# Forced into a New 2 Year Contract - Frustrated Beyond Belief



## Brady Jones (Apr 1, 2021)

Most frustrating experience ever! My DirecTV receivers are on the fritz (again). This time 3 of the 4 receivers we have in the house are laggy, flat out don't work, or when I try to power on/off, they fail to come back on. I was on w Tech support (20 minutes just to get to a live person) and they mentioned I should upgrade to 4K receivers as I was eligible for a free upgrade, but we got disconnected during the call. I called back up to do that, and they tried to charge me for the 4K receivers. As the call was at 37 minutes at that time, and I had to return to continue working, I didn't have time to escalate to a supervisor, and had to end the call frustrated. Today, on my day off, I tried to call in to exercise my "free" 4K receiver upgrade again (after almost 20 minutes to reach a live person again), and she again said that it was not an equipment charge, but an installation charge. At this point, I just wanted to get working TV again for my family so I said fine. She needed to do something but she said her system was slow and so I had to hold. She kept coming back on to apologize for the delays, then finally (I think about 40 minutes into the call) she told me (by the way) that this is a new upgrade and would require a new 2 year contract. At that point, I had had it, I asked to be sent over to the cancellations department. After a few minutes, someone came on, I could hear them just fine, but they kept repeating their name. I wasn't on mute or anything and kept trying to hear them I could hear them just fine. They finally said "I can't hear you" and hung up. Now, I'm fuming. I called back up to cancel service. Those people are always much nicer of course. I explained the whole situation and he said, let's try to get your service working. I went through the standard tech troubleshooting (that a 6-year old would figure out and that we have already tried a dozen times, power off/on, unplug, etc. blah blah) and the guy said that because the receivers had failed so many times in the past, that they'd have to upgrade, and that it would be a new 2-year contract! I couldn't believe my ears. I told him this was the most insane thing I'd ever heard. He actually agreed and said he would talk to a supervisor. He came back on saying that they would send a tech out, and they would try to fix it, but if they couldn't fix it, I'd need to call back in and try to escalate to get upper-management to waive the 2-year commitment. I asked him if he could see how completely ridiculous that was, he agreed but said that's my only option at this point. (chalk up another 30 minute call btw).

Well, needless to say I'm definitely shopping for new service. And if this experience has taught me anything it is never to get into another contract with AT&T. Most reputable carriers have services without contracts. Even if I have to get into one again, it'll never be AT&T. Absolutely unbelievable.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

If you have T-mobile, you can get YouTubeTV for $54.99 a month, otherwise it is $65.00 only issue: No dolby.
I had basically the same problem and called retention, and they released me from my contract and signed me up for ATT TV which has been good. Better PQ, Dolby, 20 streams, use your own boxes or buy theirs for $50 on ebay.
Packages are close to the same. If streaming didnt work out, I was going to sign up with DISH for their 2 yr price locked package, but I like the no-contract streaming. I can move anytime (like this Sept when I will move to YouTube so I can get the Red Zone channel that ATT doesnt carry.

Those CSRs in the South Pacific have to have caused more cancellations that they are saving ATT money. I just DETEST trying to talk to them.


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

Davenlr said:


> If you have T-mobile, you can get YouTubeTV for $54.99 a month, otherwise it is $65.00 only issue: No dolby.
> I had basically the same problem and called retention, and they released me from my contract and signed me up for ATT TV which has been good. Better PQ, Dolby, 20 streams, use your own boxes or buy theirs for $50 on ebay.
> Packages are close to the same. If streaming didnt work out, I was going to sign up with DISH for their 2 yr price locked package, but I like the no-contract streaming. I can move anytime (like this Sept when I will move to YouTube so I can get the Red Zone channel that ATT doesnt carry.
> 
> Those CSRs in the South Pacific have to have caused more cancellations that they are saving ATT money. I just DETEST trying to talk to them.


YouTubeTV missing a lot of RSN's as well.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

What number did you call? Call the loyalty number, they are generally much better at everything…


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

JoeTheDragon said:


> YouTubeTV missing a lot of RSN's as well.


True, just included them since he said he didnt want to deal with ATT any more


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

IMO take a serious look at AT&T TV and see if it's for you. 

No two year commitment and you'll save money on equipment and other ridiculous Directv fees.


----------



## WestDC (Feb 9, 2008)

Brady Jones said:


> Most frustrating experience ever! My DirecTV receivers are on the fritz (again). This time 3 of the 4 receivers we have in the house are laggy, flat out don't work, or when I try to power on/off, they fail to come back on. I was on w Tech support (20 minutes just to get to a live person) and they mentioned I should upgrade to 4K receivers as I was eligible for a free upgrade, but we got disconnected during the call. I called back up to do that, and they tried to charge me for the 4K receivers. As the call was at 37 minutes at that time, and I had to return to continue working, I didn't have time to escalate to a supervisor, and had to end the call frustrated. Today, on my day off, I tried to call in to exercise my "free" 4K receiver upgrade again (after almost 20 minutes to reach a live person again), and she again said that it was not an equipment charge, but an installation charge. At this point, I just wanted to get working TV again for my family so I said fine. She needed to do something but she said her system was slow and so I had to hold. She kept coming back on to apologize for the delays, then finally (I think about 40 minutes into the call) she told me (by the way) that this is a new upgrade and would require a new 2 year contract. At that point, I had had it, I asked to be sent over to the cancellations department. After a few minutes, someone came on, I could hear them just fine, but they kept repeating their name. I wasn't on mute or anything and kept trying to hear them I could hear them just fine. They finally said "I can't hear you" and hung up. Now, I'm fuming. I called back up to cancel service. Those people are always much nicer of course. I explained the whole situation and he said, let's try to get your service working. I went through the standard tech troubleshooting (that a 6-year old would figure out and that we have already tried a dozen times, power off/on, unplug, etc. blah blah) and the guy said that because the receivers had failed so many times in the past, that they'd have to upgrade, and that it would be a new 2-year contract! I couldn't believe my ears. I told him this was the most insane thing I'd ever heard. He actually agreed and said he would talk to a supervisor. He came back on saying that they would send a tech out, and they would try to fix it, but if they couldn't fix it, I'd need to call back in and try to escalate to get upper-management to waive the 2-year commitment. I asked him if he could see how completely ridiculous that was, he agreed but said that's my only option at this point. (chalk up another 30 minute call btw).
> 
> Well, needless to say I'm definitely shopping for new service. And if this experience has taught me anything it is never to get into another contract with AT&T. Most reputable carriers have services without contracts. Even if I have to get into one again, it'll never be AT&T. Absolutely unbelievable.


When was the last time you had a Service call? just asking --you may be better off getting a service call --while your looking at changing service ---

Oh BTW Welcome to the site --Now that your leaving D*TV --LOL


----------



## likegadgets (Dec 29, 2005)

Brady Jones said:


> Most frustrating experience ever! My DirecTV receivers are on the fritz (again). This time 3 of the 4 receivers we have in the house are laggy, flat out don't work, or when I try to power on/off, they fail to come back on. I was on w Tech support (20 minutes just to get to a live person) and they mentioned I should upgrade to 4K receivers as I was eligible for a free upgrade, but we got disconnected during the call. I called back up to do that, and they tried to charge me for the 4K receivers. As the call was at 37 minutes at that time, and I had to return to continue working, I didn't have time to escalate to a supervisor, and had to end the call frustrated. Today, on my day off, I tried to call in to exercise my "free" 4K receiver upgrade again (after almost 20 minutes to reach a live person again), and she again said that it was not an equipment charge, but an installation charge. At this point, I just wanted to get working TV again for my family so I said fine. She needed to do something but she said her system was slow and so I had to hold. She kept coming back on to apologize for the delays, then finally (I think about 40 minutes into the call) she told me (by the way) that this is a new upgrade and would require a new 2 year contract. At that point, I had had it, I asked to be sent over to the cancellations department. After a few minutes, someone came on, I could hear them just fine, but they kept repeating their name. I wasn't on mute or anything and kept trying to hear them I could hear them just fine. They finally said "I can't hear you" and hung up. Now, I'm fuming. I called back up to cancel service. Those people are always much nicer of course. I explained the whole situation and he said, let's try to get your service working. I went through the standard tech troubleshooting (that a 6-year old would figure out and that we have already tried a dozen times, power off/on, unplug, etc. blah blah) and the guy said that because the receivers had failed so many times in the past, that they'd have to upgrade, and that it would be a new 2-year contract! I couldn't believe my ears. I told him this was the most insane thing I'd ever heard. He actually agreed and said he would talk to a supervisor. He came back on saying that they would send a tech out, and they would try to fix it, but if they couldn't fix it, I'd need to call back in and try to escalate to get upper-management to waive the 2-year commitment. I asked him if he could see how completely ridiculous that was, he agreed but said that's my only option at this point. (chalk up another 30 minute call btw).
> 
> Well, needless to say I'm definitely shopping for new service. And if this experience has taught me anything it is never to get into another contract with AT&T. Most reputable carriers have services without contracts. Even if I have to get into one again, it'll never be AT&T. Absolutely unbelievable.


Just before I cancelled a month ago, I had a similar situation. The MDU operator in my building swapped my non working HR44 for an HR54. I did not order a new receiver, I called them because the DVR was so slow it was useless. They decided to swap it with an HR54. I called DTV and made it clear that I was not willing to enter into any contract, and the agent said that because it was a replacement of a problem equipment by the MDU operator, there was no new contract. Having been with DTV for decades, I knew that what an agent says often does not stick, so I recorded the phone call and asked the agent to repeat what she stated and repeat the reference number. 4 months later, I had had it with DTV and the price increases and no credits available for my account. When trying to cancel, they stated I had a contract, I gave them the reference number, (and again recorded the call), and the agent said, OK I see it. A few days later I get an invoice for $400 early cancellation. I called DTV and this time they kept passing me from department to department, loyalty, ATT Collections, the Philippine call center, a supervisor who told me I need to "adjust my expectations" as this will not be waived and they may turn me to collections if I do not pay (I now had several recordings one for each conversation). As a last ditch effort I asked for a supervisor in the US, in loyalty, while I was holding I was completing the complaint form for a Small Claims Court lawsuit, when I got a supervisor that credited me the $400 to balance the account after I explained I had several recordings and reference numbers from DTV and would be happy to play it these for her. She found the original reference number and acted. A month later, using youtube TV I find I do not miss DTV at all, and some benefits, such as no boxes, cables, lights and noise from receivers are great.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

JoeTheDragon said:


> YouTubeTV missing a lot of RSN's as well.


And missing plenty of popular / basic channels like Diy, Science, NatGeo, History, Pbs. Not to mention the DVR sucks. Behaves completely differently than any DVR you've ever seen in your life.

And of course the standard disclaimer with streaming is that you should be careful if your ISP has data caps.


----------



## mopardude01 (Aug 3, 2013)

I'm with you, don't miss at&t/D* at all. I was tired of all the lies as well, I think that's at&t business model, DirecTV used to be a really good company. I was a customer for 20 years till at&t ran me off.


----------



## DMRI2006 (Jun 13, 2006)

SledgeHammer said:


> And missing plenty of popular / basic channels like Diy, Science, NatGeo, History, Pbs. Not to mention the DVR sucks. Behaves completely differently than any DVR you've ever seen in your life.
> 
> And of course the standard disclaimer with streaming is that you should be careful if your ISP has data caps.


Unlimited cloud based recording for 9 months and exponentially faster to scan through commercials and shows than any Directv DVR I ever had "sucks"? That's a new one.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

DMRI2006 said:


> Unlimited cloud based recording for 9 months and exponentially faster to scan through commercials and shows than any Directv DVR I ever had "sucks"? That's a new one.


Have you ever tried to record Season 2, Episode 3 of Show X? Good luck finding it since the DVR will record every season and episode instead. Sorry, no, I don't want to scroll through 200+ episodes of The Big Bang Theory this afternoon to find the one I set to record this morning while perusing the guide for the day. And after I watch it, why would I want to keep it for 9 months to clutter up my playlist? As most people do, I watch a show and delete it. Nice DVR. You can't delete anything.

Not really a "new one" as you claim since there have been numerous threads on people not liking that behavior. One guy in the thread suggested I keep a notepad by the TV to jot down season / episode numbers so I could find them later! Ha! Can you imagine doing that?

Btw, my HR54 is super fast. My old HR24 was slow to the point of being unusable which is why I upgraded.

"Exponentially faster" to scan through commercials? How so?


----------



## likegadgets (Dec 29, 2005)

SledgeHammer said:


> And missing plenty of popular / basic channels like Diy, Science, NatGeo, History, Pbs. Not to mention the DVR sucks. Behaves completely differently than any DVR you've ever seen in your life.
> 
> And of course the standard disclaimer with streaming is that you should be careful if your ISP has data caps.


I do get NatGeo & the local PBS on youtube TV in Los Angeles. The DVR took a bit getting used to, but actually works very well for my purposes. Of course, it depends what you watch and how you watch, but for my lineup works great, it is less than 1/2 the price and is simpler to install and move around... Luckily my building offers 1GB Internet at very low cost without Caps, and I really don't remember when it last had an outage.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

likegadgets said:


> I do get NatGeo & the local PBS on youtube TV in Los Angeles. The DVR took a bit getting used to, but actually works very well for my purposes. Of course, it depends what you watch and how you watch, but for my lineup works great, it is less than 1/2 the price and is simpler to install and move around... Luckily my building offers 1GB Internet at very low cost without Caps, and I really don't remember when it last had an outage.


For the nationals, do you get east coast or west coast?

One of the reasons why I didn't like TVision and Cox was that they gave me the west coast feeds. That put the cable shows at 9-11. DirecTV gives me the east coast feed for the nationals, so I get them at 6-8 which more aligns with my viewing habits.

Still, once I source additional services for my missing channels, plus throw in a OTA DVR to get some subchannels I occasionally watch... juggling multiple devices, providers, bills, guides, DVRs is a PITA. If you can get everything you need from a single provider, that's one thing. And sure there are some folks out there that are willing to put up with all the juggling to save $10/mo, I'm in the camp of rather pay the $10/mo and get the one stop shop in a single device.

And at the end of the day, once you starting getting into 2 or 3 providers, or even with just Youtube and having a data cap, you aren't saving any money, in fact you are paying MORE. Some folks miss that part .

Also some folks don't want to bother with the negotiating w/ DirecTV. Doesn't bother me much. I do it during work once a year and it takes all of 5 minutes.


----------



## Getteau (Dec 20, 2007)

It's sad that you have to do this with them, but for other new people reading the thread looking for advice, this is your script when talking to DTV about any issues with slow/laggy/glitchy DVR's. Especially the HR20-34 lines.

Step 1, call the retention department first. Find the current numbers in the "Anyone call DirectTV and get a discount ..." thread. Don't waste your time with any other department.
Step 2, when they answer, say hello DTV, my receiver is completely dead. It won't power on, makes no noise, has no lights and I have tried using the power cable from my other DVR. Please send me a replacement and please credit my account the $20 shipping charge. Tell them you do not want to upgrade your equipment and you do not want to sign-up for the protection plan. If you tell them it's dead from the start, you will short circuit their troubleshooting flowchart and you will save yourself the hour of stupid "reboot the receiver, factory reset the receiver" troubleshooting steps that are designed to get you off the phone. Telling them you have tried a working power cord will save you the even dumber "we need to mail you a new power cord" step.
Step 3, wait while they type up all the info and confirm they are shipping you a new DVR.
Step 4, before you accept the order, confirm they are not starting a new commitment. Since this is replacing a failed receiver, it should NOT start a new commitment.
Step 4, after they get done processing the order for the replacement DVR, ask if there are any discounts available for your account. 
Step 5, watch everything on the old DVR while you wait for the new one to arrive from FedEx. Write down your recording schedule
Step 6, install the new DVR and go through the long process of setting up your favorites and recordings
Step 7, if they wanted you to return the old box, take it to UPS and let them pack it up and ship it back. KEEP the receipt.

Repeat steps 1-7 until your old HR20-24's have been replaced by "new" refurb'd HR24's and your HR34 has been replaced by a 44 or 54. You can try it on an HR44, but there is no guarantee you'll get a 54 and you could end up with another 44.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

Getteau said:


> Step 6, install the new DVR and go through the long process of setting up your favorites and recordings


Tried that (without the obvious lying, since I don't believe in lying)
I ordered a card for my DVR. They said they would send one. They sent a refurb DVR instead.
, and the DVR they sent did not work. I had two working units available, all they had to do is pair the card to one of them, but they refused and wanted me to pay $99 for a tech visit. Nope. Cancel.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

SledgeHammer said:


> DirecTV gives me the east coast feed for the nationals, so I get them at 6-8 which more aligns with my viewing habits.


Distant Network Stations (DNS) generally hasn't allowed for earlier time zones for quite a while now (unless you subscribed to DNS more than 10 years or so ago). Most who have them have had to go through hell to get (and keep) them.

Getting anything like DNS from DIRECTV is like pulling hen's teeth for those who are in areas that are missing local channels. Those who are covered for the big networks (and aren't grandfathered) aren't allowed DNS at all. DIRECTV failed to meet the FCC criteria for offering DNS a while back and has had to work around it to offer what they still do.

I'm betting far more people are losing distants than are getting them.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

harsh said:


> Distant Network Stations (DNS) generally hasn't allowed for earlier time zones for quite a while now (unless you subscribed to DNS more than 10 years or so ago). Most who have them had had to go through hell to get (and keep) them.
> 
> Getting anything like DNS from DIRECTV is like pulling hen's teeth for those who are in areas that are missing local channels. Those who are covered for the big networks (and aren't grandfathered) aren't allowed DNS at all. DIRECTV failed to meet the FCC criteria for offering DNS a while back and has had to work around it to offer what they still do.
> 
> I'm betting far more people are losing distants than are getting them.


I meant nationals like History, Discovery, etc. Gold Rush starts at 8pm "local time". With DirecTV I get the east code feed of Discovery, so I can start DVRing it at 5pm PST. Same goes for History, USA, etc. On Cox and Tvision, I wouldn't be able to watch Gold Rush until 8pm my time.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

At this point it is probably easier to get distants from dish (missing networks included with local channels) than DIRECTV at a home. The opposite for an RV account.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

SledgeHammer said:


> I meant nationals like History, Discovery, etc. Gold Rush starts at 8pm "local time".


I've used this to record earlier showings of programming on TNT (_The Last Ship_) but I ended up watching them the next day most of the time anyway since I'm typically opposed to sitting through commercials.

Precious few of the series on cable channels are hot topics at the water cooler where everyone is hanging on each episode. In the case of _The Last Ship_, the episodes came out as conjoined twins in adjacent time slots so if you missed the first one, you could catch it again an hour later.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

harsh said:


> I've used this to record earlier showings of programming on TNT (_The Last Ship_) but I ended up watching them the next day most of the time anyway since I'm typically opposed to sitting through commercials.
> 
> Precious few of the series on cable channels are hot topics at the water cooler where everyone is hanging on each episode. In the case of _The Last Ship_, the episodes came out as conjoined twins in adjacent time slots so if you missed the first one, you could catch it again an hour later.


Not any water cooler shows. I just need some stuff to watch . Stuff I watch on the cable channels tends to be an hour, so if I start ~15 minutes late, there are no commercials. My parents also start 15 minutes late on shows.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

SledgeHammer said:


> Not any water cooler shows. I just need some stuff to watch . Stuff I watch on the cable channels tends to be an hour, so if I start ~15 minutes late, there are no commercials. My parents also start 15 minutes late on shows.


If you're quick on the draw, you need at least 20 minutes lead or you'll catch up to live.

If what you're watching isn't time sensitive, you're not really winning much by picking up the show 180 minutes earlier so I would suggest that's not a particularly important feature.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

harsh said:


> If you're quick on the draw, you need at least 20 minutes lead or you'll catch up to live.
> 
> If what you're watching isn't time sensitive, you're not really winning much by picking up the show 180 minutes earlier so I would suggest that's not a particularly important feature.


I live in California so the programs air "3 hours earlier" by getting the east coast feeds. May not matter to you, but it matters to me. I want to watch stuff from 6 to 10, not 9 to 1AM.

You and others tend to make a lot of excuses and workarounds for stuff that's important to people. Sure, I could watch shows tomorrow, keep a pen & notepad by the TV to jot down season and episode numbers so I can find them later in Youtubes dumb DVR, juggle a bunch of apps and providers and bills, lose a bunch of channels, buy a Roku and a Tableau and jump through all your hoops. Sure, I could do all that...

But you and others keep missing the point... *doing all that is not only a huge PITA, it will be *MORE EXPENSIVE*. 
*
Why would anybody in their right mind go out of their way to add all that hassle to their lives when it will COST MORE MONEY and be a pain to use? Still haven't heard an answer for that from anybody lol. Yeah, shocker.

If you're all bitter and hate AT&T then cancel the service lol. AT&T hasn't done anything to me and they keep re-upping my discount.


----------



## mopardude01 (Aug 3, 2013)

SledgeHammer said:


> I live in California so the programs air "3 hours earlier" by getting the east coast feeds. May not matter to you, but it matters to me. I want to watch stuff from 6 to 10, not 9 to 1AM. Your lucky I guess, but they will come a time they will promise you something, and they won't hold up their end of the deal. That's just what they do.
> 
> You and others tend to make a lot of excuses and workarounds for stuff that's important to people. Sure, I could watch shows tomorrow, keep a pen & notepad by the TV to jot down season and episode numbers so I can find them later in Youtubes dumb DVR, juggle a bunch of apps and providers and bills, lose a bunch of channels, buy a Roku and a Tableau and jump through all your hoops. Sure, I could do all that...
> 
> ...


----------



## mopardude01 (Aug 3, 2013)

Your lucky I guess, but there will come a time when they promise you something and you'll never see it. That's just what they do, they lie.


----------



## TV_Guy (Nov 16, 2007)

SledgeHammer said:


> And missing plenty of popular / basic channels like Diy, Science, NatGeo, History, Pbs.


PBS was added over a year ago on YTTV in most if not all locations. NY DMA offer PBS from NYC, LI, and CT. CW also offered in NY DMA via WPIX. May vary in other locations. Nat Geo and Nat Geo Wild are part of YTTV. Also offers channels like Smithsonian and BBC World News which are only offered in higher tiers of Directv.

If you only want to record a single episode deselect the record function after the one program has recorded. Existing recording will be preserved for 9 months,


----------



## DMRI2006 (Jun 13, 2006)

I get 2 PBS affiliates off YoutubeTV locally here in RI, only 1 with Directv. Many streamers don't offer PBS at all.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

TV_Guy said:


> If you only want to record a single episode deselect the record function after the one program has recorded. Existing recording will be preserved for 9 months,


So let me see if I've got this right. On Saturday, I want to record TBBT at 4:00pm, NOT record the one at 4:30 then record the one at 5:00pm and then do the same thing on Sunday, the process would be:

1. on sat, record the ep at 4:00
2. on sat, at 4:30 kill the "season pass"
3. on sat, record the ep at 5:00
4. on sat, at 5:00 kill the "season pass" again
5. on sat, at 7:00pm, I watch the two eps
6. on sun, record the ep at 4:00, on my TV notepad, I need to jot down which season and ep # this is
7. on sun, at 4:30 kill the "season pass"
8. on sun, record the ep at 5:00, on my TV notepad, I need to jot down which season and ep # this is
9. on sun, at 5:00 kill the "season pass" again
10. on sun at 7:00pm, consult my TV notepad to find the 2 eps from sunday since my DVR will have at least 4 eps

What happens if TBBT I want to watch at 4:00 is on TBS and there is also a different one that I don't want to watch on KCOP? It will record both of those. Now I'll also need to jot down the season and ep #'s on Saturday.

And you really expect me to do all this? Man, you must have some awesome dispensaries by your house and be a charter member  .

Btw, this not some "made up scenario", or as Harsh will claim, "isn't important". On weekends and evenings I do this *ALL THE TIME*. I'll be bored and look at the guide for the next 3 or 4 hours and randomly record episodes of random shows I want to watch to kill some time. Then I go and watch them and delete them.

So on DirecTV, the same process would be:

1. On sat record the 4:00pm ep and the 5:00pm
2. On sun record the 4:00pm ep and the 5:00pm
3. Watch the 4 eps whenever and delete as I watch
DONE. *EASIER AND COST LESS THEN YOUR WAY .*


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

DMRI2006 said:


> I get 2 PBS affiliates off YoutubeTV locally here in RI, only 1 with Directv. Many streamers don't offer PBS at all.


Exactly. That's where OTA integration comes in .


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

TV_Guy said:


> PBS was added over a year ago on YTTV in most if not all locations. NY DMA offer PBS from NYC, LI, and CT. CW also offered in NY DMA via WPIX. May vary in other locations. Nat Geo and Nat Geo Wild are part of YTTV. Also offers channels like Smithsonian and BBC World News which are only offered in higher tiers of Directv.


YTTV in Los Angeles only offers KCET which isn't the PBS that I want. I want the one that shows This Old House in HD and undistorted (again not a made up issue since one of the PBS channels airs TOH in 3:3 resolution  -- YES, 3:3... a square picture thats SD distorted. There's also one that takes the HD feed, letter boxes it and then pillars that whole mess again -- the so called "window box" which results in an image thats about 25% in the middle of the screen with giant black borders). What about History and Science? Don't care about Smithsonian. Definitely don't care about BBC.


----------



## TV_Guy (Nov 16, 2007)

If you know precisely which episodes you want to record it should not be too difficult to filter them out from the list of recordings. YTTV records every program they broadcast. Each viewer then accesses that single recording if they have the program selected to be recorded. Massively more efficient than recording each program for every viewer that wants it recorded. They obtained legal permission to provide their DVR service in this manner. Since you work in IT, I'm sure you recognize how efficient this is in eliminating multiple recordings of every show.


----------



## TV_Guy (Nov 16, 2007)

SledgeHammer said:


> YTTV in Los Angeles only offers KCET which isn't the PBS that I want. I want the one that shows This Old House in HD and undistorted (again not a made up issue since one of the PBS channels airs TOH in 3:3 resolution  -- YES, 3:3... a square picture thats SD distorted. There's also one that takes the HD feed, letter boxes it and then pillars that whole mess again -- the so called "window box" which results in an image thats about 25% in the middle of the screen with giant black borders). What about History and Science? Don't care about Smithsonian. Definitely don't care about BBC.


2 suggestions:
Record OTA on the PBS of your choice.
Record it from Locast ($5 a month). I know they have multiple PBS SoCal affiliates. Not sure if they have your favorite. If the format of a single program is keeping you from leaving DirecTV you don't want to leave Directv. Which is fine, just don't disparage other services which meet the needs of some people. In my case, having to call Directv on an ongoing basis for discounts is a bigger PITA than having multiple sources for programming. Especially when even with the discounts it costs more than YTTV.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

TV_Guy said:


> 2 suggestions:
> Record OTA on the PBS of your choice.
> Record it from Locast ($5 a month). I know they have multiple PBS SoCal affiliates. Not sure if they have your favorite. If the format of a single program is keeping you from leaving DirecTV you don't want to leave Directv. Which is fine, just don't disparage other services which meet the needs of some people. In my case, having to call Directv on an ongoing basis for discounts is a bigger PITA than having multiple sources for programming. Especially when even with the discounts it costs more than YTTV.


Huh? I gave the This Old House example, as an example of why I don't use the KCET channel, not why I'm staying with DirecTV. I did list like 10 other reasons which you conveniently ignored though lol.

You also ignored the whole part about OTT (where I'd need 2 - 3 providers to get all my channels and possibly raise my Cox data cap for $50/mo) being *MORE *expensive, not cheaper then my Preferred Xtra + HR54 + OTA one stop shop.

Last time I checked, $64.99 + $50 = $114 (*before *adding additional providers to cover the missing channels) is more then the $103 I pay DirecTV for the one stop shop and all the channels I watch. Not to mention all the money I save on not having to have pens and notebooks by my TV to jot down ep #'s .

If I did go to OTT, it certainly wouldn't be to YTTV cuz the DVR sucks. AT&T TV isn't any cheaper. I'd have to upgrade to choice just to get the Science channel and thats $85/mo and STILL missing channels. Then throw in the $50/mo data cap issue...

Since you brought it up, I'd hate to call you a kettle, but aren't you disparaging a service that DOES work for some people that aren't you? On a board *that specifically caters to that service nonetheless lol?
*
"ongoing basis"? Once a year for 5 minutes isn't an ongoing basis.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

SledgeHammer said:


> May not matter to you, but it matters to me.


Then it is great that you have that option. For the other 99.99% of the population, it probably isn't a deciding factor in choosing a TV provider.


----------



## TV_Guy (Nov 16, 2007)

Not once a year. You recounted multiple attempts to get discounts when the well ran dry for a while. Every service works for some people or they would not exist. You sometimes tell us your data cap is not an issue but conveniently bring it up when it comes to price comparisons. I'm not going to argue which service is right or wrong for you. Every service has different channel lineups, prices and DVR setups. It's not possible to keep an identical setup when you change providers. You have to balance the plusses and minuses. If you are looking for an identical setup you will not be changing providers.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

harsh said:


> Then it is great that you have that option. For the other 99.99% of the population, it probably isn't a deciding factor in choosing a TV provider.


You certainly are fast and loose with your stats. This reminds me of that time you claimed "everybody" uses Linux when in reality, its really pretty much "zero". Of course people care about time zones. It's not up there with cost though, but you flopped on that argument too since for people with data caps, or those who need 2+ providers to get all their channels, or those with 1 - 2 TVs, or those who get discounts on DirecTV, OTT will end up being more expensive. Let me guess, 99.99% of the population doesn't have data caps or fall into any of the other categories?  Well, you'd be wrong yet again since Cox, Xfinity, AT&T, CenturyLink, SuddenLink, MediaCom, Buckeye, HughesNet, Viasat all potentially have data caps. Let me guess, 99.99% of the population doesn't use those providers?


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

TV_Guy said:


> Not once a year. You recounted multiple attempts to get discounts when the well ran dry for a while. Every service works for some people or they would not exist. You sometimes tell us your data cap is not an issue but conveniently bring it up when it comes to price comparisons. I'm not going to argue which service is right or wrong for you. Every service has different channel lineups, prices and DVR setups. It's not possible to keep an identical setup when you change providers. You have to balance the plusses and minuses. If you are looking for an identical setup you will not be changing providers.


Wrong again. I've been with DirecTV since 2002. I haven't paid full price for at least 13 years. Out of those 13 yrs, 12 of those have been once a year/5 minutes (including 2021). In early 2020, although it took more effort to get my 1 yr promo back, and I had to wait 2 months, I still didn't pay full price for those 2 months and that was the only year I've ever had an issue and since I got the one offs for those two months, the well never "ran dry".

Wrong again on the data caps too. If you read more carefully, you'll see I've said "*potentially*" a $50/mo fee. I use 300GB-400GB now with zero streaming. If I watch 4K, I'd go over the data cap. I also provided a list of a bunch of providers that have data caps. Since I use 300GB-400GB now, I don't really care about the data cap. If I think about switching to OTT, I'd have to consider that since you're trying to convince the world OTT is cheaper. I know you are a super rich guy who doesn't care about $50/mo -- although you seem to have cancelled your DirecTV service to save $50/mo -- hmmm....

Who said anything about identical setup? I told you I have a list of certain channels I watch. I know harsh will argue that 99.99% of the population doesn't watch those channels (and he'd be wrong as usual). I probably don't need DIY anymore since the shows I watched on there seem to have been cancelled, but I certainly watch History and Science. I only use PBS for This Old House, and as I've told you, one of the PBS channels airs it all distorted. So I should pay MORE to watch a show distorted? As far as time zones go, I obviously get LA locals and PBS from DirecTV, so I was talking about the nationals. As far as DVRs go... only Youtube has the stupid DVR behavior... so if I did go OTT, why I would I use the one DVR that sucks?

Since you keep telling me that spending 5 minutes on the phone during work hours is such a huge inconvenience to you, you'd think you take into account what other people consider inconveniences -- you know, like watching TV in the middle of the night or watching distorted shows, or juggling 2 - 3 providers, apps, bills, devices, double paying for channels, etc.

Real issue I think is that AT&T killed your dog and stole your Camaro and now you're all bitter and want revenge. If you hate AT&T so much and have cancelled your service, why are you still hanging around on a DirecTV board trying to convince us to cancel lol?

And at the end of the day, your arguments and harshs arguments ALL fall flat since "nobody" uses OTT. As we discussed in another thread, only 12% of the pay tv population does and that's with double or triple counting people with multiple providers.

And of course, you're paying more then 2x per channel vs what I am, but as we've seen, you're very selective with your details when you're trying to John Wick DirecTV.


----------



## b4pjoe (Nov 20, 2010)

SledgeHammer said:


> "ongoing basis"? Once a year for 5 minutes isn't an ongoing basis.


You're living a charmed life if your phone calls to DIRECTV is only 5 minutes.  I don't think I've ever had a phone call in over 25 years with them to be only 5 minutes.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

b4pjoe said:


> You're living a charmed life if your phone calls to DIRECTV is only 5 minutes.  I don't think I've ever had a phone call in over 25 years with them to be only 5 minutes.


Pretty much. I don't call the main number, that's a waste of time. I call the retention number directly during US business hours. They pick up immediately. Name, phone number, PIN and they access my account. Then I tell them I want to look at lowering my bill, get put one hold for 1 or 2 minutes then they come back with an offer and I take it and thank them and go back to actually being able to delete recordings lol. If they try to get me to lower my package, which has been maybe 20% of the time, I tell them I am happy with the service and my package since that's the minimum one that has all my channels and avoids the RSN.

Never had any weird billing issues, they've never killed me dog or stolen my Camaro like what unfortunately happened to TV guy . I don't call tech support either. When my multi-switch went out a few years ago, I just replaced it myself. When my remote wears out, I buy a new one, they're cheap. Why call DirecTV for that?

Only time I ever spent more time then that (aside from the one time in 2020 to appease TV guy lol) was when I was sick of dealing with the slowness of my HR24 and negotiated a comp'ed HR54. They sent it to me and I installed it myself. Super hard lol.


----------



## TV_Guy (Nov 16, 2007)

SledgeHammer said:


> Wrong again. I've been with DirecTV since 2002. I haven't paid full price for at least 13 years. Out of those 13 yrs, 12 of those have been once a year/5 minutes (including 2021). In early 2020, although it took more effort to get my 1 yr promo back, and I had to wait 2 months, I still didn't pay full price for those 2 months and that was the only year I've ever had an issue and since I got the one offs for those two months, the well never "ran dry".
> 
> Wrong again on the data caps too. If you read more carefully, you'll see I've said "*potentially*" a $50/mo fee. I use 300GB-400GB now with zero streaming. If I watch 4K, I'd go over the data cap. I also provided a list of a bunch of providers that have data caps. Since I use 300GB-400GB now, I don't really care about the data cap. If I think about switching to OTT, I'd have to consider that since you're trying to convince the world OTT is cheaper. I know you are a super rich guy who doesn't care about $50/mo -- although you seem to have cancelled your DirecTV service to save $50/mo -- hmmm....
> 
> ...


I have no issue with AT&T. For a long time it provided me a service that was superior to what I would have received from cable. Times change and I found a service that for me was superior and less expensive. All live programming services cable, satellite and OTT will be under continued pressure due to demographic changes. People forming new households are much less likely to have any form of live TV. The networks recognize this. Just look at the new NFL packages. All of them include streaming. In fact the Thursday Night Football package is streaming only on Amazon starting in 2023. The 12% is significant because it represents a trend that will only get larger in the years to come. Traditionally sports was the glue that held the TV cable bundle together. This has fractured with sports moving to OTT platforms like ESPN+, Amazon and Peacock.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

TV_Guy said:


> I have no issue with AT&T. For a long time it provided me a service that was superior to what I would have received from cable. Times change and I found a service that for me was superior and less expensive. All live programming services cable, satellite and OTT will be under continued pressure due to demographic changes. People forming new households are much less likely to have any form of live TV. The networks recognize this. Just look at the new NFL packages. All of them include streaming. In fact the Thursday Night Football package is streaming only on Amazon starting in 2023. The 12% is significant because it represents a trend that will only get larger in the years to come. Traditionally sports was the glue that held the TV cable bundle together. This has fractured with sports moving to OTT platforms like ESPN+, Amazon and Peacock.


Lol. Wrong again. The "cord cutting" trend has actually slowed considerably. See the charts for Dish subscriber counts. As you can see, it's been pretty flat since 2019. DirecTV has issues that were brought on by AT&T ownership specific to it. The big "cord cutting movement" was from 2016 - 2019. Amazon and Netflix isn't OTT btw.

You also conveniently left out the part about all the streaming services that have folded like TVision for example lol. You also left out the part about streaming services hemorrhaging cash and raising rates 25% a year. So your cost savings argument will go out the window by 2023. Even though in many situations there is no cost savings today.

I don't know how many times I can keep repeating that my DirecTV deal is cheaper then OTT would be, but you keep conveniently ignoring that part too.

I'd also point out that Monday night football and Thursday night football viewership has been on the decline since 2019, but you'd probably ignore that too lol.

You also ignored AGAIN the fact that most people sub to multiple OTT provider, so no, OTT isn't 12% since that's counting people multiple times. If you counted unique OTT subs, you'd be way under 10%.

You're confusing people who cancel DirecTV to go to Netflix, AP, Disney+ etc. vs the tiny minority that actually go to OTT.










Similar trend in cable providers:


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

SledgeHammer said:


> Lol. Wrong again. The "cord cutting" trend has actually slowed considerably. See the charts for Dish subscriber counts. As you can see, it's been pretty flat since 2019. DirecTV has issues that were brought on by AT&T ownership specific to it. The big "cord cutting movement" was from 2016 - 2019. Amazon and Netflix isn't OTT btw.
> 
> You also conveniently left out the part about all the streaming services that have folded like TVision for example lol. You also left out the part about streaming services hemorrhaging cash and raising rates 25% a year. So your cost savings argument will go out the window by 2023. Even though in many situations there is no cost savings today.
> 
> ...


I can think of only 2 live streaming services that have called it quits, PS Vue and TVision, but yeah rates have gone up faster than cable/sat mostly because the live streaming services started out as a losing proposition to build a customer base.

To save money streaming you have to pretty much abandon sports and stay away from the live streamers. It is very possible to save money by just using various SVOD services for short periods of time and switch up which ones are active. Bit of a PITA but doable.


----------



## TV_Guy (Nov 16, 2007)

SledgeHammer said:


> Lol. Wrong again. The "cord cutting" trend has actually slowed considerably. See the charts for Dish subscriber counts. As you can see, it's been pretty flat since 2019. DirecTV has issues that were brought on by AT&T ownership specific to it. The big "cord cutting movement" was from 2016 - 2019. Amazon and Netflix isn't OTT btw.
> 
> You also conveniently left out the part about all the streaming services that have folded like TVision for example lol. You also left out the part about streaming services hemorrhaging cash and raising rates 25% a year. So your cost savings argument will go out the window by 2023. Even though in many situations there is no cost savings today.
> 
> ...


I think I asked you once before why you needed any live service since you are not watching sports and news channels. Something like ad free Hulu for $12 has a lot of content. Throw in Philo for $20 along with an OTA DVR and you should have most bases covered for $32. If the few shows you would be missing are worth an additional $80 then by all means keep Directv.

As far as TVision goes the bankruptcy of Mobi TV is the culprit. More people are abandoning live tv altogether and going Netflix, AP, Disney+ etc. As more content disappears from the linear channels people will question why they need linear TV. With over a 1000 free channels on the free streaming services there is plenty of content for people leaving all forms of pay TV.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

lparsons21 said:


> To save money streaming you have to pretty much abandon sports.


Huh? YouTube TV has more sports channels for less money than ATT/D* Entertainment. Cant even get Red Zone channel on ATT or DirecTv. That is the main reason I am planning on switching over as soon as the Tmobile $10 off for a year deal hits Tuesday.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Davenlr said:


> Huh? YouTube TV has more sports channels for less money than ATT/D* Entertainment. Cant even get Red Zone channel on ATT or DirecTv. That is the main reason I am planning on switching over as soon as the Tmobile $10 off for a year deal hits Tuesday.


Yeah, it is one of the better deals out there but @$65/month it is hard to have it save money over a cable bundle for mostly the same channels.

If or when I can make myself not care for sports at all is the day I'll really save some bucks, as it is right now YTTV+the extra cost for internet bandwidth makes any savings pretty small.


----------



## TV_Guy (Nov 16, 2007)

Davenlr said:


> Huh? YouTube TV has more sports channels for less money than ATT/D* Entertainment. Cant even get Red Zone channel on ATT or DirecTv. That is the main reason I am planning on switching over as soon as the Tmobile $10 off for a year deal hits Tuesday.


The only negative with YTTV for sports is the missing RSNs from Bally along with YES and Marquee. They did integrate MLB.TV which is great for out of market baseball. A few years back I was able to get free Red Zone from Directv most years just by asking.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Davenlr said:


> Huh? YouTube TV has more sports channels for less money than ATT/D* Entertainment. Cant even get Red Zone channel on ATT or DirecTv. That is the main reason I am planning on switching over as soon as the Tmobile $10 off for a year deal hits Tuesday.


Saying YouTube has more more sports channels for less is quite incorrect if you follow any given local team.

Since they don't carry the Lakers or Dodgers YouTube tv is worthless to me and is missing the most important channels for sports.

As with all providers content is king over everything then it's a matter of what comes after that.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

TV_Guy said:


> I think I asked you once before why you needed any live service since you are not watching sports and news channels. Something like ad free Hulu for $12 has a lot of content. Throw in Philo for $20 along with an OTA DVR and you should have most bases covered for $32. If the few shows you would be missing are worth an additional $80 then by all means keep Directv.
> 
> As far as TVision goes the bankruptcy of Mobi TV is the culprit. More people are abandoning live tv altogether and going Netflix, AP, Disney+ etc. As more content disappears from the linear channels people will question why they need linear TV. With over a 1000 free channels on the free streaming services there is plenty of content for people leaving all forms of pay TV.


Oh lord. You really need to stop going to your DHA (DirecTV Haters Anonymous) meetings . I've already shown you actual numbers multiple times that people aren't abandoning pay TV in droves like you claim. I also showed you the "movement" has plateaued.

Thanks for the Netflix suggestion. I hadn't thought of that. I love watching poorly dubbed garbage from Spain . You know since Netflix lost most of their licensed content.

Content is disappearing from linear TV? Is that what they told you at the DHA meeting? When did linear TV ever have poorly dubbed garbage from Spain?

So your latest suggestion is that if the shows I watch aren't available on OTT, I should just stop watching them? Very clever . Almost as clever as the one about keeping a pen and notepad by my TV, jotting down episode numbers and going through 24 steps to record a show on YTTV.

You're just flailing around now. And poorly at that. $32 + $80 = $112. I pay DirecTV $103 and get 100% of my shows, in a single UI, a single guide, a single device and get the east coast feeds like I want.

Then once again, you ignored the data cap. So its really $32 + $50 = $82 which is $21 cheaper then you know... actually having a functional system with the channels I watch.

And you also keep ignoring the fact that you are actually paying 2x per channel. But hey, who's counting? 

And you still haven't answered why you hang out on a DirecTV when you don't have DirecTV. Does your DHA club pay you a bonus if you get somebody to cancel? Or is it more of a quota thing you have to hit every month or you lose your membership?


----------



## TV_Guy (Nov 16, 2007)

SledgeHammer said:


> Oh lord. You really need to stop going to your DHA (DirecTV Haters Anonymous) meetings . I've already shown you actual numbers multiple times that people aren't abandoning pay TV in droves like you claim. I also showed you the "movement" has plateaued.
> 
> Thanks for the Netflix suggestion. I hadn't thought of that. I love watching poorly dubbed garbage from Spain . You know since Netflix lost most of their licensed content.
> 
> ...


The most ridiculous number is price per channel. YTTV just added a bunch of largely useless Viacom channels. Should I feel good that my price per channel is now lower than before? Before the 2 rounds of Viacom additions the channels on YTTV were mainly widely watched channels. I could care less what my average price per channel is if I'm getting the large majority of the channels I watch for $65.


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

TV_Guy said:


> The most ridiculous number is price per channel. YTTV just added a bunch of largely useless Viacom channels. Should I feel good that my price per channel is now lower than before? Before the 2 rounds of Viacom additions the channels on YTTV were mainly widely watched channels. I could care less what my average price per channel is if I'm getting the large majority of the channels I watch for $65.


65 right now. Your out of your mind if you don't think that is going north of 70 this year


----------



## TV_Guy (Nov 16, 2007)

compnurd said:


> 65 right now. Your out of your mind if you don't think that is going north of 70 this year


I could see them jacking up the price if they were to add the Bally Sports RSNs including YES and Marquee. Raising the price to say $75 without the Bally RSNs might risk defections to AT&T which has those RSNs for $85.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

TV_Guy said:


> I could see them jacking up the price if they were to add the Bally Sports RSNs including YES and Marquee. Raising the price to say $75 without the Bally RSNs might risk defections to AT&T which has those RSNs for $85.


$75?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

Why that'd bring my cost to $125/mo and I'd be missing a bunch of channels and have a non functioning DVR!!! That is so much cheaper then $103 where everything just works.

Let me guess... now your suggestion will be to sell my house and move to a city without a data cap right?? Oh wait I know... I should login to my Cox account every morning and keep a spreadsheet of my data usage on the fridge so I don't go over?

Or maybe I should use the notepad and pen I have to keep by my TV so I can use your dvr to keep track of minutes too??

You're out of your mind if you don't think YTTV isn't going to be north of $100 in a couple of years or less.


----------



## TV_Guy (Nov 16, 2007)

SledgeHammer said:


> $75?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
> 
> Why that'd bring my cost to $125/mo and I'd be missing a bunch of channels and have a non functioning DVR!!! That is so much cheaper then $103 where everything just works.
> 
> ...


I think they would lose much of their customer base with that kind of pricing. They would probably just fold the service if programming costs rose to that extent. Of course those same programming costs would be reflected in higher prices across the board for all surviving service providers.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

TV_Guy said:


> I think they would lose much of their customer base with that kind of pricing. They would probably just fold the service if programming costs rose to that extent. Of course those same programming costs would be reflected in higher prices across the board for all surviving service providers.


Wrong yet again.

DirecTV only gives discounts to the folks that call in and complain. Like me. It's a tiny minority. The rest of the folks (like you) that are/were paying full price picked up the tab. Thanks for paying for my functioning DVR, I appreciate it .

Streamers want to lure in all the suckers with rock bottom teaser prices, AT A LOSS, which is why a bunch of them go out of business. Then jack up the rates 25% a year over time until they start losing customers back to linear. They can jack up the rates at 25% a year because they set the sucker prices so low to lure folks in and get them addicted. As we saw with TVision, if its the same price or close, what's the point of switching?

DirecTV isn't going to jack up the price 25% in one shot lol. Same as once the streamers bring their prices up to market, they won't be able to do 25% in a year either.


----------



## TV_Guy (Nov 16, 2007)

SledgeHammer said:


> Wrong yet again.
> 
> DirecTV only gives discounts to the folks that call in and complain. Like me. It's a tiny minority. The rest of the folks (like you) that are/were paying full price picked up the tab. Thanks for paying for my functioning DVR, I appreciate it .
> 
> ...


I was calling for discounts before you even had Directv. I know the racket all too well. I stopped calling when I realized I could pay less for streaming than I was paying for Directv after the discounts were included. They can afford to hand out discounts since most of their fees are pure profit.

Streamers are more price sensitive than cable or satellite customers. They are more likely to substitute other non live viewing if the price for YTTV becomes excessive. They have a device or multiple devices that they own and can access multiple program sources. The trend is to sell programming direct to the consumer. Services like Peacock, ESPN+, Paramount+ and HBO Max compete for viewers. Directv and YTTV are middlemen that are packaging content that they distribute to the consumer. Dozens of free apps that total over a 1000 free channels vie for viewers. Not everyone particularly younger people see TV as a must have. No wonder the NFL made sure their games are accessible via streaming.


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

TV_Guy said:


> I could see them jacking up the price if they were to add the Bally Sports RSNs including YES and Marquee. Raising the price to say $75 without the Bally RSNs might risk defections to AT&T which has those RSNs for $85.


No I see it raising just to adjust for programming costs like everyone else will


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

It's amazing how emotional the choice of TV streaming can make some people. Bottom line, it's great for some, not great for others. Not sure I understand the need for the diatribes.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

TV_Guy said:


> I was calling for discounts before you even had Directv. I know the racket all too well. I stopped calling when I realized I could pay less for streaming than I was paying for Directv after the discounts were included. They can afford to hand out discounts since most of their fees are pure profit.
> 
> Streamers are more price sensitive than cable or satellite customers. They are more likely to substitute other non live viewing if the price for YTTV becomes excessive. They have a device or multiple devices that they own and can access multiple program sources. The trend is to sell programming direct to the consumer. Services like Peacock, ESPN+, Paramount+ and HBO Max compete for viewers. Directv and YTTV are middlemen that are packaging content that they distribute to the consumer. Dozens of free apps that total over a 1000 free channels vie for viewers. Not everyone particularly younger people see TV as a must have. No wonder the NFL made sure their games are accessible via streaming.


You were calling for discounts before 2002? Sure you were... I'm sure they were giving big discounts when the service was $40/mo .


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

compnurd said:


> No I see it raising just to adjust for programming costs like everyone else will


Streamers are like startup tech companies. Interest rates are very low right now, so they get free money while they hemorrhage cash with the hopes of one day turning a profit or riding out the stock market til they go belly up. Name of the game is draw in eyeballs and jack up the prices.


----------



## DMRI2006 (Jun 13, 2006)

inkahauts said:


> Saying YouTube has more more sports channels for less is quite incorrect if you follow any given local team.
> 
> Since they don't carry the Lakers or Dodgers YouTube tv is worthless to me and is missing the most important channels for sports.
> 
> As with all providers content is king over everything then it's a matter of what comes after that.


Like most of these services, they are missing RSNs, but their national roster of sports channels is terrific for the price. I couldn't get CBS Sports Network on Fios unless I paid for their highest tier of cable service. YTTV has that, all the NBC, Fox and ESPN networks, Big10/ACC/Sec plus the option of Red Zone.

If you need an RSN you are going to be forever locked into dish or cable. This struggle is going to go on until RSNs agree to be offered a la carte, which they don't want to do...but may have to relcutantly agree to down the road whether they want to or not.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

DMRI2006 said:


> Like most of these services, they are missing RSNs, but their national roster of sports channels is terrific for the price. I couldn't get CBS Sports Network on Fios unless I paid for their highest tier of cable service. YTTV has that, all the NBC, Fox and ESPN networks, Big10/ACC/Sec plus the option of Red Zone.
> 
> If you need an RSN you are going to be forever locked into dish or cable. This struggle is going to go on until RSNs agree to be offered a la carte, which they don't want to do...but may have to relcutantly agree to down the road whether they want to or not.


If you start offering RSNs on streaming, you'll eventually start charging RSN fees. I always applauded DirecTV for offering a very good package minus 1 or 2 sports channels (Preferred Xtra) and saving me $8/mo in RSN fees. Now granted, you need to know about the package and its not advertised lol, but still...

Only a matter of time til streamers start monetizing streams and tacking on BS fees too.

If you recall, in the early days of DirecTV when they were offering the service for lowball prices, they also turned a blind eye to hackers (to get them hooked).... until one day they didn't. I bring that up, because that's akin to what people do with streaming and that's password sharing. Netflix is starting to crack down on that. Once Netflix goes full ham on password sharing, every other provider will follow and its game over for that.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

inkahauts said:


> Saying YouTube has more more sports channels for less is quite incorrect if you follow any given local team.


I said it had more sports channels that ATT TV/DirecTv ENTERTAINMENT. ENTERTAINMENT has ESPN, ESPN2, FS1, and NBCSN. I was not referring to CHOICE, or SPORTS PAK or any of the add ons, I said ENTERTAINMENT.
I.E. The number of sports channels on the cheapest package of each provider.

AS for RSN's, I did not mention them, as they are currently held hostage by a few providers, and if you need those, then you will have to pay for that provider or do without. That was not what I was talking about.



> Streamers are like startup tech companies.


This may be true. When I can get 3 rooms with HD, DVR and the same channels I want from a provider with better PQ and AQ for less, without a two year contract, then I will switch to them. At the moment, however, $55 a month for a year is looking pretty nice. Have to hand it to T-mobile. $10 off TV package, and free MLB.TV every year actually pays for my cell phone bill.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

SledgeHammer said:


> If you start offering RSNs on streaming, you'll eventually start charging RSN fees. I always applauded DirecTV for offering a very good package minus 1 or 2 sports channels (Preferred Xtra) and saving me $8/mo in RSN fees.


How much is preferred Xtra per month for the package before the extra fees start getting added? If DirecTv's new "owner" ever changes policies to allow re-activating owned equipment registered to your account, I might consider doing that. I mean, seriously, all it would cost them would be sending me 4 access cards.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

Davenlr said:


> How much is preferred Xtra per month for the package before the extra fees start getting added? If DirecTv's new "owner" ever changes policies to allow re-activating owned equipment registered to your account, I might consider doing that. I mean, seriously, all it would cost them would be sending me 4 access cards.


My bill looks like: Preferred Extra $114.99, $0 receiver fee, $0 RSN fee, $10 DVR fee, $10 HD fee, WHDVR $3, so $137.99 before discounts. Discounts bring it down to $103.18 out the door, after taxes, etc.

I'm on legacy billing, so my "DVR fee" (DVR+HD+WHDVR) is $23 vs. the newbs paying $25 in a single line item.

EDIT: My bad, I hadn't looked at the RSN fee in a while... its currently $9.99 (Los Angeles) . Thanks again DirecTV for an RSN free package .


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

$9.13 where I live and I'd have to subscribe to Sports Pack to get all of the teams claiming my area as "local". RSNs are out of control.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

Davenlr said:


> This may be true. When I can get 3 rooms with HD, DVR and the same channels I want from a provider with better PQ and AQ for less, without a two year contract, then I will switch to them. At the moment, however, $55 a month for a year is looking pretty nice. Have to hand it to T-mobile. $10 off TV package, and free MLB.TV every year actually pays for my cell phone bill.


I was on a HR20 / HR24 until several years ago when the HR24 went all snail. I wanted to upgrade to the HR54. Since I'd never used a free upgrade, I got it for free. It was a self install / upgrade, so only a 1 yr contract. Not a big deal. Aside from that 1 yr, I haven't been under contract pretty much ever.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

James Long said:


> $9.13 where I live and I'd have to subscribe to Sports Pack to get all of the teams claiming my area as "local". RSNs are out of control.


Sports is an expensive hobby lol.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

SledgeHammer said:


> I'm on legacy billing, so my "DVR fee" (DVR+HD+WHDVR) is $23 vs. the newbs paying $25 in a single line item.


I was on legacy billing, and when ATT took over, even though it was in black and white in their TOS, they refused to continue letting me use my LifeTime DVR, and raised my bill $10. That was when I left the first time after being a customer since day one with an 18" dish and RCA receiver.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Davenlr said:


> If you have T-mobile, you can get YouTubeTV for $54.99 a month, otherwise it is $65.00 only issue: No dolby.
> I had basically the same problem and called retention, and they released me from my contract and signed me up for ATT TV which has been good. Better PQ, Dolby, 20 streams, use your own boxes or buy theirs for $50 on ebay.
> Packages are close to the same. If streaming didnt work out, I was going to sign up with DISH for their 2 yr price locked package, but I like the no-contract streaming. I can move anytime (like this Sept when I will move to YouTube so I can get the Red Zone channel that ATT doesnt carry.
> 
> Those CSRs in the South Pacific have to have caused more cancellations that they are saving ATT money. I just DETEST trying to talk to them.


Excuse me ...

But didn't you mean earlier that AT&T TV can support up to 20 connected devices and 3 active streams, and not "20 streams?" ...  ...

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

HoTat2 said:


> Excuse me ...
> 
> But didn't you mean earlier that AT&T TV can support up to 20 connected devices and 3 active streams, and not "20 streams?" ...  ...
> 
> Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


No AT&T TV supports 20 streams on the home internet and 3 streams elsewhere.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

For reference: Learn About Device and Stream Limits

AT&T TV
You can stream AT&T TV on up to 20 compatible devices connected to your home network at the same time. And, use up to three of those streams on the go.

Network exclusions
Some networks only allow you to have three streams at the same time. This includes both watching in your home or on the go. These networks include:
* Fox channels: Big Ten Network, Fox News, Fox Business, FS1, FS2, Fox Deportes and Fox local channels
* STARZ®
* NHL Network
* SHOWTIME®

If you move or change your internet service provider, you can update your home network up to 4 times in a 12-month period.

AT&T TV NOW remains two streams with an extra charge for the third stream.
Twenty streams is a recent change so I can understand when word has not got around to everyone.

AT&T recommends Internet with 8Mbps per stream or more deliver an optimal viewing.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

James Long said:


> For reference: Learn About Device and Stream Limits
> 
> AT&T TV
> You can stream AT&T TV on up to 20 compatible devices connected to your home network at the same time. And, use up to three of those streams on the go.
> ...


Can't you get around the "on the go" limits by using a VPN ?


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

SledgeHammer said:


> You certainly are fast and loose with your stats.


No more so that you're choice of obscure criteria on which to claim TV provider goodness.

Do you expect that being able to watch record a TV show a few hours earlier really tips the scale for even a significant portion of the DVR-enabled community?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

SledgeHammer said:


> Can't you get around the "on the go" limits by using a VPN ?


Technically you would have to host the VPN on your home network, which would burn your uplink bandwidth (more than the 8Mbps per stream due to the extra encapsulation).
Most people don't have huge uplink bandwidths. Most people would not be able to add more than a couple VPNs to the three legitimate "non-home network" feeds.
Cheating the system is distasteful so we're not going to get into those details on this site.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

harsh said:


> No more so that you're choice of obscure criteria on which to claim TV provider goodness.
> 
> Do you expect that being able to watch record a TV show a few hours earlier really tips the scale for even a significant portion of the DVR-enabled community?


Hmm... so in your opinion, "obscure criteria" includes:

1. being able to record a single episode of a show and delete it
2. actually being able to watch TV during prime time
3. actually having all channels I actually watch
4. having a single all-in-one provider
5. not having to keep a pen / paper by the TV to jot down ep #s.
6. not going over my data cap
7. having everything I want AND *PAYING* *LESS *then your chicken wire, half baked solution

Wow... you and TV guy should get married. You two were made for each other.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

James Long said:


> Cheating the system is distasteful so we're not going to get into those details on this site.


And as you point out it is enough of a hassle that for 99% of people who would need help setting something like that up, it would be easier to find one of the outright illegal "free TV" devices that are everywhere at swap meets and other places where shady transactions are common.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

SledgeHammer said:


> Hmm... so in your opinion, "obscure criteria" includes:


No, obscure is the requirement that you be able to do trick play during the conventional local prime time slot.


> 4. having a single all-in-one provider


I submit that such a single-source doesn't exist. Some come close but none go all the way. See more at DIRECTV's fabled Titanium package.


> 6. not going over my data cap


Have you ever exceeded your data cap?


> 7. having everything I want AND *PAYING* *LESS *then your chicken wire, half baked solution


Since you highlighted it, what pay TV solution isn't appreciably cheaper than DIRECTV?


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

harsh said:


> No, obscure is the requirement that you be able to do trick play during the conventional local prime time slot.


If I can't do that, why would I even need a DVR? You even point out yourself that is the "conventional prime time slot". As in that's when sane people actually watch TV?



harsh said:


> I submit that such a single-source doesn't exist. Some come close but none go all the way. See more at DIRECTV's fabled Titanium package.


I have the "fabled" Preferred Xtra package and it has all my channels + no RSN fee. Sounds like one stop shops do actually exist. I think you were thinking of the easter bunny .



harsh said:


> Have you ever exceeded your data cap?


I don't use streaming (other then a once in a blue moon movie on Netflix) since all my shows are, well, you know... on the service I actually signed up for. Since Netflix lost all its licensed content and its pretty much all poorly dubbed foreign garbage... I've had to go to other sources for "main stream" movies. With my current usage, my PR is 600GB/mo... again with little to no streaming.

I "probably" wouldn't go over with an HD only OTT. While its a concern and would nullify any savings since its $50/mo, it's not my primary concern. My primary concern is having all the channels I want and a usable DVR. I wouldn't go YTTV because of the unusable DVR. I would possibly go AT&T TV, or at least try it out... but not much savings there AND I'd lose the OTA integration and a few channels I watch. But at least the DVR would be usable.



harsh said:


> Since you highlighted it, what pay TV solution isn't appreciably cheaper than DIRECTV?


What pay TV solution isn't "appreciably" cheaper then DIRECTV? Not sure why I need to keep repeating this to you and TV Guy, but pretty much EVERYTHING.

I priced out Dish, Cox, TVision and OTT. Is there another pay TV solution I'm not aware of?

Dish is pretty much the same price and doesn't have as good a PQ
Cox is more expensive
TVision was the same price except the PQ was terrible
OTT is more expensive if you know... I actually want to gather all my channels


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

James Long said:


> For reference: Learn About Device and Stream Limits
> 
> AT&T TV
> You can stream AT&T TV on up to 20 compatible devices connected to your home network at the same time. And, use up to three of those streams on the go.
> ...


Your home network is set to the IP address at your home location and for people at home who don't have an fixed IP address?
Will they get locked out?
Will att lock out there own users where there IP address changes?


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

JoeTheDragon said:


> Your home network is set to the IP address at your home location and for people at home who don't have an fixed IP address?
> Will they get locked out?
> Will att lock out there own users where there IP address changes?


unless you pay for static no one would really have a fixed home IP address.. However unless you change your modem or router your home IP address should very very very rarely change.. Which if it does you can update your home IP 4 times a year


----------



## b4pjoe (Nov 20, 2010)

Your home IP address is assigned by your ISP and all users using your home network will have that same external IP address.


----------



## Steveknj (Nov 14, 2006)

SledgeHammer said:


> Wrong yet again.
> 
> DirecTV only gives discounts to the folks that call in and complain. Like me. It's a tiny minority. The rest of the folks (like you) that are/were paying full price picked up the tab. Thanks for paying for my functioning DVR, I appreciate it .
> 
> ...


Look, I was completely with you and streaming doesn't work for everyone, and until I figured it out how to make it work for me. But look at AT&T TV. That gives me about 90% of what I got with DirecTV, but I STILL had to supplement with Locast to to get some locals (and with Channels DVR so I can record it). The DVR is actually really good, for a cloud DVR (my pet peeves are mostly around padding, otherwise it's really very good). But in my case I was paying about $200 a month on DirecTV. I had it on 5 TVs, including 3 DVRs and 2 extra Genies. With AT&T TV I'm paying much less, and wound up with a few extra premiums from Starz/Encore and HBO (which I had before). And I'm getting all my RSNs. What did I give up? I gave up NFL Network, a few extra HBO channels (which I can watch the content on HBO Max) and I gained one extra room through streaming. I'm on the monthly plan but could save even more if I went with a contract. I'm saving $80, by paying $105 for AT&T TV and 13 for Channels and Locast. But since you are only paying $103, then it doesn't make sense to you to switch. I wouldn't either. YTTV, to me sucks. It's DVR is terrible, it's UI is terrible and it's missing RSNs. You get what you pay for. But for a lot of people, they can do away with some channels to save the money. That wasn't some thing I was willing to do myself, which is why I JUST switched. But giving people grief on here for their choice is kind of silly. If it works for them, that's fine.


----------



## Steveknj (Nov 14, 2006)

DMRI2006 said:


> Like most of these services, they are missing RSNs, but their national roster of sports channels is terrific for the price. I couldn't get CBS Sports Network on Fios unless I paid for their highest tier of cable service. YTTV has that, all the NBC, Fox and ESPN networks, Big10/ACC/Sec plus the option of Red Zone.
> 
> If you need an RSN you are going to be forever locked into dish or cable. This struggle is going to go on until RSNs agree to be offered a la carte, which they don't want to do...but may have to relcutantly agree to down the road whether they want to or not.


The thing is, for most sports fans, unless you only watch the NFL and college sports, RSNs are important. It was make or break for me to move to streaming. That's the single most important channels for me to move to streaming and why I went AT&T TV.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

Steveknj said:


> Look, I was completely with you and streaming doesn't work for everyone, and until I figured it out how to make it work for me. But look at AT&T TV. That gives me about 90% of what I got with DirecTV, but I STILL had to supplement with Locast to to get some locals (and with Channels DVR so I can record it). The DVR is actually really good, for a cloud DVR (my pet peeves are mostly around padding, otherwise it's really very good). But in my case I was paying about $200 a month on DirecTV. I had it on 5 TVs, including 3 DVRs and 2 extra Genies. With AT&T TV I'm paying much less, and wound up with a few extra premiums from Starz/Encore and HBO (which I had before). And I'm getting all my RSNs. What did I give up? I gave up NFL Network, a few extra HBO channels (which I can watch the content on HBO Max) and I gained one extra room through streaming. I'm on the monthly plan but could save even more if I went with a contract. I'm saving $80, by paying $105 for AT&T TV and 13 for Channels and Locast. But since you are only paying $103, then it doesn't make sense to you to switch. I wouldn't either. YTTV, to me sucks. It's DVR is terrible, it's UI is terrible and it's missing RSNs. You get what you pay for. But for a lot of people, they can do away with some channels to save the money. That wasn't some thing I was willing to do myself, which is why I JUST switched. But giving people grief on here for their choice is kind of silly. If it works for them, that's fine.


I have never argued that streaming isn't cheaper for people with lots of TVs. It is. Don't care about sports. Don't care about premiums either (at least not from DirecTV) since the premiums show a lot of garbage and ancient movies. HBO shows fairly recent movies on occasion, but by that time, its been in the theater, PPV and various "other places" for 6 months. At my current deal, I could add a second TV and still come ahead of OTT. At 3 TVs, it'll be $5 to $7 more expensive. Saving $5 - $7/mo in exchange for hassle / lost channels probably isn't worth it to me. Maybe if it got to be $20+ cheaper, I'd give up some convenience.

I'm still in the camp that OTT rates will climb at a rapid clip til they equalize with traditional.


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

SledgeHammer said:


> I'm still in the camp that OTT rates will climb at a rapid clip til they equalize with traditional.


and then real cable / sat is better.
Less lag
Real DVR
Real local feeds
More in market sports
Less multi box limits


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

SledgeHammer said:


> I'm still in the camp that OTT rates will climb at a rapid clip til they equalize with traditional.


Package price IS almost the same. They just dont charge all the extras

That is why I said I would switch back to DirecTv in a heartbeat if they didnt rip me off with all the added extras that should be part of the package. Every provider that requires a contract with no option does the same thing.
Comcast has a package with all the channels for $80. Was considering it, since it included an X1 box, and unlimited streaming via an app on the TV. Opps, then read the fine print:
$16.95/mo extra for locals (no opt out)
$12.95/mo extra for 1 RSN (no opt out)
So their $80 package would cost $109.90 PLUS TAX

DISH is the cheapest traditional with their 120+ package, a hopper and 2 joeys which was about $89 plus tax.

So, when the traditionals fall in line with the 4 rooms, free HD and DVR of some type, for the same price, sure.
I believe DIrecTv even tried 4 rooms for the price of 1, but they wouldnt let me do it. They wanted $7 a room from me.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

b4pjoe said:


> Your home IP address is assigned by your ISP and all users using your home network will have that same external IP address.


True. But unless you pay for a fixed IP said IP is subject to change at the whim of the ISP. I have not had an ISP where I have noticed a change more than four times a year.


----------



## b4pjoe (Nov 20, 2010)

James Long said:


> True. But unless you pay for a fixed IP said IP is subject to change at the whim of the ISP. I have not had an ISP where I have noticed a change more than four times a year.


I haven't either. I have to wonder if there is a way AT&T knows you are with the same provider based on the network range instead of one specific IP address. Because as you say ISP's can change the IP address at any time.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

James Long said:


> True. But unless you pay for a fixed IP said IP is subject to change at the whim of the ISP. I have not had an ISP where I have noticed a change more than four times a year.


Cox "doesn't guarantee it", but I've always gotten the same IP when I reboot my modem, so I'm assuming they use DHCP reservations or something like that.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

compnurd said:


> unless you pay for static no one would really have a fixed home IP address.


This can be easily worked around using Dynamic DNS -- you can give your home broadband connection a fully qualified domain name that works regardless of the IP address.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

Davenlr said:


> Package price IS almost the same. They just dont charge all the extras


They will when they've lured enough suckers in with the teaser prices. People can't possibly expect to get 20 streams for the price of 1 forever. Anybody who does has no clue about how much data center and cloud infrastructure actually costs.

At my old (as James like to call them) "Abusers" , I had 8 micro services running as serverless in Azure (Microsoft manages the hardware, so its PAAS), plus an API gateway and then a bunch of network widgets required by corp, there was also a SQL instance and few other assorted Azure widgets. This was sitting around gathering dust because the company wasn't ready for me yet. So ZERO usage. Stage was built out, but UAT and Prod were mostly empty still. Why do the work if they aren't going to use it? . The micro services were all running at ONE instance.

Guess how much my "abusers" were flushing down the toilet for the 2 yrs I was waiting for them to light me up? $200K/yr.

Yup, $200k/yr for a few virtual machines and a few assorted Azure widgets that were getting zero use. That was not built out for serving streaming video, that was built out for serving XML. We also got a steep discount from Microsoft.

So you can extrapolate how much it costs Netflix to stream 4 4K streams to 150M people.

Netflix is in the process of cracking down on password sharing, so once that's fully in place, for you DirecTV old timers , you'll get a nice "GAME OVER" message when you try to login. Once Netflix does it, Amazon will do it and so on.

Next phase would be to monetize streams.

Once that happens, Harsh will come running back to DirecTV saying how much cheaper it is .


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

harsh said:


> This can be easily worked around using Dynamic DNS -- you can give your home broadband connection a fully qualified domain name that works regardless of the IP address.


How does that change the IP that AT&T sees you using? AT&T TV doesn't use DNS to find the IPs connecting to their service.


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

harsh said:


> This can be easily worked around using Dynamic DNS -- you can give your home broadband connection a fully qualified domain name that works regardless of the IP address.


You could. But you like to live in the hypothetical world. I live in most people have no clue what you just said


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

James Long said:


> How does that change the IP that AT&T sees you using? AT&T TV doesn't use DNS to find the IPs connecting to their service.


With Cox, if you officially want a static IP, you need a business account which is a good way to empty your wallet. $200/mo for 200 down, 20 up.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

SledgeHammer said:


> They will when they've lured enough suckers in with the teaser prices. People can't possibly expect to get 20 streams for the price of 1 forever..


This would make sense but they just changed it from 3 about a week ago. They had my sub before they changed it.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

James Long said:


> How does that change the IP that AT&T sees you using? AT&T TV doesn't use DNS to find the IPs connecting to their service.


You can use it in conjunction with a VPN. Normally VPNs are more prone to IP address changes than a typical broadband connection but Dynamic DNS can make that a non-issue such that you can still access your home even though it appears to be somewhere else on the Internet.


----------



## b4pjoe (Nov 20, 2010)

SledgeHammer said:


> With Cox, if you officially want a static IP, you need a business account which is a good way to empty your wallet. $200/mo for 200 down, 20 up.


Must be a LOT cheaper in the big city. Out here in rural Illinois Spectrum charges us $750 per month for our 50/50 business account.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

harsh said:


> You can use it in conjunction with a VPN. Normally VPNs are more prone to IP address changes than a typical broadband connection but Dynamic DNS can make that a non-issue such that you can still access your home even though it appears to be somewhere else on the Internet.


WE are talking about AT&T only allowing the home IP address to change four times per year on their TV accounts. What your are blabbering on about has NOTHING to do with AT&T's policy. Please read posts before replying.


----------



## DMRI2006 (Jun 13, 2006)

Steveknj said:


> The thing is, for most sports fans, unless you only watch the NFL and college sports, RSNs are important. It was make or break for me to move to streaming. That's the single most important channels for me to move to streaming and why I went AT&T TV.


Depends on what you watch and root for entirely. You couldnt pay me to watch the Red Sox this year so NESN's lack of availability on YTTV is a total non issue.

As I said, if you are anchored to RSNs, you are going to have limited options right now. That's the only thing holding the traditional "cable model" together as the rest of the programming world drifts away from it. And I don't blame them: they've been able to muscle their way into carriage deals for decades and make people pay whether they watch them or not. Sinclair thinks they can keep that going even as the marketplace changes. We'll see how that works out for them.


----------



## Steveknj (Nov 14, 2006)

SledgeHammer said:


> I have never argued that streaming isn't cheaper for people with lots of TVs. It is. Don't care about sports. Don't care about premiums either (at least not from DirecTV) since the premiums show a lot of garbage and ancient movies. HBO shows fairly recent movies on occasion, but by that time, its been in the theater, PPV and various "other places" for 6 months. At my current deal, I could add a second TV and still come ahead of OTT. At 3 TVs, it'll be $5 to $7 more expensive. Saving $5 - $7/mo in exchange for hassle / lost channels probably isn't worth it to me. Maybe if it got to be $20+ cheaper, I'd give up some convenience.
> 
> I'm still in the camp that OTT rates will climb at a rapid clip til they equalize with traditional.


No argument from me, I've been saying OTT will be the new sat/cable for a couple of years, and it's cheap now because they haven't figured out the best way to monetize it yet (i.e once they realize that more people are streaming than watching the other methods, carry rates will follow as will any advertising that does with it). And I've also mentioned that it doesn't work for everyone. That's the beauty of "no contract" in that if in a month or 6 months I decide it doesn't work for me, either by tech limitations or cost, I can always drop it and go back to Sat or cable. The problem with Sat is that there's that 2 year contract. If I go back, I'm stuck for 2 years again, and if the price gets much worse than OTT, I can't leave without penalty.


----------



## Steveknj (Nov 14, 2006)

DMRI2006 said:


> Depends on what you watch and root for entirely. You couldnt pay me to watch the Red Sox this year so NESN's lack of availability on YTTV is a total non issue.
> 
> As I said, if you are anchored to RSNs, you are going to have limited options right now. That's the only thing holding the traditional "cable model" together as the rest of the programming world drifts away from it. And I don't blame them: they've been able to muscle their way into carriage deals for decades and make people pay whether they watch them or not. Sinclair thinks they can keep that going even as the marketplace changes. We'll see how that works out for them.


Do you watch the Red Sox when they don't stink? So you are a fairweather fan, which is fine, and RSNs don't matter to you. Most sports fans aren't that way. If the only sport I watched is the NFL, I'd be fine with no RSNs. But I love baseball and hockey, and without RSNs I'd have no real way of following these teams except for the odd game on local OTA TV or national cable networks.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

What would be a good move would be to go back to their original platform and method when they first went live. Let people self install or pay an installer, buy and own their own equipment, and no contracts. People with their own equipment are more hesitant to quit since they have an investment in the platform. If they want to make $$$ they could rent to own the boxes like the cell companies do.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Steveknj said:


> No argument from me, I've been saying OTT will be the new sat/cable for a couple of years, and it's cheap now because they haven't figured out the best way to monetize it yet (i.e once they realize that more people are streaming than watching the other methods, carry rates will follow as will any advertising that does with it). And I've also mentioned that it doesn't work for everyone. That's the beauty of "no contract" in that if in a month or 6 months I decide it doesn't work for me, either by tech limitations or cost, I can always drop it and go back to Sat or cable. The problem with Sat is that there's that 2 year contract. If I go back, I'm stuck for 2 years again, and if the price gets much worse than OTT, I can't leave without penalty.


No, its cheap now because there is more competition and the weak players haven't been forced out or bought out yet. There is no reason why streaming the same group of channels you get via cable or satellite should cost less, the only savings is in the install and providing equipment. However, since they make you pay monthly for that equipment, those fees are actually a profit center and would allow the "package price" to be less for cable/satellite if everyone was making the same profit margin.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

Davenlr said:


> What would be a good move would be to go back to their original platform and method when they first went live. Let people self install or pay an installer, buy and own their own equipment, and no contracts. People with their own equipment are more hesitant to quit since they have an investment in the platform. If they want to make $$$ they could rent to own the boxes like the cell companies do.


They did that back in the day because it was easier to aim the dish and wire everything. Now its impossible without a "big boy" signal meter. Not only that, they had to have tech support that actually knew something beyond how to change the batteries in your remote. Too bad those people wanted actual $$$ to work. Plus they had to support all the different brands and stuff.

Owned boxes is a tiny, insignificant part of the population. So why bother with them?

Sat has a ETF because they have to roll a truck out to do the dish install, etc. So it costs them money. If the person quits after a week, they lost the $$$. Cable and streaming don't have that issue.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

Charge for the install if customer wants it. End of ETF loss.

Add to that they make you not only pay for the equipment, but they make you pay to use it.
DVR fee
HD fee
Stream from room to room
Once more people get access to high speed internet, these Satellite and cable companies are going to have to drop all these stupid add on fees to remain competitive.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

slice1900 said:


> No, its cheap now because there is more competition and the weak players haven't been forced out or bought out yet. There is no reason why streaming the same group of channels you get via cable or satellite should cost less, the only savings is in the install and providing equipment. However, since they make you pay monthly for that equipment, those fees are actually a profit center and would allow the "package price" to be less for cable/satellite if everyone was making the same profit margin.


Streaming should cost more. I'd say streaming is the most expensive delivery method, then cable then sat. Gotta pay for all the servers and bandwidth. Sat is the only delivery method where you don't need any additional capacity as you add subs.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

SledgeHammer said:


> Streaming should cost more. I'd say streaming is the most expensive delivery method, then cable then sat. Gotta pay for all the servers and bandwidth. Sat is the only delivery method where you don't need any additional capacity as you add subs.


Which tells me they are ripping those customers off, because I can almost promise ATT, Google, and the other streaming services are not operating at a loss. And I was referring to getting customers to come back, not new customers. They give the store away to new customers. My dish worked, had a 95 signal in every room, and they STILL rolled a truck before they would turn my service back on. They should have just sent access cards.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Davenlr said:


> Which tells me they are ripping those customers off, because I can almost promise ATT, Google, and the other streaming services are not operating at a loss. And I was referring to getting customers to come back, not new customers. They give the store away to new customers. My dish worked, had a 95 signal in every room, and they STILL rolled a truck before they would turn my service back on. They should have just sent access cards.


Correct, the current live streaming services seem to be profitable now and that's because they finally brought their prices up enough after the period of loss leading times early on. In the end the prices should end up being about the same as a similar subscription level for cable/sat without the bogus fees they use. AT&T TV service seems pretty much that already with the other live streamers not very far behind.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

lparsons21 said:


> Correct, the current live streaming services seem to be profitable now and that's because they finally brought their prices up enough after the period of loss leading times early on. In the end the prices should end up being about the same as a similar subscription level for cable/sat without the bogus fees they use. AT&T TV service seems pretty much that already with the other live streamers not very far behind.


Assuming they don't come up with their own bogus fees.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

SledgeHammer said:


> Assuming they don't come up with their own bogus fees.


Then people will leave just like they are doing now with DirecTv and Comcast. I never hear about DISH, they seem to be the only ones that seem to keep costs down, and include a lot of the "bogus extras". Are they losing customers to streaming as fast as DirecTv and Comcast?


----------



## codespy (Mar 30, 2006)

Davenlr said:


> .......They should have just sent access cards.


They stopped doing that when they got rid of the 'access card department'. It was shortly after ATT took over. That department was important not only for just sending out access cards, but also for properly activating 'owned' receivers.

I had an owned HR24 from a DirecTV employee that I ended up scrapping 5 years ago when he didn't ship me the access card that was married to the receiver. Tried everything to make it happen and was SOL with ATT.....


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

Davenlr said:


> Then people will leave just like they are doing now with DirecTv and Comcast. I never hear about DISH, they seem to be the only ones that seem to keep costs down, and include a lot of the "bogus extras". Are they losing customers to streaming as fast as DirecTv and Comcast?


DISH claims they don't have bogus fees, but they do, they just don't call them out in separate line items. They just roll it into the package price.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

I am sure all the streamers add the cost of their cloud DVR and guide data into their price as well. Thing about DirecTv is, while they keep it separate where you can see how much they are digging you for it, the prices of their packages are NOT that much less expensive, and are actually higher than the competition BEFORE they add in the extras. That among having to speak South Pacific to get anything accomplished, is why I think they are losing subscribers. It cant be the actual product, they have one of the best PQs, have good audio, good selection, Sunday Ticket.

@codespy Yes, I did not know they trashed the access card department until I called and asked for them, and got a "what department?" response. Should have just hung up, but I really hated trashing two perfectly good expanded DVRs and 3 receivers to the trash can. I still keep them hoping SOME day SOMEONE will get their act together at DirecTv and they will be useful again.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

Davenlr said:


> It cant be the actual product


It's not.

Whenever we get a new rant on here about somebody cancelling, they usually have raged and cancelled over a perceived spite from AT&T. Yeah, cuz AT&T is out to get everybody. I have gotten disconnected before and yeah its annoying. I've also gotten disconnected before when calling Cox, or my bank, or other companies. It happens.

OP says he cancelled cuz his equipment upgrade would mean a 2 yr contract. Well, sorry OP, it ALWAYS has. 2 yrs for a truck roll, 1 yr for a self install. And we explained why above. Cuz it costs them money to activate / send out equipment / cancel, etc. So they want to get rid of folks who might sign up for 1 day to get the Superbowl, or for a month to get some sports package and then cancel, etc.

Example, this past weekend, I was revamping my resume to a modern format, and I was trying to send it to a family member to check out, but for some reason, I kept getting a weird error on Outlook going to Cox. So I called up Cox tech support and got disconnected probably 3 times lol. First CSR tried a few things and then wanted to do a TRUCK ROLL for $5 lol/mo Cox care. I was like how is a tech going to fix my email? And why would I pay $5/mo for it? I said it politely though and she transferred me to somebody who instantly knew what the problem was. No truck, no $5/mo Cox care. They were blocking my resume because their spam detector hit on it LOL. I had to expirement with it to figure out what was doing it... based on the OPs post, he would have cancelled his Cox at the first hurdle.

You should always push back POLITELY if any company tries to push a truck roll on you or upsell you.

Anyway, unless you are planning on ordering $20 PPVs or want to watch Golf in 4K you don't need 4K boxes.


----------



## Delroy E Walleye (Jun 9, 2012)

Although it can sometimes be informative to read of others' experiences (especially when they can be helpful to others), it should be noted that the OP (with only one post _ever_) is long gone!

Much of this thread it seems to me is just less-useful, run-on re-hashing.


----------



## wmb (Dec 18, 2008)

Delroy E Walleye said:


> Much of this thread it seems to me is just less-useful, run-on re-hashing.


Ah, yes. It makes nostalgic for the flame wars of old.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

SledgeHammer said:


> DISH claims they don't have bogus fees, but they do, they just don't call them out in separate line items. They just roll it into the package price.


For recent DIRECTV subscribers, the "All Included" packaging bundles everything but additional TVs beyond the first (it used to include "up to" four TVs). Otherwise, only the location-sensitive stuff (jurisdictional fees/charges, taxes and the RSN fee) is itemized. It can't get much more tightly bundled than that.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

With Dish Anywhere, you can pretty much watch anything in your extra rooms without a joey now, correct? Just need an Android TV box of some type?


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Davenlr said:


> With Dish Anywhere, you can pretty much watch anything in your extra rooms without a joey now, correct? Just need an Android TV box of some type?


You can Sling just one Dish Anywhere session at a time (even if you have multiple Hoppers). It is what the DIRECTV App was originally supposed to be (featuring OOH).


----------



## Steveknj (Nov 14, 2006)

SledgeHammer said:


> It's not.
> 
> Whenever we get a new rant on here about somebody cancelling, they usually have raged and cancelled over a perceived spite from AT&T. Yeah, cuz AT&T is out to get everybody. I have gotten disconnected before and yeah its annoying. I've also gotten disconnected before when calling Cox, or my bank, or other companies. It happens.
> 
> ...


The thing is, cable and others have started doing away with contracts. People don't like them and will be much less willing to try it if they have to agree to one, especially when there's some competition out there (for some people).

As for spite to AT&T, I think part of the problem is that there's a noticeable and palpable downgrade in customer service since they've taken over. I think if CS had remained the same, which with all it's problems was still pretty good compared to the competition, I think the complaints would be less. And even before AT&T took over DirecTV, they had a reputation of having horrible CS. So I think that's a large part of the problem and why some people want no part of AT&T.

I do think, that if AT&T dropped contracts, I think they would do better. I personally think they should go back to the model they had years ago where you bought your own equipment and you just paid separately for an install. Then get rid of contracts. The very first receivers I got from DirecTV I bought myself and I owned it. I even owned the first DirecTiVo I owned. It was only with the first HR2x that it became a rental.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

Steveknj said:


> The thing is, cable and others have started doing away with contracts. People don't like them and will be much less willing to try it if they have to agree to one, especially when there's some competition out there (for some people).
> 
> As for spite to AT&T, I think part of the problem is that there's a noticeable and palpable downgrade in customer service since they've taken over. I think if CS had remained the same, which with all it's problems was still pretty good compared to the competition, I think the complaints would be less. And even before AT&T took over DirecTV, they had a reputation of having horrible CS. So I think that's a large part of the problem and why some people want no part of AT&T.
> 
> I do think, that if AT&T dropped contracts, I think they would do better. I personally think they should go back to the model they had years ago where you bought your own equipment and you just paid separately for an install. Then get rid of contracts. The very first receivers I got from DirecTV I bought myself and I owned it. I even owned the first DirecTiVo I owned. It was only with the first HR2x that it became a rental.


When I priced out Cox, they wanted $17/mo per box. Technically, DirecTV only charges me $10/mo for the DVR and theoretically $7 for an additional client. The other $10/mo is my bogus HD fee and then there's the bogus "my HR24 is slow as... and I want a HR54" fee of $3/mo.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

How does shipping decade's old equipment, to add a TV to a room, warrant one or two years worth of a new contract (all the while, not only paying up front for the decade's old equipment (that has already been "sold" several times over), but thereafter paying a monthly fee for it as well).



SledgeHammer said:


> It's not.
> 
> Whenever we get a new rant on here about somebody cancelling, they usually have raged and cancelled over a perceived spite from AT&T. Yeah, cuz AT&T is out to get everybody. I have gotten disconnected before and yeah its annoying. I've also gotten disconnected before when calling Cox, or my bank, or other companies. It happens.
> 
> ...


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

raott said:


> How does shipping decade's old equipment, to add a TV to a room, warrant one or two years worth of a new contract (all the while, not only paying up front for the decade's old equipment (that has already been "sold" several times over), but thereafter paying a monthly fee for it as well).


What about the cost of an truck roll now that can = 2 years. But for self install / upgrade maybe 6 mo max.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

JoeTheDragon said:


> What about the cost of an truck roll now that can = 2 years. But for self install / upgrade maybe 6 mo max.


Self installs are 1 yr. Truck rolls are 2.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

raott said:


> How does shipping decade's old equipment, to add a TV to a room, warrant one or two years worth of a new contract (all the while, not only paying up front for the decade's old equipment (that has already been "sold" several times over), but thereafter paying a monthly fee for it as well).


They have to pay the guys that blow the dust off the vents and repack them!


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

Steveknj said:


> The thing is, cable and others have started doing away with contracts. People don't like them and will be much less willing to try it if they have to agree to one, especially when there's some competition out there (for some people).
> 
> As for spite to AT&T, I think part of the problem is that there's a noticeable and palpable downgrade in customer service since they've taken over. I think if CS had remained the same, which with all it's problems was still pretty good compared to the competition, I think the complaints would be less. And even before AT&T took over DirecTV, they had a reputation of having horrible CS. So I think that's a large part of the problem and why some people want no part of AT&T.
> 
> I do think, that if AT&T dropped contracts, I think they would do better. I personally think they should go back to the model they had years ago where you bought your own equipment and you just paid separately for an install. Then get rid of contracts. The very first receivers I got from DirecTV I bought myself and I owned it. I even owned the first DirecTiVo I owned. It was only with the first HR2x that it became a rental.


They need to get rid of the receiver mirroring fees... That was a big reason i left.. Pay 35 bucks a month for outdated hardware was nuts


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

compnurd said:


> They need to get rid of the receiver mirroring fees... That was a big reason i left.. Pay 35 bucks a month for outdated hardware was nuts


cable has it
steaming has it kind of


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

JoeTheDragon said:


> cable has it
> steaming has it kind of


Kind of?? There is no box fees with YTTV/ATT TV or any other that i am aware


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

JoeTheDragon said:


> cable has it
> steaming has it kind of


Depends on the cable company. Spectrum does not require a box for any TV. You can use an Apple TV or a variety of others and the Spectrum App.


----------



## Getteau (Dec 20, 2007)

It's nice to wish for, but there is no way DTV ever gets rid of the mirror fee. That's a guaranteed chunk of change they get every month and if they got rid of it, they'd lose even more money each quarter. I've consistently had 4-6 receivers over the past 22-23 years and I shudder when I start to think of how much I've paid in mirror fees.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Getteau said:


> It's nice to wish for, but there is no way DTV ever gets rid of the mirror fee. That's a guaranteed chunk of change they get every month and if they got rid of it, they'd lose even more money each quarter. I've consistently had 4-6 receivers over the past 22-23 years and I shudder when I start to think of how much I've paid in mirror fees.


"Lose even more money"? Directv is losing subscribers, but making money hand over fist. They are still generating nearly $1 billion in cash flow per quarter despite the subscriber losses.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

slice1900 said:


> "Lose even more money"? Directv is losing subscribers, but making money hand over fist. They are still generating nearly $1 billion in cash flow per quarter despite the subscriber losses.


They are not breaking separate numbers out any more, so that is a guess, though likely correct based on prior disclosed numbers.

With that said, that is not sustainable with the continued subscriber losses.

Furthermore, it's also indicative that the Directv is somehow a victim of the providers crowd, aren't fully informed. Losing customers at an astounding rate yet still a ton of cash generated.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

Funny how the chicken littles keep saying the sky is falling at DirecTV. Even at 13M subs, they dwarf any OTT provider, the largest of which is only 4M subs, DISH, and ALL cable providers except Charter and Comcast. So they are essentially #3 in the Pay TV game.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

raott said:


> They are not breaking separate numbers out any more, so that is a guess, though likely correct based on prior disclosed numbers.


AT&T|DIRECTV started breaking out the figures again at the end of 2020 and restated the past two years in preparation for the transfer of control to the new ownership.
Revenue for AT&T|DIRECTV Video was $8.075 B, $8.032 B, $7.942 B, $8.075 B, $7.407 B, $7.021 B, $7.014 B and $7.168 B for the last eight quarters.
Profits for AT&T|DIRECTV was $875 M, $717 M, $433 M, $39 M, $686 M, $488 M, $457 M and $98 M for each respective quarter.
The numbers still combine DIRECTV, UVERSE and AT&T TV (along with AT&T TV Now). But the profit Video is providing AT&T corporate is now being disclosed.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

SledgeHammer said:


> Funny how the chicken littles keep saying the sky is falling at DirecTV. Even at 13M subs, they dwarf any OTT provider, the largest of which is only 4M subs, DISH, and ALL cable providers except Charter and Comcast. So they are essentially #3 in the Pay TV game.


While still profitable ($1.729 B profit last year) the subscriber loss needs to level off. At current rates AT&T|DIRECTV will have no customers in five years. At current rates DISH will still have satellite customers in 35 years and have 20 million SlingTV customers. While I have no doubt that current rates will change, they need to change toward the positive for DIRECTV.

The sky isn't falling ... but DIRECTV is on a path to be smaller than DISH by the end of 2023. That should be a somber concern for DIRECTV supporters.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

James Long said:


> While still profitable ($1.729 B profit last year) the subscriber loss needs to level off. At current rates AT&T|DIRECTV will have no customers in five years. At current rates DISH will still have satellite customers in 35 years and have 20 million SlingTV customers. While I have no doubt that current rates will change, they need to change toward the positive for DIRECTV.
> 
> The sky isn't falling ... but DIRECTV is on a path to be smaller than DISH by the end of 2023. That should be a somber concern for DIRECTV supporters.


Well, I doubt TPG invested $1.8B to flush it down the toilet. They likely have some plans to improve the image. The spin off will also have the AT&T TV services in it. STEP #1 as predicted, they will rebrand to get rid of the AT&T name and bring back the DirecTV brand. That'll get rid of all the AT&T hate.


----------



## DMRI2006 (Jun 13, 2006)

SledgeHammer said:


> Well, I doubt TPG invested $1.8B to flush it down the toilet. They likely have some plans to improve the image. The spin off will also have the AT&T TV services in it. STEP #1 as predicted, they will rebrand to get rid of the AT&T name and bring back the DirecTV brand. That'll get rid of all the AT&T hate.


Its still basically an AT&T company no matter what the brand says. What do you think is going to change? Lots of investment in new technology when millions of subscribers are leaving? This is like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, with TPG as a life boat until they siphon it off to Dish or another buyer.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> I do think, that if AT&T dropped contracts, I think they would do better. I personally think they should go back to the model they had years ago where you bought your own equipment and you just paid separately for an install.


The flaw in this logic is that back in the 1980s, it was uncommon to have many TVs -- each with their own receiver. Now it is perhaps common for a household to have more TVs than residents.

Aiming the old spoon didn't require a great deal of precision and one didn't have to contemplate tilt. The multi-sat SD dishes (Phase II, Phase III) did, but still didn't require much precision. Ka change all that with a vengeance. Ka also introduced the need to add struts to support the relatively large sail.

SWM is quicker to set up but it is more complicated to get right and then there's the blasted PI. DECA adds its own complexities that weren't present 25 years ago.

Then there's the "who told you you could mix a D11 with a Genie -- no, a new access card won't fix it" kinds of questions.

I think it is perfectly reasonable that the self-install ship sailed when it did and many customers are happier for it.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

James Long said:


> The numbers still combine DIRECTV, UVERSE and AT&T TV (along with AT&T TV Now).


Since all of those properties are included in the auction, that doesn't seem likely to change.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

DMRI2006 said:


> Its still basically an AT&T company no matter what the brand says. What do you think is going to change? Lots of investment in new technology when millions of subscribers are leaving? This is like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, with TPG as a life boat until they siphon it off to Dish or another buyer.


People aren't leaving cuz the tech sucks, they're leaving cuz they just randomly hate AT&T and/or their policies. They've already said they'll bring back the DirecTV name. Maybe they'll bring back some of the policies people used to like, like owned boxes, address changes, suspension policies, maybe some pricing policies, etc. Maybe they'll do other stuff like fix outstanding bugs in the DVR, let you have multiple genies on an account, etc. Who knows? There is plenty of room for improvement. Whether any of it will work or if its too late, who knows.

If they keep doing what they're doing, well... then *shrug*.

If the plan is to shut down DirecTV and switch everybody to the streaming platform, well, the people that are leaving, some of them ARE going to the streaming platform, some are going to DISH or cable, and some are going to other streaming platforms.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

SledgeHammer said:


> Well, I doubt TPG invested $1.8B to flush it down the toilet. They likely have some plans to improve the image. The spin off will also have the AT&T TV services in it. STEP #1 as predicted, they will rebrand to get rid of the AT&T name and bring back the DirecTV brand. That'll get rid of all the AT&T hate.


I don't believe the #1 problem is the AT&T name. I believe the #1 problem is a corporate misconception over how much "Video" contributes to the well being of AT&T. Top management and some investors seem to see Video as a diminishing business with decreasing profits but overlooks the fact that Video is still profitable where other areas of AT&T are not. Perhaps new management not distracted with caring about the rest of AT&T will be better focused on making the new DIRECTV better. I am glad someone is willing to give it a shot.


----------



## wmb (Dec 18, 2008)

James Long said:


> Top management and some investors seem to see Video as a diminishing business with decreasing profits but overlooks the fact that Video is still profitable where other areas of AT&T are not.


IDK. I'm not sure third party distribution is where the value is. The IP has value. The data stream is a commodity that has value. AT&T's third party video distribution business is shrinking as the IP owners are using commodity data stream to cut out the middle man.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

I agree. If I could subscribe to all NBC channels, and all Fox Sports channels, I could probably get by just fine as far as live TV goes.


----------



## Steveknj (Nov 14, 2006)

harsh said:


> The flaw in this logic is that back in the 1980s, it was uncommon to have many TVs -- each with their own receiver. Now it is perhaps common for a household to have more TVs than residents.
> 
> Aiming the old spoon didn't require a great deal of precision and one didn't have to contemplate tilt. The multi-sat SD dishes (Phase II, Phase III) did, but still didn't require much precision. Ka change all that with a vengeance. Ka also introduced the need to add struts to support the relatively large sail.
> 
> ...


That may be true, but there's also a lot of hunger for "do it yourself" these days. I know DirecTV dabbled in having an app on various devices. I'd also think that at this point, maybe they forgo physical DVRs altogether and have a cloud one (heck, the one on AT&T TV is actually pretty darn good functionality wise, still needs some tweaks, but it's decent). Then, satellite just becomes another method of bringing content into your house, like the internet or cable. My cable company offers a cloud DVR, so there's no reason why they couldn't. And if you want a physical hard drive based DVR, you can purchase one (just like buying an Osprey, even though you don't need one). That would completely change the DirecTV model to where they only show up at your house to install a dish, or, for repairs.


----------



## Steveknj (Nov 14, 2006)

SledgeHammer said:


> People aren't leaving cuz the tech sucks, they're leaving cuz they just randomly hate AT&T and/or their policies. They've already said they'll bring back the DirecTV name. Maybe they'll bring back some of the policies people used to like, like owned boxes, address changes, suspension policies, maybe some pricing policies, etc. Maybe they'll do other stuff like fix outstanding bugs in the DVR, let you have multiple genies on an account, etc. Who knows? There is plenty of room for improvement. Whether any of it will work or if its too late, who knows.
> 
> If they keep doing what they're doing, well... then *shrug*.
> 
> If the plan is to shut down DirecTV and switch everybody to the streaming platform, well, the people that are leaving, some of them ARE going to the streaming platform, some are going to DISH or cable, and some are going to other streaming platforms.


People are leaving because they can get their TV cheaper (in most cases) and not have to get stuck in a two year contract. I think AT&T plays a small part in it, but not a major one.


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

Davenlr said:


> I agree. If I could subscribe to all NBC channels, and all Fox Sports channels, I could probably get by just fine as far as live TV goes.


canada does have something like that BY LAW.



Steveknj said:


> That may be true, but there's also a lot of hunger for "do it yourself" these days. I know DirecTV dabbled in having an app on various devices. I'd also think that at this point, maybe they forgo physical DVRs altogether and have a cloud one (heck, the one on AT&T TV is actually pretty darn good functionality wise, still needs some tweaks, but it's decent). Then, satellite just becomes another method of bringing content into your house, like the internet or cable. My cable company offers a cloud DVR, so there's no reason why they couldn't. And if you want a physical hard drive based DVR, you can purchase one (just like buying an Osprey, even though you don't need one). That would completely change the DirecTV model to where they only show up at your house to install a dish, or, for repairs.


With cable it's over the there private network and they may have multicast for live feeds like att uverse.

But not all people have the bandwidth for say 2-4 HD streams at the same time (at bitates higher then uverse) and forget about 4K or higher. Also caps are an issue as well.
maybe we need an cable card 2.0 law both sat and cable qam / cable IPTV.
In the past the VC plugged into the sat box.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

SledgeHammer said:


> People aren't leaving cuz the tech sucks, they're leaving cuz they just randomly hate AT&T and/or their policies. They've already said they'll bring back the DirecTV name. Maybe they'll bring back some of the policies people used to like, like owned boxes, address changes, suspension policies, maybe some pricing policies, etc. Maybe they'll do other stuff like fix outstanding bugs in the DVR, let you have multiple genies on an account, etc. Who knows? There is plenty of room for improvement. Whether any of it will work or if its too late, who knows.
> 
> If they keep doing what they're doing, well... then *shrug*.
> 
> If the plan is to shut down DirecTV and switch everybody to the streaming platform, well, the people that are leaving, some of them ARE going to the streaming platform, some are going to DISH or cable, and some are going to other streaming platforms.


I don't know which "people" you are referring to, but I left because I moved to an apartment, but I did not return once I bought my house because of the ridiculous prices, two-year contract, archaic equipment, horrible On Demand, and lack of an App to so that I wouldn't need a box (at a cost) for every TV.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> That may be true, but there's also a lot of hunger for "do it yourself" these days.


Really? I'm not sure I'm seeing any evidence of this.


> I know DirecTV dabbled in having an app on various devices.


The history of DIRECTV apps has been a fairly big disappointment for all involved. Many have long forgotten DIRECTV2PC and DIRECTV2Go (a hardware device with great promise that became a DVR app with a lot less promise).


> I'd also think that at this point, maybe they forgo physical DVRs altogether and have a cloud one (heck, the one on AT&T TV is actually pretty darn good functionality wise, still needs some tweaks, but it's decent).


I think one of the main reasons that AT&T TV hasn't been more popular has a lot to do with the AT&T TV DVR's shortcomings relative to the highly respected DIRECTV DVR experience.

Of course the show-stopper for a cloud DVR with DIRECTV is that DIRECTV doesn't come with an no-cost way to access a remote "cloud". The "cloud" needs to be in-home and that solution is the Genie.


----------



## Steveknj (Nov 14, 2006)

harsh said:


> Really? I'm not sure I'm seeing any evidence of this.


The whole host of streaming services is all on do it yourself devices, like Roku, Apple TV, Firestick and others. That's what I'm referring to.



> The history of DIRECTV apps has been a fairly big disappointment for all involved. Many have long forgotten DIRECTV2PC and DIRECTV2Go (a hardware device with great promise that became a DVR app with a lot less promise).


I'm specifically referring to the app on Roku and others that essentially are (were?) a replacement for the Genie minis (CK61 or whatever it's called). They weren't great, and that's why most of us opted for the hardware solution.



> I think one of the main reasons that AT&T TV hasn't been more popular has a lot to do with the AT&T TV DVR's shortcomings relative to the highly respected DIRECTV DVR experience.


What shortcomings are you referring to? I have AT&T TV and I really like their DVR. The two shortcomings that I've encounters are the lack of ability to pad (either before or after a show) and the lack of a decent SP option for your favorite team (for example, I like to set a SP for the NY Rangers, but it only lets me set one for NHL Hockey, with unlimited DVR it's not that terrible, but I do a lot of deleting). These types of things are easily fixable if there's a hunger for them. Otherwise, I like the functionality. I like the quickplay features, especially where it brings up the status bar and lets you nest button pushes so you can see how many seconds you are moving past (and I've learned most commercial breaks are 240 seconds in the process). There are some small functional issues I'd like to change, but nothing that terrible. It's only slightly less functional than a DirecTV DVR.



> Of course the show-stopper for a cloud DVR with DIRECTV is that DIRECTV doesn't come with an no-cost way to access a remote "cloud". The "cloud" needs to be in-home and that solution is the Genie.


Of course if you replace the Genie with a cloud DVR, that issue is solved. Again, my solution would not require a DirecTV receiver of any kind, though you'd have the option to purchase one. If you are home, your content is delivered through satellite and if your mobile it's through the internet via the app.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> The whole host of streaming services is all on do it yourself devices, like Roku, Apple TV, Firestick and others. That's what I'm referring to.


Installing an app is hardly DIY. Assembling all of the bits and pieces from various individual services might be considered a "roll your own" option but it doesn't end up looking like a unified solution that YTTV, AT&T TV or SlingTV offer.


> I'm specifically referring to the app on Roku and others that essentially are (were?) a replacement for the Genie minis (CK61 or whatever it's called). They weren't great, and that's why most of us opted for the hardware solution.


You answered your own question. If the apps suck, uptake won't be great.


> The two shortcomings that I've encounters are the lack of ability to pad (either before or after a show) and the lack of a decent SP option for your favorite team (for example, I like to set a SP for the NY Rangers, but it only lets me set one for NHL Hockey, with unlimited DVR it's not that terrible, but I do a lot of deleting).


Again, you're answering your own question. Those issues are big even if you aren't a huge sports fan. A really nice remote that does all the key trick play features is typically missing from streaming DVR apps.


> It's only slightly less functional than a DirecTV DVR.


That really isn't true at all even if DIRECTV hadn't bailed on a handful of features including being able to record OTA and watch it remotely.


> Of course if you replace the Genie with a cloud DVR, that issue is solved. Again, my solution would not require a DirecTV receiver of any kind, though you'd have the option to purchase one. If you are home, your content is delivered through satellite and if your mobile it's through the internet via the app.


With specific application to DIRECTV, an Internet-based cloud solution is not workable. No amount of dreaming about DIRECTV transitioning straight across to a streaming service is going to change the physics of the DVR's location. Being able to stream a specific selection of channels is not equivalent to being able to access shows (or clips of shows) your local DVR. Just getting the cloud DVR to "mirror" what's on the local DVR wouldn't be feasible.

Many have DIRECTV expressly because their access to broadband is limited and telling those people to figure it out isn't going to make it better.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

harsh said:


> Really? I'm not sure I'm seeing any evidence of this.


I avoid trades people at ALL COSTS if I can do something myself. Not because of cost, or because I like to, but because I don't like dealing with trades people. They'll either rip you off, or trash everything around their "work area" and you end up diy'ing the clean up. I had a carpet cleaner come in once and he scuffed pretty much every wall in the house. I bought a carpet shampooer after that. But I don't attempt things I don't feel comfortable doing.

I have a legacy dish with the 4 cables going into a multiswitch in the attic. I will and did service the MS and PI. I *won't* get a 2 story ladder and service the dish outside.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

Since the OP has left and this is a generic gripe thread...



SledgeHammer said:


> I avoid trades people at ALL COSTS


I so totally agree with you. I bought a new toilet and was going to install it last night. When I went to remove the old one (it would not completely flush without stopping up), the bolts spun with the nuts. That wasnt a good deal. I lifted the entire toilet off the floor, thinking the bolts had just rusted and broke off. Nope, the entire flange on the top of the cast iron pipe was completely gone, the wood for 3 inches around the pipe was rotten, and the wax ring was STUCK in the pipe (hence not flushing). Called 3 plumbers and NONE would even come look when I told them there was wood damage. Lucky too. I watch some youtube videos, went to home depot, and talked to a REALLY smart guy in the plumbing dept. We settled on screwing a 1/4" piece of plywood painted black (same color as new toilet) to the floor, with a 4.25" hole for the pipe to slip through, and a flange adapter that sticks in the pipe with a rubber ring, and the more you screw it, the tighter it gets until it totally seals. Then screws to the plywood, insert new screws, new wax ring, drop the new toilet, and hook up the water, test for leaks. Total cost: $60 (not including new toilet).

Before














After


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

There, I fixed it.


----------



## codespy (Mar 30, 2006)

Davenlr said:


> Since the OP has left and this is a generic gripe thread...
> 
> I so totally agree with you. I bought a new toilet and was going to install it last night. When I went to remove the old one (it would not completely flush without stopping up), the bolts spun with the nuts. That wasnt a good deal. I lifted the entire toilet off the floor, thinking the bolts had just rusted and broke off. Nope, the entire flange on the top of the cast iron pipe was completely gone, the wood for 3 inches around the pipe was rotten, and the wax ring was STUCK in the pipe (hence not flushing). Called 3 plumbers and NONE would even come look when I told them there was wood damage. Lucky too. I watch some youtube videos, went to home depot, and talked to a REALLY smart guy in the plumbing dept. We settled on screwing a 1/4" piece of plywood painted black (same color as new toilet) to the floor, with a 4.25" hole for the pipe to slip through, and a flange adapter that sticks in the pipe with a rubber ring, and the more you screw it, the tighter it gets until it totally seals. Then screws to the plywood, insert new screws, new wax ring, drop the new toilet, and hook up the water, test for leaks. Total cost: $60 (not including new toilet).
> 
> ...


Yes I agree with you, this thread has really gone down the drain now with that post. :tonguewink:


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

> I so totally agree with you. I bought a new toilet and was going to install it last night. When I went to remove the old one (it would not completely flush without stopping up), the bolts spun with the nuts. That wasnt a good deal. I lifted the entire toilet off the floor, thinking the bolts had just rusted and broke off. Nope, the entire flange on the top of the cast iron pipe was completely gone, the wood for 3 inches around the pipe was rotten, and the wax ring was STUCK in the pipe (hence not flushing). Called 3 plumbers and NONE would even come look when I told them there was wood damage. Lucky too. I watch some youtube videos, went to home depot, and talked to a REALLY smart guy in the plumbing dept. We settled on screwing a 1/4" piece of plywood painted black (same color as new toilet) to the floor, with a 4.25" hole for the pipe to slip through, and a flange adapter that sticks in the pipe with a rubber ring, and the more you screw it, the tighter it gets until it totally seals. Then screws to the plywood, insert new screws, new wax ring, drop the new toilet, and hook up the water, test for leaks. Total cost: $60 (not including new toilet).


If you already bought the PVC flange repair kit AND the plywood, why didn't you just fix the floor? You should have cut out all the rotted wood either way since if you didn't, it will spread to your plywood and the rest of the structure.

Not to mention you won't be able to sell the house like that as you'll fail the home inspection. Assuming somebody even makes you an offer since they'd wonder what other repairs you did.

Not to mention the mold...

Definitely not a "REALLY smart guy" working at Home Depot.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

In time sir, in time. Not something I wanted to leave nonworking for an extended period of time until I could find a carpenter or learn how to do it. I need to go under the house, figure out where the beams are and how much I need to cut out. The floor decking was replaced 10 years ago, so it should be an easy floor repair. I also want to replace the entire vertical part of the pipe. Since I am not a plumber, I need to research how to cut a cast iron pipe (assuming that is what it is when I get under the house, it might be steel) and convert it to PVC pipe to replace it. I also need to check with some friends in the home repair business to find out what the codes are in my town as far as what I am allowed to use, material wise. I think for someone who never replaced a toilet and didnt even know the part was called a flange, getting it back in service in three hours was pretty good.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

Davenlr said:


> In time sir, in time. Not something I wanted to leave nonworking for an extended period of time until I could find a carpenter or learn how to do it. I need to go under the house, figure out where the beams are and how much I need to cut out. The floor decking was replaced 10 years ago, so it should be an easy floor repair. I also want to replace the entire vertical part of the pipe. Since I am not a plumber, I need to research how to cut a cast iron pipe (assuming that is what it is when I get under the house, it might be steel) and convert it to PVC pipe to replace it. I also need to check with some friends in the home repair business to find out what the codes are in my town as far as what I am allowed to use, material wise. I think for someone who never replaced a toilet and didnt even know the part was called a flange, getting it back in service in three hours was pretty good.


Cutting cast iron is easy. You can rent the tool at Home Depot.


----------



## Steveknj (Nov 14, 2006)

harsh said:


> Installing an app is hardly DIY. Assembling all of the bits and pieces from various individual services might be considered a "roll your own" option but it doesn't end up looking like a unified solution that YTTV, AT&T TV or SlingTV offer.You answered your own question.


As it stands now, I agree, but that doesn't mean it has to in the (near) future.



> If the apps suck, uptake won't be great.Again, you're answering your own question.


But again, does it have to suck? They have the right idea for AT&T TV, there's no logical reason (but of course I'm not a software engineer, but have worked quite a bit doing Q.A. on my company's software) they couldn't port something similar over to a DirecTV solution. At which point, it won't suck (though obviously that is subjective. I remember the arguments of how bad DirecTV UI looked compared to what Dish offers on their DVR.



> Those issues are big even if you aren't a huge sports fan. A really nice remote that does all the key trick play features is typically missing from streaming DVR apps.


But they are, again, fixable features. We are talking about what we would want DirecTV to do to make it more "do it yourself" not as it stands now. The AT&T TV DVR is actually quite good. Missing a a few features sure, but there's no reason it couldn't be used as the model for a DirecTV cloud DVR. There are things I like BETTER about this cloud DVR, such as, unlimited space (no longer pigeonholed into the size of the Genie's HD), using 30 second skip (really 15 sec on this DVR) brings up the status bar AND the number of seconds for each button push. So for example I can push the button up to 300 seconds and it shows that on the screen. This is great, especially if you know how long a commercial break it No reason it can't be ported to a DirecTV cloud DVR solution. I get your issue with remotes, but for example, I could use any number of 3rd party remotes that work fine with the DVR.



> That really isn't true at all even if DIRECTV hadn't bailed on a handful of features including being able to record OTA and watch it remotely.


It is true. As I said, there are things this DVR does better.



> With specific application to DIRECTV, an Internet-based cloud solution is not workable. No amount of dreaming about DIRECTV transitioning straight across to a streaming service is going to change the physics of the DVR's location. Being able to stream a specific selection of channels is not equivalent to being able to access shows (or clips of shows) your local DVR. Just getting the cloud DVR to "mirror" what's on the local DVR wouldn't be feasible.


I'm not even sure what you are getting at. I don't want it "mirror" the local DVR, I want it to replace it, i.e. you will no longer HAVE a DVR sitting in your living room. You could BUY one if that's your preference but for most people that's totally unnecessary. You have to stop thinking about what DirecTV is now and how that works. It's dying, or at least it's your elderly grandfather. It still works, but people are bailing. So you still need a premium service that is more light on it's feet. No more truck rolls, if possible. You want to save DirecTV, there are ways to do it.



> Many have DIRECTV expressly because their access to broadband is limited and telling those people to figure it out isn't going to make it better.


I agree, and that user base is dying off. But with that said, my solution would be to keep a satellite based solution with elements of the internet, such as saving content to the cloud. They still get their content via satellite and there would still be a Genie type DVR available for purchase for customers who need or want it. That would work for most people. As I said, my cable company still offers TV via cable (or fiber), but they offer a cloud based DVR (as well as a HD based one).


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> I don't want it "mirror" the local DVR, I want it to replace it, i.e. you will no longer HAVE a DVR sitting in your living room. You could BUY one if that's your preference but for most people that's totally unnecessary. You have to stop thinking about what DirecTV is now and how that works.


Converting from a satellite-delivered model to a Internet delivered model makes some very big assumptions that aren't reasonable at this time. The first problem is the amount of third-party bandwidth required and any additional costs associated with that.

As it is, those who were fortunate enough to get an OTA tuner can record their non-DIRECTV delivered OTA content to their DVR. You can't do that without a DVR and associated OTA adapter.

AT&T TV's offering is a decided subset of the DIRECTV offering and maybe some of it is contractual. We'll see what happens after NFLST moves on.

For the next five years at least, there will be an application for DBS TV service. The question is whether or not the New DIRECTV can be one of the players. Summarily whacking those who don't have sufficient and cheap broadband bandwidth would not be in anyone's best interest -- especially if the offering is equivalent or superior in most every way.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

Steveknj said:


> I agree, and that user base is dying off. But with that said, my solution would be to keep a satellite based solution with elements of the internet, such as saving content to the cloud. They still get their content via satellite and there would still be a Genie type DVR available for purchase for customers who need or want it. That would work for most people. As I said, my cable company still offers TV via cable (or fiber), but they offer a cloud based DVR (as well as a HD based one).


I have access to AND HAVE 1Gbps service. I still have DirecTV. Your assumptions are mistaken. Many ISPs have data caps. I probably wouldn't go over with straight HD, but likely would if 4K was introduced into the mix. Other issue is that I can't get all my channels via streaming. AT&T TV comes pretty close, but is still missing some stuff. Plus DirecTV has the added perk of OTA integration as well as east coast nationals.


----------



## Steveknj (Nov 14, 2006)

SledgeHammer said:


> I have access to AND HAVE 1Gbps service. I still have DirecTV. Your assumptions are mistaken. Many ISPs have data caps. I probably wouldn't go over with straight HD, but likely would if 4K was introduced into the mix. Other issue is that I can't get all my channels via streaming. AT&T TV comes pretty close, but is still missing some stuff. Plus DirecTV has the added perk of OTA integration as well as east coast nationals.


What's mistaken about my assumptions? You are the exception, look at the droves of people leaving DirecTV? We've already established that streaming doesn't work for you. That's fine. But this is an ENTIRELY different discussion. This is a discussion about how to save DirecTV. My idea is hybrid Sat and internet based cloud DVR. It's about trying to avoid having truck drops and hardware that costs money. And about maintaining the status quo for those who it works for, like yourself. Anyone else have a solution? Because at the current rate, there will only be a few of you left, and at that point, it's possible that DirecTV might be a gonner. It's too expensive for most people, especially those who enjoy sports.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

SledgeHammer said:


> I have access to AND HAVE 1Gbps service. I still have DirecTV. Your assumptions are mistaken. Many ISPs have data caps. I probably wouldn't go over with straight HD, but likely would if 4K was introduced into the mix. Other issue is that I can't get all my channels via streaming. AT&T TV comes pretty close, but is still missing some stuff. Plus DirecTV has the added perk of OTA integration as well as east coast nationals.


His "assumption" was more on point and correct than your prior assumption that most people are leaving because they "hate AT&T". I don't know a single person who gives one iota about OTA integration or having east coast nationals other than a handful who would frequent forums like these. The vast bulk of people don't care.

As to caps, Spectrum does not have caps (I believe they are the second largest internet provider in the country) and you would need over 60 hours of 4K viewing to hit a TB cap. Good luck finding 60 hours of 4K shows to watch anytime soon.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

Steveknj said:


> What's mistaken about my assumptions? You are the exception, look at the droves of people leaving DirecTV? We've already established that streaming doesn't work for you. That's fine. But this is an ENTIRELY different discussion. This is a discussion about how to save DirecTV. My idea is hybrid Sat and internet based cloud DVR. It's about trying to avoid having truck drops and hardware that costs money. And about maintaining the status quo for those who it works for, like yourself. Anyone else have a solution? Because at the current rate, there will only be a few of you left, and at that point, it's possible that DirecTV might be a gonner. It's too expensive for most people, especially those who enjoy sports.


The OP of this thread left because AT&T "spited him".


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

raott said:


> His "assumption" was more on point and correct than your prior assumption that most people are leaving because they "hate AT&T". I don't know a single person who gives one iota about OTA integration or having east coast nationals other than a handful who would frequent forums like these. The vast bulk of people don't care.
> 
> As to caps, Spectrum does not have caps (I believe they are the second largest internet provider in the country) and you would need over 60 hours of 4K viewing to hit a TB cap. Good luck finding 60 hours of 4K shows to watch anytime soon.


The OP did. And we regularly get rants from people who had a bad CSR and cancelled on the spot. Agree that most people don't care about OTA. Re: the east coast nationals, I said that's an added perk for ME. I use 300GB-400GB with no streaming.

If I ignored the data cap issue and went with AT&T, I'd need Xtra just to get a few channels that Choice doesn't have. Xtra is $74.99, $83.48 after RSN, taxes, etc and STILL be missing a few things I have now. That'll only save me $20/mo lol and again... getting the missing things will cost me, so really its probably closer to $10/mo savings after everything. Why would anybody change their hassle free set up to save $10/mo and introduce hassle?


----------



## b4pjoe (Nov 20, 2010)

raott said:


> His "assumption" was more on point and correct than your prior assumption that most people are leaving because they "hate AT&T". I don't know a single person who gives one iota about OTA integration or having east coast nationals other than a handful who would frequent forums like these. The vast bulk of people don't care.
> 
> As to caps, Spectrum does not have caps (I believe they are the second largest internet provider in the country) and you would need over 60 hours of 4K viewing to hit a TB cap. Good luck finding 60 hours of 4K shows to watch anytime soon.


Spectrum has no data caps because the FCC imposed a seven-year ban on Spectrum imposing data caps as part of its approval of Charter's 2016 merger with Time Warner Cable and Bright House Networks. The earliest the company can impose data caps is May 18, 2023.

Spectrum applied to the FCC last year and requested it to allow it to impose Data Caps in 2021 and later withdrew the petition after realizing the current Republican-dominated Commission was not planning to approve it in the waning days of the Trump Administration and it was highly unlikely to win approval under the incoming Biden Administration.

Spectrum claimed it had no immediate plans to impose data caps or usage-based pricing.

Smart money says Spectrum will have data caps in its future. Probably on May 18, 2023.


----------



## likegadgets (Dec 29, 2005)

harsh said:


> Converting from a satellite-delivered model to a Internet delivered model makes some very big assumptions that aren't reasonable at this time. The first problem is the amount of third-party bandwidth required and any additional costs associated with that.
> 
> As it is, those who were fortunate enough to get an OTA tuner can record their non-DIRECTV delivered OTA content to their DVR. You can't do that without a DVR and associated OTA adapter.
> 
> ...


Last month I went from being a 23 year subscriber of DirecTV to streaming. For years I thoroughly enjoyed DirecTV - but lately there were far too many issues, like them trying to force me into a two year contact because the MDU operator changed a defective receiver, huge price increase, long times on hold. So I first suspended the account while I tried YTTV. I get you when you say that bandwidth, OTA and other factors matter. In my case I have lots of inexpensive bandwidth (my HOA provides fiber to 1GB at very little cost). I tried it for 30 days and things worked and still are working great, then I cancelled and shipped the receivers back. Do not miss DirecTV at all. But it is not for everyone. Year after year I stayed and was happy until DirecTV no longer had an edge given my viewing habits and I could see no reason to pay them more tan double (given my setup, package, combination of receivers, etc). Many of my neighbors have cancelled DTV as well and chosen streaming alternatives. We also have a superb antenna and the HD channels come very clear. I considered getting an Amazon recast but have not felt the need as of yet.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

likegadgets said:


> We also have a superb antenna and the HD channels come very clear. I considered getting an Amazon recast but have not felt the need as of yet.


Lifetime Tivos are listed on ebay quite often. They have two tuners.
Plex server is another option if you have a HDHomeRun which has 4 tuners, but requires a computer or Nvidia Shield to run it on.

Lots of OTA recording options out there.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Davenlr said:


> Plex server is another option if you have a HDHomeRun which has 4 tuners, but requires a computer or Nvidia Shield to run it on.


Plex Server runs on all manner of devices from the Raspberry Pi to NASes and retired computers. An nVIDIA Shield Pro is _not_ required.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

SledgeHammer said:


> The OP did. And we regularly get rants from people who had a bad CSR and cancelled on the spot. Agree that most people don't care about OTA. Re: the east coast nationals, I said that's an added perk for ME. I use 300GB-400GB with no streaming.
> 
> If I ignored the data cap issue and went with AT&T, I'd need Xtra just to get a few channels that Choice doesn't have. Xtra is $74.99, $83.48 after RSN, taxes, etc and STILL be missing a few things I have now. That'll only save me $20/mo lol and again... getting the missing things will cost me, so really its probably closer to $10/mo savings after everything. Why would anybody change their hassle free set up to save $10/mo and introduce hassle?


Because there is no "hassle" for many. I had a choice, Directv or AT&T. I chose AT&T because it was actually much less hassle than Directv. A much cleaner, easier install and has every channel I want other than NFL network. I'm saving money, have less hassle and don't have to fool with the Directv's archaic equipment and setups.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

raott said:


> Because there is no "hassle" for many. I had a choice, Directv or AT&T. I chose AT&T because it was actually much less hassle than Directv. A much cleaner, easier install and has every channel I want other than NFL network. I'm saving money, have less hassle and don't have to fool with the Directv's archaic equipment and setups.


How many subs does AT&T TV have? Can't seem to find the numbers. Regardless, we've already established that OTT is only about 10-12% of pay TV subs IF you assume everybody only subs to a single OTT service, which isn't the case for a lot of folks. And I'm talking strictly live tv. So the number of unique subs is a lot less then 10-12%. Sounds like a tiny minority to me. Kind of an "edge case" that execs aren't too worried about. We've also established the cord cutting movement has plateaued for the last few years. DirecTVs sub losses are mostly specific to AT&T/DirecTV issues. Dish has leveled out.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

SledgeHammer said:


> How many subs does AT&T TV have? Can't seem to find the numbers. Regardless, we've already established that OTT is only about 10-12% of pay TV subs IF you assume everybody only subs to a single OTT service, which isn't the case for a lot of folks. And I'm talking strictly live tv. So the number of unique subs is a lot less then 10-12%. Sounds like a tiny minority to me. Kind of an "edge case" that execs aren't too worried about. We've also established the cord cutting movement has plateaued for the last few years. DirecTVs sub losses are mostly specific to AT&T/DirecTV issues. Dish has leveled out.


Huh? Literally 10 seconds of research showed me that Dish TV lost 144,000 subscribers in the fourth quarter of 2020 alone. You are literally just making things up out of whole cloth. Your assertion that cord cutting has "plateaued" for "the last few years" is equally as incorrect.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

harsh said:


> Plex Server runs on all manner of devices from the Raspberry Pi to NASes and retired computers. An nVIDIA Shield Pro is _not_ required.


Why are you always so argumentative? I said "requires a computer or Nvidia Shield". Last time I checked, a Raspberry PI, an NAS, or a retired (or not) computer were all computers. I dont recall saying an Nvidia Shield Pro was required. Please stop being so negative.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Davenlr said:


> Lifetime Tivos are listed on ebay quite often. They have two tuners.
> Plex server is another option if you have a HDHomeRun which has 4 tuners, but requires a computer or Nvidia Shield to run it on.
> 
> Lots of OTA recording options out there.


There are four tuner OTA Tivos also.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

raott said:


> SledgeHammer said:
> 
> 
> > DirecTVs sub losses are mostly specific to AT&T/DirecTV issues. Dish has leveled out.
> ...


DISH lost 15k more satellite subscribers in 2020 than they did in 2019. Unfortunately they also lost 118k Sling TV customers. DISH is currently 78% satellite and 22% Sling TV.

AT&T|DIRECTV doesn't want to say. They lost nearly 3 million subscribers in 2020 after losing 3.4 million in 2019. I suppose that could be called "leveling off". (They lost 438k less subscribers! Hurray!) The "Now" product is no longer sold but AT&T|DIRECTV has been shedding those customers (665k lost in 2019, 270k lost in 2020. 665k left. AT&T|DIRECTV does not publish the split between satellite, uverse and OTT types of customers.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

raott said:


> Huh? Literally 10 seconds of research showed me that Dish TV lost 144,000 subscribers in the fourth quarter of 2020 alone. You are literally just making things up out of whole cloth. Your assertion that cord cutting has "plateaued" for "the last few years" is equally as incorrect.


Uh... instead of telling people they are making stuff up, you want to try actually read the thread. I'm not "making it up"... if anybody is, it's Statistica. You might also want to look up what "plateaued" means since I don't think you actually know. Here I'll help... it means "leveled off". NOTE: "leveled off" doesn't mean "stopped", so you'll probably have to look that up too.

If you think the 2016 - 2018 drops and the 2019 - 2020 drops are equivalent, well, can't help ya there. You'd need to see a doctor for that.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

James Long said:


> AT&T|DIRECTV doesn't want to say. They lost nearly 3 million subscribers in 2020 after losing 3.4 million in 2019. I suppose that could be called "leveling off".


Taken as a percentage of the customer base they started the year with, the losses were about the same (pretty grim). The difficulty being that they're perhaps dipping into their "quality" customers now.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Davenlr said:


> Why are you always so argumentative? I said "requires a computer or Nvidia Shield". Last time I checked, a Raspberry PI, an NAS, or a retired (or not) computer were all computers.


The Raspberry Pi is not what anyone would consider a "computer" (neither by cost, capability nor functionality) and neither are NAS devices but they make up a pretty good chunk of the Plex server population -- possibly many more installations than the nVIDIA Shield (perhaps comparable to a Chromebook) has.

Letting misinformation pass as fact is not in anyone's best interest.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

harsh said:


> Taken as a percentage of the customer base they started the year with, the losses were about the same (pretty grim).


AT&T|DIRECTV lost 16% of the customers they had at the beginning of 2020, DISH lost 11%.
AT&T|DIRECTV has lost 28% of the customers they had at the beginning of 2019, DISH lost 12% (both over 2 years).

"About the same?" Nope. AT&T|DIRECTV's losses are much higher as a percentage of subscribers (as well as in net subscribers).
DISH gained subscribers in 3Q19 and 3Q20 ... AT&T|DIRECTV has not gained subscribers since 2Q18.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

harsh said:


> The Raspberry Pi is not what anyone would consider a "computer" (neither by cost, capability nor functionality)


* Teach, Learn, and Make with Raspberry Pi*
https://www.raspberrypi.org

The Raspberry Pi is a tiny and affordable *computer* that you can use to learn programming through fun, practical projects.

Care to accuse me of misinformation any more, bring a bigger army.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

Davenlr said:


> * Teach, Learn, and Make with Raspberry Pi*
> https://www.raspberrypi.org
> 
> The Raspberry Pi is a tiny and affordable *computer* that you can use to learn programming through fun, practical projects.
> ...


Yawn. He's yet another chronic arguer. The Raspberry Pi 4 can even run his precious Linux that nobody else uses at home.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

SledgeHammer said:


> Uh... instead of telling people they are making stuff up, you want to try actually read the thread. I'm not "making it up"... if anybody is, it's Statistica. You might also want to look up what "plateaued" means since I don't think you actually know. Here I'll help... it means "leveled off". NOTE: "leveled off" doesn't mean "stopped", so you'll probably have to look that up too.
> 
> If you think the 2016 - 2018 drops and the 2019 - 2020 drops are equivalent, well, can't help ya there. You'd need to see a doctor for that.


The number of cord cutters continues to rise. The number of dish subscribers continues to drop. Keep spinning and misdirecting. I'm done with responding to you. You are waayyyyy too emotional about streaming. It's bizarre.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

raott said:


> The number of cord cutters continues to rise. The number of dish subscribers continues to drop. Keep spinning and misdirecting. I'm done with responding to you. You are waayyyyy too emotional about streaming. It's bizarre.


Guess you didn't look up what "plateaued" means, huh? Maybe you should ask for a dictionary for Xmas? I'll miss hearing about your tall tales about how streaming live TV that's ~8% distinct users vs. pay TV is the sky falling . Let me guess... I'm making up those numbers too? Oh wait... that would be all the providers lying about their sub counts. Man, if you can't trust Statistica and public companies, who CAN you trust?

You'd argue if I told you the sky was green and the grass was blue .

What's TRULY bizarre is a person that hangs out on a DirecTV message board trying to convince the world to cancel when they don't even sub .


----------



## mjwagner (Oct 8, 2005)

raott said:


> The number of cord cutters continues to rise. The number of dish subscribers continues to drop. Keep spinning and misdirecting. I'm done with responding to you. You are waayyyyy too emotional about streaming. It's bizarre.


Lots of folks here have been whistling past the graveyard for years...


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Davenlr said:


> The Raspberry Pi is a tiny and affordable *computer* that you can use to learn programming through fun, practical projects


Doing fun and educational programming projects is a whole different proposition than participating in Skype meetings or running off-the-shelf tax software.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

SledgeHammer said:


> The Raspberry Pi 4 can even run his precious Linux that nobody else uses at home.


You would do well not to disparage the only widely recognized operating system family that the Raspberry Pi runs if you're trying to support the argument that it is anything more than a simple learning tool.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

SledgeHammer said:


> Guess you didn't look up what "plateaued" means, huh? Maybe you should ask for a dictionary for Xmas? I'll miss hearing about your tall tales about how streaming live TV that's ~8% distinct users vs. pay TV is the sky falling . Let me guess... I'm making up those numbers too? Oh wait... that would be all the providers lying about their sub counts. Man, if you can't trust Statistica and public companies, who CAN you trust?
> 
> You'd argue if I told you the sky was green and the grass was blue .
> 
> What's TRULY bizarre is a person that hangs out on a DirecTV message board trying to convince the world to cancel when they don't even sub .


Convince the world to cancel? You clearly have me confused with someone else. I don't give one iota who subscribes to what and I'm certainly not emotionally attached as you appear to be. Given the context of your rants and rambling, I suspect I was subscribed to Directv longer than you've been alive.


----------



## mjwagner (Oct 8, 2005)

harsh said:


> Doing fun and educational programming projects is a whole different proposition than participating in Skype meetings or running off-the-shelf tax software.


A Raspberry Pi, by definition, is a computer. I know folks who run their entire entertainment systems on Raspberry Pi's. Saying it is just a "fun educational" "learning tool" is BS. And my Synology NAS has a computer built into it. I run many apps on it, database systems, web servers, etc..


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

mjwagner said:


> A Raspberry Pi, by definition, is a computer. I know folks who run their entire entertainment systems on Raspberry Pi's. Saying it is just a "fun educational" "learning tool" is BS.


Pi-based entertainment systems are no more computers than the Engine Control Unit on a 21st century Harley Davidson motorcycle. In the automation business, they call the brains a Programmable Logic Controller so there's less confusion.


> And my Synology NAS has a computer built into it. I run many apps on it, database systems, web servers, etc..


Sure it can do server tasks, but it can't comfortably run popular GUI-based applications software nor can it drive any kind of display device (the Raspberry Pi 4b can drive two displays).

It comes down to what the Joe Sixpack pictures when they think about the term "computer". I don't think anyone would be happy running a server (SoC-based or otherwise) for their daily driver.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

harsh said:


> It comes down to what the Joe Sixpack pictures when they think about the term "computer".


"Joe Sixpack" is wrong and so are you if you are following the least common denominator for your definitions. I have had end users refer to their monitors as their computers - ignorant of the box on or below their desk that actually is doing the computing. Choosing to rely on the most ignorant answer is not best practice.

If it makes you feel better call the PI a mini computer. Not all large case computers have the same capabilities so making a list of all the high demand software that cannot run on a long list of computers then picking the smallest capacity PI for a comparison is just wrong. The PI is a core ... one can build out a PI based system that can rival any other computer. Just like any other computer one should match the computer to the need.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

raott said:


> Convince the world to cancel? You clearly have me confused with someone else. I don't give one iota who subscribes to what and I'm certainly not emotionally attached as you appear to be. Given the context of your rants and rambling, I suspect I was subscribed to Directv longer than you've been alive.


Wow. You've got some serious issues. I'm calmly responding to your posts and you're going off the deep end further and further. You told us you cancelled your service, yet you continue to hang out on a DIRECTV message board trying to convince us to cancel too to make yourself feel better.

You've had DirecTV longer then I've been alive? Interesting since DirecTV launched in 1994. Talk about "making stuff up".

Not to mention I'm STILL waiting on your explanation on why I would cancel my $103/mo DirecTV service to pay $93 after taxes and fees AND STILL lose channels for AT&T TV?

Next thing you're going to tell us is that we should sell our cars because motorcycles are cheaper, conveniently leaving out all the stuff that cars do that motorcycles don't.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

harsh said:


> You would do well not to disparage the only widely recognized operating system family that the Raspberry Pi runs if you're trying to support the argument that it is anything more than a simple learning tool.


You can run Windows 10 on a Raspberry Pi ya know... but who cares about Raspberry Pis? I wouldn't have a use for one, but its still a computer lol.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

James Long said:


> "Joe Sixpack" is wrong and so are you if you are following the least common denominator for your definitions.


I'm not chasing after the "technically" but rather the "practically" meaning of the term. An Arduino or a Linux-based FTA receiver could technically qualify but they aren't practical for interactive day-to-day client applications and that's perhaps the most reasonable place to draw the line. The line between "computers" and "devices" is pretty blurry, but I'm guessing that most have an idea of where the threshold is.


> If it makes you feel better call the PI a mini computer.


We've both been around long enough to know what a minicomputer (a savagely cost-reduced mainframe that wasn't shrunken enough to become a "supermicro") was. I don't think the term has a modern analog.

My point remains that Plex doesn't require a "computer" or an nVIDIA Shield -- it runs on a number of "devices" as well as at least one router.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

SledgeHammer said:


> Wow. You've got some serious issues. I'm calmly responding to your posts and you're going off the deep end further and further. You told us you cancelled your service, yet you continue to hang out on a DIRECTV message board trying to convince us to cancel too to make yourself feel better.
> 
> You've had DirecTV longer then I've been alive? Interesting since DirecTV launched in 1994. Talk about "making stuff up".
> 
> ...


Move along. Your diatribes are nothing short of bizarre. Feel free to put me on your "ignore" list.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

raott said:


> Move along. Your diatribes are nothing short of bizarre. Feel free to put me on your "ignore" list.


I thought you were going to stop responding to me? You are just making yourself look foolish at this point. Just stop.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

harsh said:


> The line between "computers" and "devices" is pretty blurry, but I'm guessing that most have an idea of where the threshold is.


Runs a standard operating system (such as Windows, macOS or Linux). Does not need to run all three. Does not need your personal approval to be a "computer".


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

James Long said:


> Runs a standard operating system (such as Windows, macOS or Linux). Does not need to run all three. Does not need your personal approval to be a "computer".


Wikipedia thinks they are computers too:

"Raspberry Pi is a series of small single-board *computers* developed in the United Kingdom by the Raspberry Pi Foundation in association with Broadcom."


----------



## wmb (Dec 18, 2008)

James Long said:


> Runs a standard operating system (such as Windows, macOS or Linux). Does not need to run all three. Does not need your personal approval to be a "computer".


Cheap way to build a supercomputer...

Cheap Supercomputers: LANL has 750-node Raspberry Pi Development Clusters

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

James Long said:


> Runs a standard operating system (such as Windows, macOS or Linux). Does not need to run all three. Does not need your personal approval to be a "computer".


Many "devices" easily run some flavor of Linux and a few even run a brain-dead version of Windows (at one time this included ATMs and cash registers).

Perhaps the litmus test could be this: Would you tell your friends that you got a new computer if it were a Raspberry Pi?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

harsh said:


> Many "devices" easily run some flavor of Linux and a few even run a brain-dead version of Windows (at one time this included ATMs and cash registers).
> 
> Perhaps the litmus test could be this: Would you tell your friends that you got a new computer if it were a Raspberry Pi?


Raspberry Pi owners would.  Now lets move on ... enough said on the off-topic.


----------



## Claude A Greiner (Dec 8, 2018)

Getteau said:


> It's sad that you have to do this with them, but for other new people reading the thread looking for advice, this is your script when talking to DTV about any issues with slow/laggy/glitchy DVR's. Especially the HR20-34 lines.
> 
> Step 1, call the retention department first. Find the current numbers in the "Anyone call DirectTV and get a discount ..." thread. Don't waste your time with any other department.
> Step 2, when they answer, say hello DTV, my receiver is completely dead. It won't power on, makes no noise, has no lights and I have tried using the power cable from my other DVR. Please send me a replacement and please credit my account the $20 shipping charge. Tell them you do not want to upgrade your equipment and you do not want to sign-up for the protection plan. If you tell them it's dead from the start, you will short circuit their troubleshooting flowchart and you will save yourself the hour of stupid "reboot the receiver, factory reset the receiver" troubleshooting steps that are designed to get you off the phone. Telling them you have tried a working power cord will save you the even dumber "we need to mail you a new power cord" step.
> ...


Yeah I tried step 2 once. They sent me a replacement power supply.

No point in arguing, I made them overnight it and then called the next day

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Steveknj (Nov 14, 2006)

SledgeHammer said:


> I thought you were going to stop responding to me? You are just making yourself look foolish at this point. Just stop.


Honestly, I'm not sure why you need to be so condescending to folks here. With that said, awhile back in this thread we established the for you, DirecTV works well, for others, switching to some streaming service works better. This isn't a one size fits all situation. So can we just leave it at that? Whatever works for folks works for folks. Does it really matter if they have gained, lost, or remained constant?


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

Steveknj said:


> Honestly, I'm not sure why you need to be so condescending to folks here. With that said, awhile back in this thread we established the for you, DirecTV works well, for others, switching to some streaming service works better. This isn't a one size fits all situation. So can we just leave it at that? Whatever works for folks works for folks. Does it really matter if they have gained, lost, or remained constant?


Maybe you should actually try read the thread next time before you post? You got the wrong person.


----------



## Steveknj (Nov 14, 2006)

SledgeHammer said:


> Maybe you should actually try read the thread next time before you post? You got the wrong person.


I read the whole thread and I have the right person. Anyway, I'll let you do what you do.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

Steveknj said:


> I read the whole thread and I have the right person. Anyway, I'll let you do what you do.


You mean you'll let me have a functional system under a single provider with all my channels and little "bonus features" like east coast feeds, CEC, a local DVR where I can actually delete stuff, integrated OTA, programmable RF remote, NOT have to keep a pad & pen by my TV to jot down ep #'s **AND** pay *less* then what you're paying?

Thanks buddy! I appreciate it! 

P.S. might want to work on your social skills a bit... if somebody tells you they value something and you say its stupid, IRL, you'd likely get a punch in the nose for your trouble. That's kinda rude.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

SledgeHammer said:


> P.S. might want to work on your social skills a bit... if somebody tells you they value something and you say its stupid, IRL, you'd likely get a punch in the nose for your trouble. That's kinda rude.


So is saying someone deserves a punch in the nose.

Let's stick a fork in this thread.


----------

