[trdrjeff]

http://investor.directv.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=674176

DIRECTV Video & High-Speed Internet Bundles Available Soon throughout the Entire U.S.

New Deals with ViaSat and Hughes will Provide Enhanced DIRECTV and Broadband Packages to Customers in Rural America;
Supports Expansion of Connected Set-top Boxes

EL SEGUNDO, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- DIRECTV customers will be able to bundle their video and high-speed Internet services, no matter where they live in the United States, through new agreements with satellite broadband providers ViaSat and Hughes.

DIRECTV will offer the Exede℠ by ViaSat and Hughes' HughesNet® Gen4 next-generation satellite broadband services, with speeds of over 10 Mbps, to its customers living in mostly unserved, rural areas later this year. This new offering, coupled with already available triple-play bundles with Verizon, AT&T, Century Link and other telco providers, means that any DIRECTV customer in the U.S. will now be able to get bundled pricing.

Customers who sign up for satellite broadband through DIRECTV will be able to take advantage of certain special offers beginning later this year. More details on the offers and marketing plans will be made available closer to launch.

"We look forward to offering every single DIRECTV customer access to fast, affordable broadband options through DIRECTV, no matter where they live," said Oswin Eleonora, senior vice president, Emerging Markets, DIRECTV. "With greatly improved capacity and speeds, satellite broadband services provided by ViaSat and Hughes will fully support our customers' connected home experience, enabling them to access a host of features like YouTube, Pandora, social TV apps, and more than 7,000 VOD titles."

 

[wilbur_the_goose]

I don't see a market. 10Mbs is really slow, unless you don't have access to local services.

 

[tenholde]

I don't see a market. 10Mbs is really slow, unless you don't have access to local services.

You just described the market: rural market with no other broadband access

tenholde

 

[hilmar2k]

You just described the market: rural market with no other broadband access

tenholde

Yup, there's a whole lot of this country not currently served by high speed internet. Not only is there a market, but it's pretty big.

 

[lesz]

I don't see a market. 10Mbs is really slow, unless you don't have access to local services.

There is no market to be seen if, as is apparently the case, you see the whole country as being the urban/suburban area in which I'm guessing you live; however, there are tens of millions of people who live in rural and other sparsely populated locations. In those areas, with the potential of being able to sign up only 2 or 3 or 4 customers per mile, no company is going to find financial sense in building the infrastructure to provide internet access via fiber/cable/dsl.

For the tens of millions of people who do live in such areas, the prospect of even a "slow" 4 or 5 megabit connection is just a dream, and, if they had a 4 or 5 megabit connection, they would feel like they were on the cutting edge of technology. Right now, if they are lucky, they might have access to a fixed wireless connection at between 1 and 4 megabits per second. Otherwise, their choice of internet service access is either dial-up or satellite, and even with the drawbacks of satellite, satellite is still a welcome option for millions, and the speed improvements provided by the new services offered by Hughes and Wild Blue are eagerly awaited by many, and this is true regardless of whether those in urban markets may scoff at the quality of those connections.

 

[Tonedeaf]

Depending on pricing, I would consider going for the 10Mbps service. I currently have 6Mbps service with ATT just outside of Dallas.

 

[dstout]

One of the drawbacks to satellite internet is the caps.

 

[lesz]

Depending on pricing, I would consider going for the 10Mbps service. I currently have 6Mbps service with ATT just outside of Dallas.

When other options (besides dial-up) are available, satellite internet service is not likely to ever be a viable choice. First, because of the distance that the signal must travel, latency is likely to be 10-20 times (or more) higher than that with a terrestrially-based connection. Also, because providing bandwidth via satellite is very expensive for the provider, satellite service is quite expensive. Further, usage caps are going to be a problem for some.

That said, as someone who lives in a remote location, I had satellite internet service from Hughes for 5 years. I paid $120 per month for 2 megabit service, and, as I had no other choices besides dial-up, I was more than happy to have the opportunity to have an alternative to dial-up. I now have a 4 megabit WISP connection for $57 per month. While I hope that I never have to go back to the satellite connection, if, for some reason, I had no other choice again, I would not not hesitate to go back to the satellite connection. At this point, I would love to have a 20 or 30 megabit or faster connection, but, like many others in remote areas, that kind of connection is something that I'm not likely to see at any time soon, and, if that kind of connection does ever come to areas like mine, by that time, the urban areas will likely have connections available (at reasonable cost) that are many times faster.

 

[harsh]

One of the drawbacks to satellite internet is the caps.

Many terrestrial services have caps as well. How much of a drawback it is depends on the service. Excede is decidedly different from the classic Hughes model.

I've set up a couple of people up with Excede (DISH has been offering bundles since Excede became generally available) and they're quite happy to have parted ways with their air cards.

 

[dpeters11]

But at least Hughes does have a period where downloads don't count toward usage so that you can get all your updates without worrying about a cap. Plus they allow you to reset your usage once a billing cycle, and bank three resets.

They do seem to make it as fair as possible.

 

[narrod]

Depending on pricing, I would consider going for the 10Mbps service. I currently have 6Mbps service with ATT just outside of Dallas.

Me too. That's the fastest I can get at my home in Louisville.

 

[hasan]

I don't see a market. 10Mbs is really slow, unless you don't have access to local services.

Mighty provincial of ya, Wilbur.

Here in rural Iowa I am extremely fortunate to be within one mile of a fiber drop for DSL, otherwise, it would be dial up or satellite only. While I'm satisfied with 6 Mbps (and no cap), it's nice to know that 10 Mbps may be attainable as an option. Of course, I'll believe they actually deliver that speed when I see some user reviews, and we don't know what the cap might be either. Anyone know the cost per month, and install/rental issues for the dish and equipment?

 

[charlie460]

Even with more bandwidth, the latency is going to be MUCH higher than any Cable/DSL connection.

 

[dpeters11]

I don't see anyone using satellite Internet unless it really was the only option other than dialup. It's not like satellite TV. But, for the average person, it can work out. However, I'd like to play against a team of satellite users on CoD, I might actually do well.

 

[Shades228]

I don't see a market. 10Mbs is really slow, unless you don't have access to local services.

There are many places that have land based internet with speeds that aren't that fast. Now with everything a speed number isn't everything as all connections are not equal but still even in some places this could force their current providers to update to be competitive.

 

[damondlt]

I don't see a market. 10Mbs is really slow, unless you don't have access to local services.

What,? Your crazy. We have 10 mbps through blue ridge cable and there is nothing slow about it. That cost $58 a month. I'd love to hear your speed and your price.:lol: Verizon in our area only goes as high as 3 mbps. And that's $40 per month. But that still has no issue netflixing or streaming.

Very few customers will rarely need more the 3 mbps.
5-10 mbps will do almost anything you need fast. If not then you better look at your equipment.

 

[wilbur_the_goose]

I have 20 up/20 down from Verizon - Cost is about $60 per month. Western burbs of Philly.

Sorry about the rural thing. I know how frustrating lack of good internet service can be - we only had dial-up here at one time and it was beyond horrible.

 

[dpeters11]

30/10 fiber here for $60 with no cap. I couldn't deal with 5-10Mb speeds now. When I left DSL and the phone company took my copper out, I was on 10. Now, I could bump up to 50/10 or 100/20 but I agree, that would be ridiculous, especially 100.

 

[SParker]

I just had my fixed wireless upgraded to 3MB with no caps. I'd take that everyday all day over 10MB with a 25 gig cap.

 

[hasan]

I have 20 up/20 down from Verizon - Cost is about $60 per month. Western burbs of Philly.

Sorry about the rural thing. I know how frustrating lack of good internet service can be - we only had dial-up here at one time and it was beyond horrible.

I'm sooooo jealous...on two counts. One, your internet speed, and two, West Philly. We spent a lot of time in the Overbrook area, and lived downtown about a mile or so from the Italian Market, 8th and Addison. We loved our time in Philly.