Thread regarding AT&T layoffs

Goksen HBOMAX became- ATURD

Remember when AT&T decide
ignoring net neutrality principles by not counting the use of its new HBO Max streaming service against its customers’ data caps? AT&T data customers who use competing streamers, such as Netflix and Disney+, will have that usage counted against their data caps.

Now...

Stankey & WarnerMedia launched HBO Max in late May, and more than six weeks later, it’s still a no-show on Roku or Amazon’s Fire TV. Coming up is NBCUniversal’s July 15 national unveiling of Peacock, and it, too, is unlikely to be on either platform, sources say.

The standoffs, of course, revolve around money. More than that, the distribution disputes are about long-term strategic access to rapidly growing streaming-first audiences, as well as advertising inventory. One media company exec says Roku and Amazon are asking for “egregious” terms, but Fair considering AR&T's blunt move to break net neutrality principles.
the other side, an insider at one of the over-the-top platform providers says they’re simply looking for “a reasonable share” of the value they create for partners — and adds that companies like WarnerMedia and NBCU are coming to the table with an “old TV mindset.”

by
| 1033 views | | 4 replies (last July 16, 2020) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+15XStz8M

4 replies (most recent on top)

Looks like Amazon and Roku are giving the deathstar and comc-ap a gallon or two of their own medicine. Good for them.

I hope they negotiate their contracts so price increases by t and 'c-ap are immediately reflected in the prices paid to Amazon and Roku for using the apps on their platforms. That should make t and 'c-ap keep their price increases in check.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1aum+15XStz8M

AT&T does sell unlimited plans. The fact that AT&T subsidizes it’s own OTT video service by not counting that traffic towards caps takes margin out of the revenues. So how exactly does this violate net neutrality....someone has to pay for ntwk capacity ...either the customer or the OTT provider if caps
are exceeded and this Includes AT&T absorbing more costs if its our own content service driving the capacity. Nothing violates net-neutrality there.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1ygp+15XStz8M

would you want to do business with att if you were any other streaming service. they lie to their customers and employees what do think they would do to another company.

rand and stank have no morals and I would tell them to go pound sand and watch them go out of business.

their wireless service sux and they won't spend any money to support their customers because it doesn't generate any revenue and maintenance is nothing but a money loser. don't worry customers will talk with their wallets sooner or later. lets hope it is sooner.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1mvi+15XStz8M

Although this is unrelated to net neutrality, the concept is the same. T fought and won the net neutrality battle in order to be able to prioritize their own traffic and services.
Now the same is happening from a content distribution standpoint and the distributors are now prioritizes their own business models while wanting to charge the outsiders. Sounds just like net neutrality and zero rating to me. T may have won that battle, but the war isn't looking so good.

Hey T, Karma is a Beeeootch lol !!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @vxc+15XStz8M

Post a reply

: