Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AT&T to Buy DirecTV for $48.5 Billion

dealbook.nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 173 posts

Re: AT&T to Buy DirecTV for $48.5 Billion

#141

Post by [deleted] »

qq66 wrote: post #138
georgemcbay wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This race is rigged. Even if the streaming providers win the telecoms will just jack up the prices on their bandwidth when net neutrality is killed completely, which I don't think is an avoidable situation at this point.

If net neutrality is gone for good, the telecoms don't even have to bother entering the streaming business. They just have to look at Netflix's profits each year and charge (profits-$1) the next year, letting Netflix stay barely in business and capturing the surplus.

[deleted]

Re: AT&T to Buy DirecTV for $48.5 Billion

#142

Post by rayiner »

raarts wrote: post #19

Think. How would the content providers - any of them, from Disney to Facebook - get their content at the consumer without the data-distributors, from Comcast to AT&T ? The saying is internet kills the middleman, but this is the real middleman that needs to be killed, and just as our roads are free and open to everyone, so should the digital roads be.

Comcast and AT&T aren't the middle-man. They build a necessary part of the infrastructure necessary to get content to the consumer. They're no more the middle-man than FedEx or UPS. Companies like Netflix, etc, are the middle-men: selling other peoples' content over other peoples' wires.

Vis-a-vis roads: the public pays for the roads, while the cable networks have been almost entirely built with private money. Transportation is also a good example of why you probably don't want publicly-funded telecom networks. Older suburbanites vote, younger people don't. That means we have tons of highways out to the suburbs, and decrepit public transportation.

My parents switched from FIOS back to DISH because they missed their low-res Indian channels. They'll be the people voting to decide how much public money to allocate to broadband. Will you be happy with their decision? Especially now that states and cities are out of money? When push comes to shove and it's shoring-up public pensions versus building broadband, where will the money go?

Re: AT&T to Buy DirecTV for $48.5 Billion

#143

Post by jusben1369 »

wkdown wrote: post #67
jusben1369 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes! Cable = Sports. If they somehow decouple those two then I'm all Internet.

MLB At Bat NHL Gamecenter NBA League Pass NFL Sunday Ticket (currently DirecTV exclusive via contract) * I am assuming you are American and/or care only about the four major sports in the US. Not sure about futball, rugby, cricket, tennis, cycling, etc

You have to understand that Cable and Sports is a mutual lovefest. So all of these online alternatives are designed to be incremental revenue streams and specifically designed not to cannibalize the main revenue stream. They're mostly targeted at people who may away from their home market and so can't watch their favorite team on local cable.

Re: AT&T to Buy DirecTV for $48.5 Billion

#144

Post by jusben1369 »

dba7dba wrote: post #117
jusben1369 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes! Cable = Sports. If they somehow decouple those two then I'm all Internet.

Cable = Sports is why I am not watching ANY sports other than little snippets I can grab on youtube or mlb.com. Seriously. Have not watched a full game (definitely not MLB, NFL, NBA) of anything in a LONG time. And none in family (yes little kids too) are watching much sports on TV either. Definitely not enough to grow up to be a fan of a particular pro sports league or a team, other than soccer via AYSO. IMHO pro sp…

I can't believe you're making your children suffer as part of your ideological war against cable companies. Think of the children and pick up that phone and dial 1 - 800 - GETTWCCABLE now!

Re: AT&T to Buy DirecTV for $48.5 Billion

#145

Post by wil421 »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #9

Do many young people watch TV anymore? It seems like netflix + youtube scratches that itch.

You cant get the same content in the same quality from places like Netflix or Youtube.

I like to watch new shows not reruns of shows/movies I have already seen, most of the time I have seen them multiple times. I am looking at you netflix.

Re: AT&T to Buy DirecTV for $48.5 Billion

#146

Post by ssharp »

Selfcommit wrote: post #65
canvia wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Young people don't care about sports either. eSports like they have on Twitch.tv are more and more popular. A $35 leaf antenna from amazon gets you all the local HD channels for free.

I'll speak for the late 20's Crowd (although I just turned 30..) No one in my age group, that I know, watches sports at home. If they do, they go to the bar to do it. ESports are MUCH more interesting for at-home watching.

A lot of people your age will eventually have children or will no longer find going to the bar regularly that enjoyable.

If you look at how much money major sports franchise owners are spending on improving the in-game experience for fans, and listen to their thoughts on doing so, it's pretty clear that they are fighting hard to get people to actually come to games rather than watching them on TV.

NFL Football is the most popular sports league in the US and quite frankly, I find the product to be almost unwatchable live compared to television. I think basketball and hockey are much more enjoyable in person, but that's also expensive and more time consuming than seeing them on TV, and both leagues play around 80 games a season, I believe.

A useless data point, but I'm 32 and never heard of eSports until this thread.

Lastly, consider this: Twitch is selling for $1 Billion dollars. The average value of a single(of 32) NFL team is more than that and television networks are paying the NFL several billion each year to broadcast games.

Re: AT&T to Buy DirecTV for $48.5 Billion

#147

Post by toyg »

zanny wrote: post #80
jusben1369 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because I'll switch to Comcast or Verizon if I'm an ATT customer and their internet service is bad?

Comcast, Verizon, AT&T, and Time Warner all serve different cable networks. They rarely overlap, so you don't have that choice 99% of the time. And it isn't really implicitly evil, because they just own the coax in the area and it obviously is not worth the investment to lay redundant wires.

>they just own the coax in the area and it obviously is not worth the investment to lay redundant wires

Sooner or later, this sort of thing must be addressed with a "public utility" perspective in mind -- not just in US but here in Europe as well. Why can I use different gas providers, or different electricity providers, or even different water providers in some countries, without pipe ownership being a factor? Answer: better laws. A degree of resource-sharing is forced upon providers by law, for the benefit of consumers.

Re: AT&T to Buy DirecTV for $48.5 Billion

#148

Post by snsr »

tn13 wrote: post #100

This is getting dangerous. Imagine a world where a public transportation company owns the network of roads too and denies any other transportation company to come up besides their own.

Not a perfect analogy, but this may be of interest to you -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_conspi...

Re: AT&T to Buy DirecTV for $48.5 Billion

#149

Post by determinant »

icantthinkofone wrote: post #133
dba7dba wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cable = Sports is why I am not watching ANY sports other than little snippets I can grab on youtube or mlb.com. Seriously. Have not watched a full game (definitely not MLB, NFL, NBA) of anything in a LONG time. And none in family (yes little kids too) are watching much sports on TV either. Definitely not enough to grow up to be a fan of a particular pro sports league or a team, other than soccer via AYSO. IMHO pro sp…

What's funny is I would sign up for MLB.com in an instant if I could watch the local game but they block that so I'm out.

This was my frustration also. It surprises me that they haven't worked out an arrangement to either make that feature an upgrade or worked out a way to make financial arrangements with (I'm guessing) the people who have broadcast rights for a market.

Re: AT&T to Buy DirecTV for $48.5 Billion

#150

Post by mcdougle »

whoopdedo wrote: post #92
mrjatx wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your first statement is absolutely ridiculous. Do you have data to back this up? I'm not in some "~esportz~" community - but I'm not in a sports community either, and you know what happens to my facebook when an athletic game is on? 20-30yo people talking about it in a massive flood. I have, as far as I know, never seen any of my friends (general Austinites of various walks of life) mention esports. If you're referri…

If 20-30 year olds aren't paying for television, is it because they don't want to or that they can't afford it? Narrow the criteria to people under-40 who own a house and I'd expect a much larger subscription rate.

Sports are pretty much the only TV I watch anymore (for the most part) and I stopped paying for cable as soon as I graduated from college (it was included in my rent payment at my apartment down there, otherwise I'd have done it sooner). There are other means to watching sports -- Sunday night NFL games are on NBC.com, for instance. Every college sport is broadcasted on ESPN3, so you can just get a couple of people together to buy a cheap subscription and use that to watch ESPN3. The only ones I miss (or, alternatively, use sketchy streaming sites for) are midday NFL games.
Post reply on HN