DirecTV Customer Service Nonsense (UPDATE post #28)

[barkley]

Agreed. Cable and satellite are dead. It will be all streaming on demand going forward.

if that's the case then someone will be missing out on a significant customer base to make money off b/c there are still large areas of the u.s. that have little to no streaming via internet access. this isn't limited to people who live out in the middle of nowhere with nothing around. i'm in one of the hottest housing markets (due to business growth) in the country but large chunks of it due to the natural topography can make streaming access impossible. our area isn't entirely unique w/ this issue so if the satellite television providers go away then at minimum tens of thousands of viewers/consumers of products advertised in my area alone will be a lost source of revenue (no cable exists-can't ever, antenna's don't work).

 

[Disney1fan2002]

Agreed. Cable and satellite are dead. It will be all streaming on demand going forward.

If that happens, would it make sense that the cost of internet will go up? I pay roughly $79/ month for high speed internet from Cox. I get Direct TV for my channels, but since Direct TV uses Verizon for their internet, I can't get it because it's not available in my neighborhood. (if it were, I would be with FIOS).

If everyone slowly dumps cable and satellite, and goes to streaming, then the demand for internet would rise, thus allowing internet providers to charge a rate comparable to what we pay for TV now.

 

[Lori74]

what is available for streaming that is comparable to directv? i looked at a few things, and it seems rather expensive, some you have to pay per tv, (not just a $5 fee) we like the channels we get with directv, but know there must be something good out there

 

[sam_gordon]

Simple solution, a $ 9 antenna.

I've received OTA stations with paper clips before. In other locations, it takes a $100+ antenna, and in others, no antenna will help. Go to tvfool.com and put in your address to see what it will take.

To refund just the missing channel would probably be less the twenty five cents for the year.

OTA channels are more in the $1-$2/month range.

Agreed. Cable and satellite are dead. It will be all streaming on demand going forward.

Doubt it. Too many places don't have reliable internet. No (or poor) internet = no streaming.

 

[kdonnel]

OTA channels are more in the $1-$2/month range.

Each?

I get 6 OTA channels with my TV package. If that is costing them $6 to $12 per month per subscriber what about the 18 sports only channels I get? And the 52 other news, weather, home improvement, and movie channels? I only pay $50 a month including taxes and fees.

It has to be much less the $1-$2 per month.

For some channels it has to be in the $1 or less per year range.

 

[kdonnel]

Doubt it. Too many places don't have reliable internet. No (or poor) internet = no streaming.

There have been threads debating this before.

Satellite is already dead. The satellite companies know it, their subscribers have not figured it out yet.

Cable will survive but only as a means to provide data service.

Telcos will survive but only as a means to provide data service.

Cellular networks will grow to the point that they provide the last mile internet for areas that are cost prohibitive to lay fiber, copper, or coax.

Of course there will be people who hate change and cling to the old keeping bits and pieces of the cable system going but they will be the minority in 10 to 15 years. Just like the minority that still cling to their land lines.

At that point people will suddenly realize they are paying 10x as much for content as the previous generation.

 

[wgeo]

We cut the cord a long time ago and I do miss certain channels, but I don't miss the bill. Unfortunately so many of the streaming services are raising their rates like crazy - I still don't want to pay $50 to stream - although that's better than most cable/satellite bills.

Our problem is that our OTA antenna gets all channels great, except NBC. And the only way we can get the channels is to have the antenna outside and run a cord through our brick house to get the signal inside, so no 9.99 antenna for us. Overall I'm good with OTA but I'd really like to consistently get NBC - it seems to only go out with live sports - which is of course when we really want to watch!

 

[MIGrandma]

Well, we are giving Hulu a try.

We bought a Roku stick yesterday and got a 7-day free trial with Hulu so started that last night.

We are getting the channels we watch most on DirecTV plus locals. If we continue the service it will be $44.99/month. Way less expensive than $151 each month that we are paying for DirecTV.

DH finally got a bit of a refund from DirecTV, or rather AT&T, of $25 off our next bill and another $10 off the next one. Probably won’t wait around for that second one as I imagine we will be cutting the cord with DirecTV within a few days.

So far the internet seems to be handling the streaming and both of us on our iPads at the same time. DH works from home a lot on the computer so he is anxious to see how it goes with him working, the Hulu and me on my iPad at the same time. Time will tell.

 

[luvsJack]

Simple solution, a $ 9 antenna. Let's get real, every "provider" has disputes that take channels off for a time. Even the internet based ones. Just the nature of TV today.

Doesn’t work everywhere.

 

[dclpluto]

Well, we are giving Hulu a try.

We bought a Roku stick yesterday and got a 7-day free trial with Hulu so started that last night.

We are getting the channels we watch most on DirecTV plus locals. If we continue the service it will be $44.99/month. Way less expensive than $151 each month that we are paying for DirecTV.

DH finally got a bit of a refund from DirecTV, or rather AT&T, of $25 off our next bill and another $10 off the next one. Probably won’t wait around for that second one as I imagine we will be cutting the cord with DirecTV within a few days.

So far the internet seems to be handling the streaming and both of us on our iPads at the same time. DH works from home a lot on the computer so he is anxious to see how it goes with him working, the Hulu and me on my iPad at the same time. Time will tell.

Why would you have directv if you could get cable? Directv is expensive like you know. My parents have directv because they can’t get cable.

 

[tvguy]

There have been threads debating this before.

Satellite is already dead. The satellite companies know it, their subscribers have not figured it out yet.

Cable will survive but only as a means to provide data service.

Telcos will survive but only as a means to provide data service.

Cellular networks will grow to the point that they provide the last mile internet for areas that are cost prohibitive to lay fiber, copper, or coax.

Of course there will be people who hate change and cling to the old keeping bits and pieces of the cable system going but they will be the minority in 10 to 15 years. Just like the minority that still cling to their land lines.

At that point people will suddenly realize they are paying 10x as much for content as the previous generation.

I'm not sure what is dead, what is dying, and what is on the comeback. My wife and I both work for major TV station groups whose corporate leadership felt "over the air" was dead. Now they are spending millions to beef up OTA. So I'd say, it's too soon to county anything out.

 

[kdonnel]

Why would you have directv if you could get cable? Directv is expensive like you know. My parents have directv because they can’t get cable.

I had DirecTV instead of Comcast years ago because Comcast was measurable worse then DirectTV. Comcast had ancient technology in the set top boxes and daily hour long outages.

You can't just get anyones recommendation for TV or internet provider. Just because Comcast or Charter or at&t or Verizon is great where you live does not mean it is great where someone else lives. Could even just be the difference between being on the left side or right side of the street and the quality of service.

 

[tvguy]

Doesn’t work everywhere.

Like I just posted, TV stations are spending millions to make sure you can receive their signal over the air on rabbit ears. Many places that lost signal with the digital conversion in 2015, and now stations are scrambling to add translators, boost transmission power, and replace existing transmitters. My station just put in a translator, took almost 4 years to get corporate approval, FCC approval and get the equipment built, delivered and installed.

 

[kdonnel]

I'm not sure what is dead, what is dying, and what is on the comeback. My wife and I both work for major TV station groups whose corporate leadership felt "over the air" was dead. Now they are spending millions to beef up OTA. So I'd say, it's too soon to county anything out.

Follow the investment dollars.

Telcos are investing $0 in their legacy copper plant. All their investment dollars are doing to Cellular and providing data circuits.

Dish is all wrapped up in the Sprint/Tmobile merger. If it goes forward Dish will emerge as the 4th Cellular provider. All their investment for years has gone towards buying spectrum not to buying new satellites.

Comcast is pouring money into creating an NBC/Universal streaming service, not on improving their cable TV offerings.

Disney is pouring money into Disney+ original content. Despite having a massive existing content catalog they are creating shows and are spending theatrical movie quantities of money on the streaming content.

OTA is getting a boost because of streaming / cord cutting.

There is always a chance that Cable will reinvent themselves but the current companies do not seem to be that innovative.

 

[luvsJack]

Like I just posted, TV stations are spending millions to make sure you can receive their signal over the air on rabbit ears. Many places that lost signal with the digital conversion in 2015, and now stations are scrambling to add translators, boost transmission power, and replace existing transmitters. My station just put in a translator, took almost 4 years to get corporate approval, FCC approval and get the equipment built, delivered and installed.

Maybe so but I have an antenna. Live in the woods way out in the country. Doesn’t pick up squat. We try one every year so we would have it for hurricanes and such when Direct gets knocked out.

 

[wgeo]

Like I just posted, TV stations are spending millions to make sure you can receive their signal over the air on rabbit ears. Many places that lost signal with the digital conversion in 2015, and now stations are scrambling to add translators, boost transmission power, and replace existing transmitters. My station just put in a translator, took almost 4 years to get corporate approval, FCC approval and get the equipment built, delivered and installed.

Could you have a little chat with the tv stations in my area? Reception here is mediocre at best. Better than nothing for sure - but tons of lost signals and pixalation.

 

[wgeo]

Well, we are giving Hulu a try.

We bought a Roku stick yesterday and got a 7-day free trial with Hulu so started that last night.

We are getting the channels we watch most on DirecTV plus locals. If we continue the service it will be $44.99/month. Way less expensive than $151 each month that we are paying for DirecTV.

DH finally got a bit of a refund from DirecTV, or rather AT&T, of $25 off our next bill and another $10 off the next one. Probably won’t wait around for that second one as I imagine we will be cutting the cord with DirecTV within a few days.

So far the internet seems to be handling the streaming and both of us on our iPads at the same time. DH works from home a lot on the computer so he is anxious to see how it goes with him working, the Hulu and me on my iPad at the same time. Time will tell.

Best of luck, that is a huge money savings. For what it's worth, our internet speed is not particularly high - we usually get about 35 Mbps (even though we are promised more) and we usually have 4computers, music streaming on a couple of phones and the tv streaming at once and it's just fine.

 

[MIGrandma]

Why would you have directv if you could get cable? Directv is expensive like you know. My parents have directv because they can’t get cable.

We can’t get cable out here in the country. My Mom lived in town and had Charter service, it went out often. Wouldn’t even want that if we could get it.

 

[sam_gordon]

Each?

I get 6 OTA channels with my TV package. If that is costing them $6 to $12 per month per subscriber what about the 18 sports only channels I get? And the 52 other news, weather, home improvement, and movie channels? I only pay $50 a month including taxes and fees.

It has to be much less the $1-$2 per month.

For some channels it has to be in the $1 or less per year range.

Yes, each (for the "Big 4"... ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX). PBS is $0. "Subchannels" (CW, Grit, etc) are probably close to $0. ESPN is around $7/month I believe (I know it's more than $5).

Satellite is already dead. The satellite companies know it, their subscribers have not figured it out yet.

Sort of like how "newspapers are dead"? "Terrestrial radio is dead"? There are many parts of the country where satellite is the ONLY way to reach them... whether for television or internet (and satellite internet is not a good solution for streaming).

Like I just posted, TV stations are spending millions to make sure you can receive their signal over the air on rabbit ears. Many places that lost signal with the digital conversion in 2015, and now stations are scrambling to add translators, boost transmission power, and replace existing transmitters. My station just put in a translator, took almost 4 years to get corporate approval, FCC approval and get the equipment built, delivered and installed.

Please don't take what ONE station is doing and equate it to multiple (or even anywhere NEAR a majority) stations.

 

[kdonnel]

All those with OTA reception problems, are you using the right antenna?

Since the migration to DTV the majority of OTA stations are broadcasting on UHF channels. Rabbit ears are VHF. That old bowtie that clipped onto the rabbit ears is UHF.

Is your antenna high enough? It can make a huge difference.

Is your antenna located outside? Regular building materials block a lot of signal.

I have an older version of this in my attic.

https://www.amazon.com/Element-Bowtie-Indoor-Outdoor-Antenna/dp/B00C4XVOOC
I am 60 miles from the broadcast antennas and get great reception. If did take some work to find the right spot in the attic. In the first place tried I did not get my CBS station. Had to move the antenna a foot to the left and raise it 2 inches.