I don’t see how T-Mo succeeds at that price point when streaming w/sports + Netflix or Hulu is about half that cost.
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017/12/t-mobile-promises-to-...
> Layer3 TV brands itself as "The New Cable." ... offering access to a wide range of HD and 4K channels (more than 275 in total), streamed using the highly efficient H.265 (also known as HEVC) video codec and a custom set-top box. It's a pure IP service—there's no tuner in the box, and it will connect over Wi-Fi—and to support it, Layer3 has built out a fiber distribution network and data center in Denver that handles transcoding shows into HEVC. It also has partnerships with Internet providers to provide the last mile connectivity. This private backbone network should mean that Layer3 doesn't suffer the kinds of issues that Netflix dealt with a few years ago when its links bought from Cogent became congested.
I suspect that T-Mobile is buying them for their technology and plans to scrap the current service offerings and try to offer an À la carte service. If they're able to do that it could be revolutionary but that's a big if. Most cable packages exist today because networks force their channels to be sold in bundles, you can't offer ESPN without ESPN2 or the Disney Channel.
Sling TV is allegedly À la carte but it's really just a basic cable bundle with the really crap channels excluded.
Needless to say their mailers have been going straight to recycle ever since.
If T-Mo can figure out this alacarte thing I might give them a second look. I'm not paying $90/month after fees for two channels that show maybe a couple of shows that I'm actually interested in. That's madness.
I pay a little over 50 bucks a month for Hulu's Live TV service but the interface and UX is absolute garbage. If I could get everything I get from Hulu Live with a real honest channel guide + easily managed cloud DVR I would pay an extra $25 a month and drop Hulu in a flash.
I'll definitely be giving the T-Mobile service a look as the only thing keeping me on Hulu is lack of good alternatives (I'm looking at you DirectTV).
Disclaimer: I work at YouTube, but am not on YouTube TV team.
No one has solved the last mile problem because everyone was content to pay the ISPs and now look what's happened.
We need alternatives and we need them fast.
And that's purely a political will issue, not a "we need to invent alternatives" issue.
If a new entrant came in, they would have been on a level playing field.
Telecom operators do not want to be dumb pipes.
I hope this means full on-demand and not the half-assed cable/satellite game of a broadcasting model with a DVR tacked on. I didn't become a cord cutter for the sake of a lower bill, but because I was spoiled by DVD box sets that I can (re)watch anytime at my own pace. Traditional channels are just grating to me now, and I have no idea why that model should be imposed on IP-based services.
I’m an ATT subscriber and with our data plan Direct TV Now is offered for a small added fee. GreAt svc and it allowed two family members to ditch their Comcast tv svc.
No Brainer other wireless carriers will follow.
They probably tried and couldn't work out an agreement. Dish is sort of infamous for being hard to work with, and has inflated the cost of their company by squatting on large amounts of spectrum they have zero intention of ever using. And that's all before getting into personality conflicts between both companies CEOs.
http://news.centurylink.com/2017-11-01-CenturyLink-completes...
