U-Verse TV Hits 1 Million Subs > 16 Million say NO

16 Million say NO

The same old rick roll copy and paste rant. And you hate competition because......

I hate Sprint but I don't want to see them die off. I hate Comcast but I don't want to see them die off either. Competition is good for the consumers.

Where in the world did you ever read into my post(s) that I hate competition?

Quite the reverse. I'd just like to see something competitive is all...not a next generation disaster.

My posts simply call it like I see it as it relates to the technology from a business perspective.

And call them what you will..but my predictions for 2 years now are all coming to fruition. Nowhere in the country has this mega disaster played out like it has here in Ct.
From the political to legal battles..the dislike for vrads..
and our state being surrounded by Verizon and their FIOS rollout..here we are..stuck in the middle with AT&T.

In all honestly..I feel sorry for the AT&T workers in this state..many who are former SNET workers. SNET was a great company and to be so shackled by the mismanagement that is occurring is devastating to them I'm sure. We're also seeing many of the diehard snet/at&t customers even jumping ship in the Ct. forum. That tells the real story I think about how they're fed up with what has occurred and have decided that they too want something better. And who can blame them? Certainly not I. It's up to AT&T to change my mind. And the minds of everyone who has finally said..

enough is enough.

And until that day comes the demise of this company will continue.

Sad ..but true.
--
The Coyote captured the RR! Roadrunner Rick is now Comcastic!

reply to Rick
The problem with this analysis is bad method.

NONE of those (46% of 1 Million is....) ~460,000 customers that switched from DSL to U-Verse had AT&T TV. Some may have had the AT&T|Dish Network service, but no one had a purely AT&T TV service. AT&T gets all the U-Verse TV revenue.

~6% of potential customers have already adopted, and the service has been available (in select areas) for what, 2, 2.5 years?. If you take into account that many areas are in their first and second years of availability (some areas in their first few months), and combine that knowledge with the fact that potential customers might be in contracts with current providers, there is already a built-in bias against switching to AT&T U-Verse when it first appears.

Anyone have any idea how fast POTS grew in terms of customers vs service available? Cable? Cell Phone Service? It would be interesting to compare these growth numbers. I doubt they are too far out of line.

I think U-Verse is doing OK so far.

You have NINTY FIVE PERCENT of people who can get this service right now...

saying NO to it.

That is NOT a winning product no matter how you try to slice and dice it.

And that 5 percent who are saying YES includes ALL The built up anticipation of their die hard fans who get to finally say..It's HERE. I can switch from cable.

And so..in reality..you're probably really looking at something like a 2 1/2% success..conversion rate from cable.

Sir..that won't even begin to save this company from the demise of landlines and dsl that is occurring.
And will continue to occur in the many years ahead.

And remember..the cable co's barely even have docsis 3.0 out yet.

Sorry to say..but I think that AT&T is finished.
And at best..will someday be but a former shell of what it is today.

That's my prediction..has been my prediction..and I'm sticking to it unless something dramatic happens.
--
The Coyote captured the RR! Roadrunner Rick is now Comcastic!

Comcast has had 30+ Years to market their product and have about a 40 percent take rate, leaving on average 60 percent of the potential customers saying no to comcast. ATT has in about 18 rolling months (meaning house one has had u-verse available for 18 months and house 17m has had it available for a day.) time gotten to a 6 percent take rate. 6 percent at this point is not bad. People are slow to change even if they dislike their current provider. If ATT can sustain 6 percent per year in about 5 years they will pass Comcast on take rate.

What are you (comcast) afraid of?

reply to ILpt4U
Even if AT&T is trading 1 for 1 (losing a local phone line for each new video sub), they will lose pre-tax cash flow dollars and their margin % will fall...it already has but they're blaming it on a tough economy. Here's how it works...the local land lines are very high gross margin services. Virtually zero cost of goods sold. Video on the other hand is very high cost of goods sold...you have to pay a HUGE chunk of the revenue to the networks. When they lose a phone customer, the cost of the switch, the techs, the care folks and executive overhead stays in place. When they add a video sub, they may not have to add much in terms of overhead, but they do have to pay ESPN, TNT, The Weather Channel, etc. So, while they stay still in terms of revenue, they are adding cost. You can't make that up in volume...

The only way this thing works is if they assume some huge % of landlines they would have lost if they didn't do anything. And then there's the capital investment, which isn't as bad as FiOS but is still there. These guys are pinned against the wall. They have to do something.

reply to Rick

reply to Rick
Over dramatize much?

AT&T has profitable wireless as well as Internet--- and they get USF slush from VOIP and so on.

AT&T isn't going anywhere anytime soon. Even if all POTS die.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

reply to ILpt4U

reply to ILpt4U
This marks the end of year 2 of open availability. From 06/06 to 12/06 it was available on a trail basis in 1 or 2 markets.

reply to VideoGuy
Cable-sat-telco all with a 33% take rate works for me. If you take a start date of 1/01/2004 comcast had 1.2million circuit switched phone customers and zero digital voice,today they have zero circuit switch customers and 6.1 million cdv a net gain of 5 million over 5 years. Verizon on 1/01/2004 had 55 million pots subs,sold over 3 million an now have 37 million a loss of 15 million over 5 years.

reply to Rick
Rick , we have the same old crap coming from you as we did when verizon was in the news. funny how you only open your mouth to spout pro-comcast, anti-telco drivel. it makes me wonder what your real motive (and the motive of comcast really is). some utopian wet dream of cable (comcast) dominance with no threat from outside competition (be it from the telcos or from indie-sources), perhaps?

funny, in trying to find some information regarding *comcasts* footprint, i was looking through the old comcast press releases. funny that in q3 2003, you were actually *concerned* with penetration rates and providing that information to your stockholders (as can be referenced here). however, q3 2008 gives a different picture, one that is only given by "how much the customer is spending" and "how much we are making as our shareholders". after fumbling around your website, i found this page. this page states that you have this penetration

Customers: As of September 30, 2008, Comcast served customers in 39 states and the District of Columbia.

•24.4 million cable customers
•14.7 million high-speed Internet customers
•6.1 million voice customers

now, assuming that all voice customers are *more than likely* all hsi customers, and that most hsi customers are video subs, its safe to say that you have ~25 million customers total. now, you have penetration in 39 states and the dc. follow me on some math now...

total us population is around 320 million people. given that most big msos only cover the "densely populated" areas, i feel that we could assume a pretty standard distribution of people in relation to comcasts footprint. if we divide the 320 million people evenly distributed across all 50 states and multiply that number by the 39 states that comcast has footing in, we get about 250 million people. dividing this number by 25 million gives about 10%. this is very rough but (a) i am assuming that if comcast has a presence in a state, then it covers the whole state (b) the use of (a) cancels out the fact that i am using a standard average distribution of the population across all states.

now, the last mention i could find of comcat mentioning its penetration rates was on this page here:

Comcast Cable added 1.664 million high-speed Internet subscribers in 2003, a pro forma increase in net additions of 38.7% over the same period last year. Comcast finished the year with nearly 5.3 million subscribers, representing a penetration rate of 15.2%. More than 87% of the homes in Comcast's footprint, or over 34.7 million homes, now have access to High-Speed Internet service.

(from »www.comcast.com/About/PressRelea···ootprint)

now Rick , granted this mentions hsi penetration in q4 2004, but your company is *purposely* hiding all of the relevant information from more current years. given this hsi penetration of 15%, i would be more than willing to give you around 6 or 7 percent on top of what i had already figured (but just goes to show that my figures were *not* that far off).

so, we can decide on around 17 or so percent of penetration for comcast. how many *millions* of customers saying "no" does that represent Rick ?
for ease of comparison, 1/16 is about 6.25%. given that it is a new technology, i'd say u-verse isn't doing too bad now. comcast has had how many years to push its hsi product (as well as digital voice and cable)?
again, this is just more of the same comcast-shill that spews on regular intervals from your mouth anytime a telco is discussed.

edited to fix a hanging quote. did everything from the qreply box