Not a proper comparison. AT&T offers tons more content to you than Netflix. You are getting a LOT more content for the money than Netflix.AT&T $35 vs Netflix $11. $35 is not penny comparing to Netflix $11.
you keep coming back to QUALITY content. I would keep using Netflix as my example. Netflix offers QUALITY content for MUCH less and more:
1) 4K content
2) watch when you want and what you want. DVR is history
3) stream 4 devices
All of that content is considered "OTT" it is just extra to their main source of income.Where do you get these numbers? Have you looked at CBS All Access (with no commercials). They seem to be doing well and one of the major networks. And, NBC, ABC ad FOX are on Hulu (with no commercials). Take a look at that. They would be the most expensive.
Of course you will have to pay more for NO Commercials. We are just saying that a number of networks are offering it NOW. This is not some pipe dream. Of course the others like Netflix (with more and more original content) and HBO with original content.
Again..... TV via internet is aimed at people who do not have traditional pay tv. They are all offered by companies that offer traditional pay tv as their main business model. These so called skinny bundle are considered as OTT by the companies offering them.you are still living in the 80's and 90's business model when telecom and cables monopolized using their pipe.
with today internet, competition is opened up to everyone on the same level playing field. AT&T will face alot of competition from big player like Netflix to small player like Sling and more coming, possible Apple. plus consumers have many other entertainments today beside watching TV.
the day of 100's of mostly useless channels mixing with tortured ads is over. As a consumer, I don't want to pay so that I can watch ads. that picture is so wrong.
[doublepost=1483459541][/doublepost]the idea of 100's channel with content playing with a fixed schedule is so 80's and old.
some channels like live sport and news make sense to play at fixed time slots but 90% content is recorded. it makes no sense to play this recorded content on a fixed schedule.
if it is a recorded content, consumers should be able to choose what and when to watch. it is pointless to play this content through a "channel" streaming all day at fixed time slot. it is so wrong. DVR exists to fix this "problem" and ads.
without channels and ads, there is no need for DVR. why do you need DVR on Netflix?
DVRs are popular for the the main reason: The impossibility of consumers to watch all their favorite shows live. Pay TV providers use it as source of revenue as well as feature to attract customers.This made sense when there was only broadcast, i.e. everybody had to use the same video stream. But with IP-based on-demand delivery, every customer now receives their own individual stream which can be personalized. One customer can watch with commercials and save a few pennies, another can choose a "premium" ad-free version. The popularity of DVRs proves that there is a significant market. I believe providers that do not offer an ad-free option will suffer.
And since you seem to like the advertising industry so much: They also get some interesting opportunities out of it: They can insert targeted ads into the individual customer's stream, which are much more effective than today's bland "spray and pray" TV commercials. Ad insertion is already part of all major IP-based distribution platforms. Just give people options, and everyone will be happy.
[doublepost=1483462002][/doublepost]To be fair, AT&T are not the ones cashing in a fat profit margin on DTVNow. On the contrary, they are currently probably losing money on the service.
Funny.... all the complaints of ads and how outdated current content model is. Yet right now content owners offers a la carte to anyone interested..... go open Amazon, Google or iTunes etc, and just pay for the content you want. Problem solved.