of the money they are spending for the rights to all the other non-original series they have, even though popular original shows like Sense8 got cancelled for "budget" reasons. While other shows like Degrassi, Project Mc2 and others are stuck in "Netflix Limbo" (google the term, you'll find tons of originals that were previously renewed for additional seasons, but those additional seasons have yet to be comissioned and Netflix still hasn't cancelled those shows, screwing over any cast members that have multiseason contracts saying those shows have priority over any other future starring projects they take).

    There's also a bunch of originals that Netflix doesn't actually own outright since they were comissioned and produced by 3rd parties instead of in house, including House of Cards, the Marvel shows and much of the Dreamworks kids shows, so down the road even they can leave Netflix. (i.e. After the Kevin Spacey stuff broke, all Netflix could do is refuse to carry any additional seasons if he was still on it, it was still on MRC to either fire and write him out of the show or fallback on their own syndication deals)

    Then you got other "originals" that are just imports Netflix slapped with the "Netflix Original" label in the USA and randomly decided to stop importing halfway through and in some cases dropped them entirely. (i.e. the 3rd season of YTV's Some Assembly Required that aired back in 2016 has yet to appear on Netflix, Series 3 of CBBC's Sparticle Mystery that aired back in 2015, or CBBC's Wolfblood that left Netflix entirely without them ever adding series 4 and 5)


    Not to mention Netflix's ever shrinking movie library after they had to give up a bunch of premium window rights for multiple studios like Fox, Sony, Universal, Lionsgate and WB a few years ago after HBO, Showtime, Starz and Epix launched their own authenticated streaming platforms. While, outside of certain studios that they're about to lose like Disney, the rest of their major studio movie library is now mostly in the syndicated window that has to be renewed on an ongoing basis movie by movie.
     
    Last edited: Feb 16, 2019
  3. Feb 16, 2019 #63 of 131
    NashGuy

    NashGuy Active Member

    314
    71
    Jan 30, 2014
    Nashville, TN
    Quite awhile back (in 2017, I think), someone at AT&T (Stephenson?) said that the UI they were developing for the revamped DTV Now app (which emerged from beta and rolled out widely in May/June 2018) would eventually work its way across all of their TV apps/services/boxes, even eventually including DTV satellite. I'm sure he didn't mean *exactly* the same UI, as there will always need to be slightly different menus, etc., but the same general look and feel and placement of the main UI elements.

    So I would expect that the UI that you see in the beta screenshots/videos of the C71 to be pretty much how it's going to look when the device actually rolls out with the forthcoming "DTV over IP" product, however that's branded and structured. It's basically the current DTV Now app, but with DTV channel numbers, integrated into the home screen of an Android TV box. And it supports a more full-featured voice remote than the remotes that come with Roku, Apple TV, etc. In fact, I've read that AT&T has already iterated an updated version of the remote control for the C71 based on beta tester feedback. I've also read that regular ol' DTV Genie remotes can be used with the C71.

    The real mysteries about this forthcoming service are what the channel packages and their prices will be, how much cloud DVR storage it offers, and how AT&T brands it. If the channel packages are nearly the same as with satellite (with itself will probably see a channel package shake-up for new subscribers), then perhaps this new service will simply be branded "DirecTV" and sold from the same website that sells their satellite service. Or maybe it gets a whole new name, like "DirecTV Stream" or "AT&T TV". We'll see...
     
  4. Feb 16, 2019 #64 of 131
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    9,711
    1,188
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    You really believe they can just keep hitting people with $2 increases and it won't after their subscriber totals?

    Let's see if the $2 increase stops the bleeding of cash. I'll bet they bleed more cash in 2019. So long as investors don't care I guess they can keep running it up.
     
  5. Feb 17, 2019 #65 of 131
    SledgeHammer

    SledgeHammer Icon

    2,286
    228
    Dec 28, 2007
    They kind of had to with Friends. There was a big uproar at the time and stock market conditions were bad. It was done to protect the stock I think. Is somebody really going to cancel Netflix because they lose Friends?

    As for Disney, it's already been gone over. The Marvel shows had a contract clause where they can't appear on another streaming service for 2 yrs. Sure Disney could revive them at that point, assuming all the cast is still available. Besides, at the end of the day its Disneys loss, not Netflix. Nobody is cancelling Netflix, the service is still growing. Disney instead just gave up 150M eyeballs that they'll never get on a standalone service.
     
  6. Feb 17, 2019 #66 of 131
    SledgeHammer

    SledgeHammer Icon

    2,286
    228
    Dec 28, 2007
    The stock always pops big when they hike the prices. That's what you haven't wrapped your head around yet. Are you shorting them or something? lol... nobody actually believes $14 - $16 is a fair price for everything you get. It's much too low which is why the stock always pops. Analysts always say they should raise the prices more.

    Netflix is giving the service away for "free" to establish a rabid fan base. And they are succeeding. Netflix has become a cultural phenomenon. When was the last time you went on a date and the girl wanted to Amazon Prime 'N Chill or Hulu 'N Chill? :D Netflix is synonymous with streaming as Google is synonymous with search.

    I believe they can get to $29.99 at the very least which if they never get above 200M subs, they'll get an additional 33B/yr.

    They're at 139M and they've barely tapped India and China is waiting in the wings. Between the two countries, they've got about 3B people. They've got about 17% of the US population. If they got 17% of China and India, that'd be a mind boggling 510M. At the current $16, that's only a few pennies @ 97B/yr. Not saying they'll get that kind of penetration in those two countries, but you don't think they can get at least 8%? That'd be $48.5B. Or even a measly 4%? That's still $24.25B.
     
    Rich likes this.
  7. Feb 17, 2019 #67 of 131
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    48,312
    1,415
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Raising prices is good for shareholders as the increased revenue will go toward decreasing debt. But it is bad for customers and with enough price increases customers will cut back - perhaps subscribe only a few months a year instead of paying for months they could skip or find other places to spend their money. When the customer count levels off (and it will, eventually) Netflix will be in a bad position. The bubble probably won't pop this year - the price is still "reasonable" and there is still room to grow - but there is no company that can survive forever while continuing to increase debt.
     
  8. Feb 17, 2019 #68 of 131
    Rich

    Rich DBSTalk Club DBSTalk Club

    32,516
    1,136
    Feb 22, 2007
    Piscataway, NJ
    I've watched all the Marvel shows except for Daredevil. Aside from The Punisher and Daredevil I don't see much of a downside to losing the Marvel shows.

    Rich
     
  9. Feb 17, 2019 #69 of 131
    inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    24,289
    1,345
    Nov 13, 2006
    Say what? They didn’t give up anything. Disney is going to take a chunk of subscribers from Netflix with their service. You won’t find anything from any Disney’s arm (including FOX stuff they are buying) in a few years...

    Friends is probably still better than any comedy on tv today so that is a little bit of an exception to the rule.. cost wise for something older.
     
  10. Feb 17, 2019 #70 of 131
    Rich

    Rich DBSTalk Club DBSTalk Club

    32,516
    1,136
    Feb 22, 2007
    Piscataway, NJ
    I haven't watched any baseball or football games on the ATVs yet. Only boxing matches. Let me watch some baseball games on a cable replacement service and I'll start a thread about what I don't like about using streaming devices' remotes. This isn't just about the ATVs' remotes, I think I'm gonna see problems with any remote other than a D* remote. I know what a D* remote can do and I just don't see any streamers' remotes doing that.

    Rich
     
  11. Feb 17, 2019 #71 of 131
    SledgeHammer

    SledgeHammer Icon

    2,286
    228
    Dec 28, 2007
    Actually they lost a LOT. They've already said they are dumping more then $8B into standing up the service. If somebody signed up to Netflix for 100% Disney and absolutely nothing else, then yeah, I guess they'll switch. How realistic is that? Not very. Most likely people will get both if they really want the Disney content for their kids or they want to see Marvel or Star Wars for the 20th time.

    On the other hand, considering that no other streaming service is even close to Netflix, what are your REALISTIC expectations for Disney sub count? HBO Now had only around 5M subs late last year. WWE had 1.6M. Amazon Prime is difficult to compare since they are bundling the free shipping side with the video. ESPN streaming, which obviously there are TON of sports fan (I'm not one of them), but they just recently hit 1M subs after 2 yrs.

    So point is, it will take Disney YEARS to build up subs. Going by every other streaming service, they'll never catch up to Netflix. If they only have 5M subs over 4 or 5 yrs like HBO, you'd consider that a success? How many years do you think it will take them to break even on the service vs sticking with Netflix and its 139M subs?

    If people are concerned about Netflix spending 8B year, why aren't you concerned about Disney spending 8B+ on a service that could potentially flop much like they did in the 80's when they tried to be a premium cable channel?

    If Disney spends $8B and say, charges say $10/mo for it and they get say 5M subs, oh wow, it'll only take them 13 yrs to recoup the 8B they spent in the first year, not counting the ongoing costs. Wow sounds great. I'm going out to buy Disney stock this instant. I'll even be generous and say they get 10M subs. Wow, still 6 yrs to recoup year 1 costs.

    People were all freaked out about Apple coming out and killing Netflix and look at what a dud that service is already looking like since Apple wants a 30% cut. Netflix isn't on it. HBO isn't on it. FAIL. Looks like an expensive version of Roku to me minus a bunch of content. Apple is also know to be a very PG company. Are they going to produce content people will want to see? How much is that going to cost them?

    EDIT: one other point to make, I work in software, so obviously a lot of Star Wars and Marvel geeks there that love the movies. Guess what? They all have them already on collector edition 4K blurays. What do they need the streaming service for when they can buy the disc once for $20 or less?

    I'm not saying it wouldn't have been better for Disney to stay, but right now, it's looking like a much bigger loss for Disney then Netflix.
     
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2019
    Rich likes this.
  12. Feb 17, 2019 #72 of 131
    raott

    raott Hall Of Fame

    2,401
    112
    Nov 23, 2005
    Totally disagree. Disney isn't taking much if anything as far as subscribers go. Those with kids will add Disney in addition to Netflix The adults will still want the adult content of Netflix.

     
    Rich and SledgeHammer like this.
  13. Feb 17, 2019 #73 of 131
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    9,711
    1,188
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    Few people will cancel over the loss of one show, but it is cumulative. You no longer have friends, you no longer have Disney or Marvel stuff, and so on. Eventually they will have only their own content and the foreign stuff they license. It is going to be FAR less attractive to people than it is today, let alone five years ago when it had almost anything.

    The idea that "nobody is cancelling Netflix" is ludicrous. Of course they are. Directv was growing until recently, and they lost three million subscribers every year. Netflix surely loses several times that many, they are just adding more than they lose. That won't happen forever, especially with all the content they losing. The golden age of Netflix is already past, it is a much less attractive service today than it was five years ago.
     
  14. Feb 17, 2019 #74 of 131
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    9,711
    1,188
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    You're nuts, you really believe people would pay $30 a month for ONE streaming service? It already isn't what it used to be, and it only gets worse as they lose everything but their own content over the next couple years.
     
  15. Feb 17, 2019 #75 of 131
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    9,711
    1,188
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa

    It doesn't matter if Disney or ESPN aren't getting 139 million subscribers to their streaming service, because they already have nearly 100 million subscribers in the form of pretty much everyone who subscribes to cable/satellite. People who get ESPN already aren't going to subscribe to their streaming service, why would they want to pay twice? Maybe Disney will get some double subscribers if they have kids so they can stream Disney movies (unless Disney's on demand service already has this)
     
  16. Feb 17, 2019 #76 of 131
    NashGuy

    NashGuy Active Member

    314
    71
    Jan 30, 2014
    Nashville, TN
    As the "plus" in their names imply, ESPN+ and Disney+ are complementary to the existing linear cable channels from ESPN and Disney. ESPN+ is essentially a streaming-only "ESPN 4" that carries odd and ends games/matches that aren't on cable, for $5/mo. If you also pay to subscribe to regular ESPN as part of a cable package, then you can authenticate that in the ESPN+ app to also get all of that content there too.

    Disney+ will offer exclusive new content that isn't available on any of the Disney cable channels and it will also be the place where Disney theatrical films land about a year after debuting at the theater. It's certainly possible, though, that they will allow Disney+ to somewhat cannibalize the Disney Channel, Disney Jr., and Disney XD by putting those channels' content on Disney+ the next day, the same way that new episodes of series on ABC and Freeform are added to Hulu the following day.
     
  17. Feb 17, 2019 #77 of 131
    SledgeHammer

    SledgeHammer Icon

    2,286
    228
    Dec 28, 2007
    Of course it does. Disney said they are investing over 8B *into the streaming service*. Why would anybody want to sink that kind of money into a money losing venture? If they don't get ROI on it, heads will roll.

    Much like DirecTV now is a money losing venture. Do you really think AT&T is going to keep it going when it becomes a huge drag on their earnings?
     
  18. Feb 17, 2019 #78 of 131
    CraigerM

    CraigerM Well-Known Member

    1,490
    75
    Apr 15, 2014
    St. Louis
    AT&T said streaming is their future if DTV Now fails how could they even think about doing DTV over IP? Unless they are changing their minds about how they do their TV service again and would just want to go all VOD? They haven't mentioned DTV over IP for awhile and they keep talking about their WarnerMedia VOD service.
     
    Rich likes this.
  19. Feb 17, 2019 #79 of 131
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    48,312
    1,415
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Fortunately the entertainment group is profitable an there is no proof that DIRECTV Now is a huge drag.
     
    compnurd likes this.
  20. Feb 17, 2019 #80 of 131
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    48,312
    1,415
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    DTV Now isn't failing. The growth may be lower than expected - and part of that may be due to the rumors over "something better" coming with DTV over IP or other proposed DTV products.

    DTV over IP (when it becomes a real product) will be judged on its own merits.
     

Share This Page