Thread regarding AT&T layoffs

$135 for AT&T now.

I see people signing up in droves. Said no one.

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/video/t-offers-streaming-135-per-152521936.html

by
| 1302 views | | 12 replies (last August 26, 2019) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+10FRwtii

12 replies (most recent on top)

people aren't spending their nights anymore flipping through channels to see what might be on so they can watch...

They load up an app get a suggestion given to them and off they go....

I agree, no one wants to spend $100 on tv any more...I have directv at home due to employee pricing, and i seriously don't even remember the last time i turned it on to watch something. It just doesn't make sense anymore, and i sure as hell wouldn't be paying $100 for tv for the off chance that i might need it.

AT&T should have kept their tv service at $15/10 eaten the loss and created a streaming serivce that actually had all their IP on it so people could consume when they wanted too.

it seems like the company is going with the opposite...lets raise the prices even more and make streaming just as expensive with a bunch of stuff people don't want.

I seriously don't get the direction this company is trying to take...

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @4bfi+10FRwtii

It’s costing them a lot to install this too, this was supposed to be cheaper for the company supposedly because it was going to be csi drop shipped to customers but now I’m hearing they are sending multiple truck rolls to make sure it’s going to work, first to have the lines conditioned (oh look our crummy plant rears it’s ugly head) and then a tech to install the rest of it and assist 91 year old grandpa remember his log in. LOL

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1uwe+10FRwtii

The age of people paying for the privilege of consuming advertising is over. T and her competitors just have not figured that out yet.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1fns+10FRwtii

Plain & simple. They're losing their a$$ and scrambling to make up the difference.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1lac+10FRwtii

They're doing it wrong. In an effort to compete for cord cutters that are fed up with high priced cable and satellite, we are offering a high priced streaming service.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1zvy+10FRwtii

Ok I'm not good with math but $135 for 125 channels? Isn't that completely opposite pricing when bundling? So we are now the unbundled carrier? I'm guessing this isto serve a very small demographic. Time will tell how long we all will last...

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1myx+10FRwtii

Maybe if somebody came up with a way to turn on your TV and simply channel scroll up or down, maybe punch in the exact channel you want to watch or hit a search button. No logging in or out, no limit on how many tvs can be connected...hmmm

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1ghn+10FRwtii

This is great deal for employees. Maybe if enough employees buy they will keep themselves employed by being their own customer. So that is what 300,000 people? That could be enough to keep some people employed.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1rrv+10FRwtii

Is this to drive up content price for 3rd party distributors?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @agv+10FRwtii

$10 for an employee discount. I dropped u-verse tv and switched to it. Get unlimited data on the internet with it. Good deal for employees who are OK with having a 3 stream limit. Bad for the general public who have access to more competitive services.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ajc+10FRwtii

This is almost as out of touch as the 3 tiered HBO Max pricing that they were going to do. Nobody wants to pay over $100 for tv and nobody wants to pay more than $10-15 for a streaming service. We need some innovative leadership here that actually wait for it understands the customers they are selling to.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @xtp+10FRwtii

Count me out. Lol randymust need to give him and Stanley a raise so they go to pebble beach more.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @msh+10FRwtii

Post a reply

: