Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes! Cable = Sports. If they somehow decouple those two then I'm all Internet.
Do you get ESPN3 through your ISP? It covers most sports both live and recorded, and doesn't require a cable subscription.
AT&T to Buy DirecTV for $48.5 Billion
71–80 of 173 posts
Re: AT&T to Buy DirecTV for $48.5 Billion
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sports. ESPN + NFL Redzone + TNT + Local channels in HD have no good alternative on the internet. If they did I wouldn't pay for TV.
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.
Re: AT&T to Buy DirecTV for $48.5 Billion
#73The race is officially on! Can the Telecoms retain their terrible monopolies by becoming streaming providers Faster than the Streaming providers (Netflix, Youtube, Amazon Prime et al) trying to become Content creators? AT&T is running out of customers to squeeze in the cell phone plans market. This is the next frontier for terrible service, exorbitant prices and regulated monopolies...
Re: AT&T to Buy DirecTV for $48.5 Billion
#74Earlier 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
Re: AT&T to Buy DirecTV for $48.5 Billion
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sports. ESPN + NFL Redzone + TNT + Local channels in HD have no good alternative on the internet. If they did I wouldn't pay for TV.
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.
Re: AT&T to Buy DirecTV for $48.5 Billion
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can I ask where you live, and how much you pay? In the bay area internet only is marginally cheaper than any bundle. $99 for TV + 25mbps and between $66 for just the 25mbps. Teaser rates are $59 for the bundle, $29 for internet.
I live in Kirkland (a suburb of Seattle). Paying Comcast $50/month for "Blast Plus" which is 50 mbps + TV, while it's ~$69 for just 50mbps internet. Both are "promo rates" (aka call the retention dpt. once they run out and you'll get them for another year).
Re: AT&T to Buy DirecTV for $48.5 Billion
#77Earlier 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.
Re: AT&T to Buy DirecTV for $48.5 Billion
#78Earlier 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
Re: AT&T to Buy DirecTV for $48.5 Billion
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
Roads aren't free, we pay for them in taxes and tolls.
OF course they are not really 'free', but does Amazon pay toll to get things delivered to you? Do government bodies who maintain the roads, tax large suppliers to make use of them?
Re: AT&T to Buy DirecTV for $48.5 Billion
#80Use this as a perfect example to explain to people why Net Neutrality matters. "What incentive does AT&T have to bring you good streaming experience for Netflix, Hulu, or heck even Youtube when they'd much much MUCH rather you were buying DirecTV from them?"
Because I'll switch to Comcast or Verizon if I'm an ATT customer and their internet service is bad?
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.