dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
AT&T's New $5 'Premium' HD Tier: 3 Channels
Here we were thinking TelcoTV was supposed to be different....
by Karl Bode 04:23PM Friday Oct 24 2008
The other day, users started reporting that they were getting postcards from AT&T, informing them that HD channels currently in their $10 a month U-Verse IPTV HD package would soon be moved to a "Premium" tier, costing users an additional $5 per month. A recent post to the official U-Verse forums (hat tip to Engadget HD) offers more detail found at the official AT&T website. The site notes that the new Premium HD tier will be composed of a whopping three HD channels: Universal HD, MGM HD, and Smithsonian HD. Of course, several satellite and cable competitors offer almost as tepid "premium" HD packages, but that won't make U-Verse subscribers feel any better.

view:
topics flat nest 

Harddrive
Proud American and Infidel since 1968.
Premium
join:2000-09-20
DFW
kudos:2

3 channels for $5 more a month?

looks like AT&T is raising rates faster than Comcast.

ninjatutle
Premium

join:2006-01-02
San Ramon, CA

Re: 3 channels for $5 more a month?

No, its more like if you want these crappy channels, pay for it. Instead of raising the rates for everyone else. Thats the comcast way. More money ripped from your pockets.

Ima

join:2003-10-23
Little Rock, AR

Re: 3 channels for $5 more a month?

said by ninjatutle:

No, its more like if you want these crappy channels, pay for it. Instead of raising the rates for everyone else. Thats the comcast way. More money ripped from your pockets.
Gotta agree here. I'm glad it's only a rate increase for those who actually want the channels.
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Re: 3 channels for $5 more a month?

As it should be.... in an a la carte system.

ztmike
Mark for moderation
Premium
join:2001-08-02
Michigan City, IN

i lol'd

Looks like At&t want to kill themselves in this race for more subscribers, not only do their internet speeds suck for both their dsl,u-verse, but they raise rates like this?

lawl.

S_engineer
Premium
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL

Re: i lol'd

said by ztmike:

Looks like At&t want to kill themselves in this race for more subscribers, not only do their internet speeds suck for both their dsl,u-verse, but they raise rates like this?
What motivation do they have keeping the prices the same? If cable keeps moving the bar, you better believe ATT will go along. They've probably maxxed out the cheap dsl market, Uverse deployment is stagnating, monies got to come from somewhere...especially with Apples hand out for a billion!

ztmike
Mark for moderation
Premium
join:2001-08-02
Michigan City, IN

2 edits

Re: i lol'd

said by S_engineer:

said by ztmike:

Looks like At&t want to kill themselves in this race for more subscribers, not only do their internet speeds suck for both their dsl,u-verse, but they raise rates like this?
What motivation do they have keeping the prices the same?
Maybe because U-Verse is a new deployment? I don't know how they expect to gain customers if they keep up the rate hikes, how many u-verse paying customers do they have atm? 1million? Only people that will buy u-verse service are the ones that don't want caps at comcast (but then at&t is also said to be working on caps) or they are to dumb to shop around.

I still find it funny that At&t went with DSL technology over FTTH. What a damn waste of money.

damaludj

@verizon.net

Re: i lol'd

they haven't even hit 1 million yet, they are aiming to get at get 1 million by the end of the year

en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
18Mbps isn't all that bad (when it gets deployed).

jt4

@comcast.net

Re: i lol'd

that for internet only sub. cant get that kind of speed when you have uverse tv.

dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4
said by en102:

18Mbps isn't all that bad (when it gets deployed).
18000/896 i lol'd.
thats probably not even enough upload to ACK for 18mbps.
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee

THXULTRA

@att.net

Good ridens

With digital tv I get a great signal now eliminating the need for cable or pay tv. All the really good shows are on free tv or eventually come on dvd so I can honestly say I can live without pay tv. I would much rather get my signal over the air and get netflix and save a bunch of money in the process. Pay tv is just out of control.
mworks

join:2006-06-13
Faison, NC

The more HD progress the more I have to pay

Anyone remember when HD was first announced how all the stations would be using it and how great it was going to be ?

All I have seen since HD made its appearance is people wanting more money from me. More money from equipment and now all the cable and sat companies wanting to dollar me to death for every channel that has a HD logo. Even if said channel doesn't have all HD content.

CrazyT

join:2008-10-08
Irving, TX

Re: The more HD progress the more I have to pay

I'm glad I have resisted the switch to HD....Sure, if given the choice I'd watch HD vs non HD but I don't place any monetary value on it. (spare me the 'you can get free HD OTA' replies, I don't want an antenna in addition to my DTV Satellite)

jester121
Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
Those cameras are expensive.

SHABAZZ

join:2008-07-13
Seattle, WA

Cancel

When ever packages or prices are changed subscribers should be able to cancel their service without any fees.

jester121
Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL

Re: Cancel

AT&T doesn't have contracts for Uverse do they?
iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·Verizon Online DSL

Still cheaper than capped internet HD downloads...

Let's say you watch an hour of TV per day on U-Verse from one of the three channels...at 5 Mbps encoding you're looking at ~68 GB of data transferred per month. So the data transfer costs would be 7.4 cents per GB. Interesting, no?

Plus, isn't this getting closer to "a la carte" TV? Sure it might be expensive, but it's paying for three channels versus a huge bunch of 'em...
Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1

Re: Still cheaper than capped internet HD downloads...

there is no transport costs in the shows, its all on their local network.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports
Chaldo

join:2008-03-18
West Bloomfield, MI

trying to pay off some bills, use that money.

Bet you there doing this to pay off some bills aka all the fiber,cat5 or there new IPHONE bill which is A LOT.. I would think.. its so obvious

ArgMeMatey

join:2001-08-09
Milwaukee, WI
kudos:2
Reviews:
·voip.ms
·AT&T Midwest
·Time Warner Cable
said by iansltx:

Plus, isn't this getting closer to "a la carte" TV? Sure it might be expensive, but it's paying for three channels versus a huge bunch of 'em...
So what are my chances of getting just these three channels? (OK, maybe I would take the internet service too.)

I guess I'll stick with my cheap basic cable and pokey, cheap DSL. Thanks anyway. All this HDTV stuff is great for people who can't afford to watch sports in person and those without legs or the ability to use them, but as the years go by I wonder more and more often why we even pay $16 a month for TV service.
--
USNG:
16TDN2870
Find your Lat-Long:
Geocoder
iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·Verizon Online DSL

Re: Still cheaper than capped internet HD downloads...

Heh, you're talking to an internet-only Comcast customer. Actually, the nearest TV to me is in another apartment Online content FTW, though as HD quality rises (and I watch HD on everything I can...SD is just a tad fuzzy on my computer) I may run up against...ou guessed it...the ComCap.

nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA
said by iansltx:

Plus, isn't this getting closer to "a la carte" TV? Sure it might be expensive, but it's paying for three channels versus a huge bunch of 'em...
But that presupposes that I can actually buy just those three channels. But no. If I want the premium HD channels, I have to:
• Buy the Basic Cable package
• Buy the expanded Basic Cable package
• Buy the Digital Cable package
• Buy the basic HD package
• Then, and only then, can I just buy those three channels.

I mean, if I could, I'd have just the HD tier and NHL Center Ice. But, I can't. For some reason, I have to buy 400 other channels that I never freaking watch (because, getting used to 1080i, the standard definition is next to unwatchable).
--
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. -- Bertrand Russell
iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX
kudos:2

Re: Still cheaper than capped internet HD downloads...

Point taken. A la carte in marketing terms, lousy addon otherwise.

ImInSoCal

@rr.com

Bonded VDSL2 yet ?

They need to work on bonded VDSL2 already, supposedly, it would double the bandwidth right? =/

Re: Bonded VDSL2 yet ?

It's bonded ADSL2+ =D double the bandwidth would help a lot, even though some say it's really more like a 30% increase.

packetscan
Premium
join:2004-10-19
Bridgeport, CT

What would you expect

At&t has stepped on "everyone" pushing this service..

Now that they have close to a million subscribers, and to show them gratitude you get a rate increase..

Nice..
--
Reach out and Tap someone!

Millenniumle

join:2007-11-11
Fredonia, NY

Broadcast

I get more than that over the airwaves, for free!

I recently reconnected my antenna and dumped $60/month cable. I'm getting nine digital stations, all crystal clear with great audio, with a fixed antenna - and not counting the 2 Jesus channels. Six of them are in HD. It's no cable package for sure, but it's free, looks great, and sounds great. With a rotator I'd have two more channels.

Broadcast isn't what it used to be.

Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
Reviews:
·ooma
·Comcast
·Callcentric
·Site5.com

Same channels and same as Directv?

Directv has the same deal and include the same channels. Why does this seem like a situation where the channel is demanding more money than the provider is willing to pay? I don't know if this is the situation, but it certainly seems like that.
--
My domain - Nightfall.net
Joe12345678

join:2003-07-22
Des Plaines, IL

Re: Same channels and same as Directv?

It $5 for 6 channels on Direct first 3 mouths are free.
KoRnGtL15
Premium
join:2007-01-04
Grants Pass, OR
kudos:1
Wrong. You get 2 more channels for a total of 5 with DTV instead of 3 ATT wants to give.

said by Nightfall:

Directv has the same deal and include the same channels. Why does this seem like a situation where the channel is demanding more money than the provider is willing to pay? I don't know if this is the situation, but it certainly seems like that.

ComcastFanboi

@comcast.net

What's next?

CallerID ChannelID for $9.95/mo that lets you see the name and number of the channel you're watching?
Big SZ

join:2007-09-29

Telcos ARE cable in different clothing

This should not be a surprise. Verizon and AT&T are Comcast and Time Warner and every other company. They raise rates....it's what they do.

inteller
Sociopaths always win.

join:2003-12-08
Tulsa, OK

Strange, I'm not paying more for HD on Cox

And even more strange, my internet speeds are faster than that U-perverse.

Cox HD > U-perverse.

now when ATT offers Spice HD and PlayboyHD as extras for $5 add-on call me.

HeyG

@sbcglobal.net

There are more channels

Last night I found at least 34 new channels in my HD lineup with a message saying:

Service is currently not available in your area.

Coming Soon...

Based in Chicago - many of the channels include Speed HD, Fox, Fox News, TWC, plus more HBO, Showtime, Encore, Cinemax, etc

For whatever price, just to have Speed in the lineup is well worth the price...the new whole house DRV thing is pretty suite and they have been making changes to the user interface. Having switched from Comcast as soon as AT&T was available I would never go back and tell everyone I know how great of a deal AT&T is...even if I had to pay what I paid for Comcast previously.