# AT&T to launch $15 streaming bundle in coming weeks...



## techguy88 (Mar 19, 2015)

Straight from the courtroom "in the coming weeks" AT&T will launch AT&T Watch a $15 non-sports bundle of channels available to everyone. AT&T Wireless subs get it free.

AT&T chief reveals plans for new streaming service -- in court


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Interesting ... just when we were seeing rumors of a full content streaming service (more channels than DIRECTV NOW and comparable to a full DIRECTV or UVERSE subscription) they are introducing a package with far less channels.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Well they had mentioned both this and the full package ages ago... they always said they had plans for three services...


----------



## NashGuy (Jan 30, 2014)

inkahauts said:


> Well they had mentioned both this and the full package ages ago... they always said they had plans for three services...


Yeah. Although the original announcement was for:

*DirecTV Now* (which was originally described as being a full-on OTT replacement for regular DirecTV, or at least close to it)
*DirecTV Mobile* (which, I dunno, was just the mobile app version of DTV Now? Or something along the line's of Verizon's failed Go90, and not any kind of skinny bundle of traditional cable channels?)
and the free *DirecTV Preview* (which would appear to just be access to AT&T's own Audience network, plus some scattered free on-demand stuff -- I've read reports that you can get that stuff free in the DTV Now app but I'm not sure how. Maybe sign up for the free DTVN trial, then cancel and you can still use your log in to access the free stuff?)
As for this upcoming sport-free $15 bundle being a separate app with its own brand, I don't get it. Granted, AT&T pulls some head-scratchers but I just don't see the logic in keeping their new headline-grabbing low-cost package silo'ed away in its own app. Makes it less likely that those subscribers will up-convert to the more expensive packages in the separate DTV Now app. And why have two separate competing brand names for their OTT cable-replacement services? It would be more confusing to the public than HBO Go vs. HBO Now.

So maybe what's going to happen is that AT&T Watch will be the new brand name for DTV Now, which will be expanded to include this new $15 bundle at the low end. That would make a lot more sense to me. I don't see much value in using the DirecTV brand for an OTT service aimed at cord-cutters/cord-nevers anyhow. The first thing a cord-cutter friend of mine asked me when I began recommending DTV Now to her was "Wait, do I have to put up a dish?". I suspect that, in general, we're going to see them move away from the DirecTV brand for TV services. Looks like their higher-end OTT service (with included STB) will be branded as AT&T TV when it debuts late this year. Who knows, maybe they'll even rename DirecTV to AT&T Satellite (although I don't see the point in pouring money into rebranding a service that they plan to just ride out as it slowly declines).

As for the channels in the $15 bundle, I expect that not only will it be lacking sports channels, it will also lack locals. No channels, in fact, owned by Disney/ABC, Comcast/NBC, CBS or Fox. It'll have the Turner nets, plus some of most popular nets from Discovery/Scripps, Viacom, AMC, plus maybe A+E and Hallmark.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

It's a convoluted marketing mess.


----------

