AT&T TV Looks a Little Too Much Like Traditional Cable – The company’s new streaming service costs $93 a month. What the heck?

Tweet

30 comments

  1. MarkusRight

    |Author

    Lmao and I pay $6 a month for IPTV and I get 800 different USA channels in full HD. I’m not going to mention the service because its underground IPTV. AKA not entirely legal. But youll never get caught because its not using torrents or any other network traffic that can be deemed as piracy bu your ISP. Ive been using underground IPTV for the past 4 years and I pay $72 a year to watch unlimited HD TV, I fucking love it, Suck my left nut cable industry.

  2. Locupleto

    |Author

    As a kid I was the first person I knew with cable TV. We also dropped it first, just as it got very popular. Just too expensive for what it was. Hundred + channels of nothing to watch. Been a long time fan of Netflix, but dropped it too a few months back. After many years and I believe thier streaming content has droped in quality. Might look at their disk service again someday. Presently on HBO until I run through their good content. We will see. So far have watched some real gems though. The Duce, Leftovers, West World, all really excellent IMO. Watched a few good movies too. When this well runs dry on to the next streaming service, and then the next. My Sony TV doesn’t support the RedBox streaming app, I’m so disappointed in that.

    If they all dry up so be it. The thrift store has tons of video disks for cheap. There is also redbox kiosks. I’ll comb the pay to rent options on Amazon. I’ll go back to reading books long before I pay anything more than 15, 20, maybe 25 bucks a month for video entertainment.

    I’ll not resort to piracy, however. I believe it’s too good a channel for distributing malware. Come on, you think some “good guys” are making all that available? Also, I believe in IP.

    Does anyone consider paying something like $90+ a month for video content makes any sort of sense? Would love to hear from someone who does.

  3. LH99

    |Author

    I am Jack’s complete lack of surprise as someone who dropped DirectTV Now when AT&T’s merger was approved and two weeks later they dropped half the channels and jacked the price. **** AT&T.

  4. cr0ft

    |Author

    Why are people confused? This is capitalism. When you have the ability to suck the consumer dry, and you own the politicians who should be working for the consumers to stop you, you suck the consumer dry.

    Americans are just such suckers, they get taken for a ride all the time, get **** internet, pay enormous amounts of money, and of course stuff like this. And then they go and vote right-wing to make sure they get to be victims forever.

  5. Shnazzyone

    |Author

    Still, despite services like sling and youtube tv being out these ISPs just don’t get that they have competitors now. For 35 bucks a month i get around 50 channels of my choice from sling. Time warner keeps sending me flyers and offers bragging how for 30 bucks a month they can give me a similar service with only 10 channels. It’s like they are totally oblivious to what their competition is doing.

  6. lewdite

    |Author

    Cable TV is pretty good tbh. Sure, it’s expensive and I basically have to threaten to quit once a year in order to get the price / channels that I want but I basically pay about this much and get all the channels I like: live news, live sports, red zone included (the only way to watch Sunday morning football IMO) and I expense some of it as a business cost because I use the financial news to trade stocks. Plus the whole home DVR is a useful service I’ve become accustomed to.

    But hey if you don’t care about live news and sports then I totally understand not wanting to spend more than ~$20 on streaming entertainment, some folks just want to watch the office a million times and that’s fine.

  7. captnmr

    |Author

    I’m a big fan of “the customer is always right”. The market will decide if $93/month is viable or not. I’m sure most streaming providers have forgotten the 2000s where downloading movies and tv shows was the norm. Well, now we have faster internet connections and a plethora of gray-market IPTV providers offer you live streams of various qualities for $10-15 per month.
    Netflix and iTunes have proven that consumers are willing to pay a reasonable price for an unlimited service. AT&T and others seem to think that consumers want streaming at any cost.
    In the next five years, I see content and delivery as separate services. For instance, AppleTv would offer local channels for $.99 each and HBO for $5. The only reason it’s not done widely now is to not piss off cable providers. Once “core cutters” become a critical mass, we’ll see more piece meal subscriptions.

    Two things will die:
    – forced bundling
    – fragmentation of streaming platforms.

  8. datamonger

    |Author

    I think we’re up to $50/month now, but we’ve also been subscribers since the service went live. However, if they keep on increasing the cost on us, when they likely will, I’ll be looking for an alternative service (one with an Android TV app).

  9. Here’s what I predict with the streaming services:

    Hulu will thrive, Netflix will stay strong although never as strong as they once were, Disney+ will explode initially, peak, but then stay strong, all because they offer something original but also an ability to discover more. You can watch Netflix original programming but then some rom-com from the 90s or a classic Disney movie right after.

    -Apple TV will fail because nobody wants to pay to watch just one services’ shows
    -HBO Max will fail because of same reason, and people will finally just buy the DVRs, Blu-rays, or direct downloads for Friends
    -CBS All Access will fail because not even Star Trek fans will want to pay X per month to watch new episodes of Picard or Discovery, or they’ll just do it intermittently when new episodes/series are available
    -NBC’s streaming service same thing, and people will just buy or direct download the office
    -YouTube TV is more of a live viewing platform than a streaming service, will do okay but never explode in popularity, Google will eventually nix as a result.
    -Sling TV also more of a live viewing platform than streaming, will gain a lot of subscribers when recession hits because it’s cheapest out of live TV options but will never explode due to functionality issues, or will just constantly see a stream of customers coming and leaving before and after major sporting events.

    Meanwhile, cable providers will lower prices of services after facing increased competition over the next couple of years, people will opt out of streaming back for cable, Apple TV, CBS, NBC, will all go, HBO Max’s most popular shows will come back to HBOGO or Now or be nixed completely, will and voila.

  10. GrowCanadian

    |Author

    I’m already on the fence about dumping Netflix at $15 a month let alone $93. Next price increase from Netflix I’m dropping everyone and going back to flying the pirate flag. The entire reason I dumped cable is to save money.

  11. josefresco

    |Author

    I signed up for YouTube TV for $35/month and 6 months later they increased the price to $50/month. Streaming providers are no better than traditional “cable” TV. In fact, Comcrap never increased my costs by 40+%.

    More info: [https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/10/youtube-tv-price-increases-to-50-a-month.html](https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/10/youtube-tv-price-increases-to-50-a-month.html)

    ” Google explained a bit why it felt the need to increase its prices. It has expanded its service to cover all of the U.S. and added more than 10 new channels since launch. It’s also adding Discovery, HGTV, Food Network, TLC, Investigation Discovery, Animal Planet, Travel Channel, MotorTrend and EPIX. ”

    9 new stations (I won’t watch a single one), that’s about $1.60/month for each. You suck Google!

  12. RaVashaan

    |Author

    >In other words, delivering pay TV in this form is cheaper for AT&T than using legacy delivery methods like satellite.

    So, cheaper for AT&T to deliver, no savings passed on to the customer, no upsides to the customer like on-demand, ad-free viewing, but all the potential downsides like lagging due to heavy traffic / slow internet connection speeds. Oh and now the ads will be personalized for you as well. Gotcha.

  13. SirHerald

    |Author

    AT&T seems to be about a decade behind. Everything I’ve looked into with them is behind everybody else. They keep trying to sell us internet half the speed of everybody else.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.