Slashdot Mirror


SBC Considering Buying DirecTV

Guppy06 writes "Throwing their hats into a ring that includes News Corporation, Cablevision, and General Electric, this NYT article (yadda yadda yadda) reports that #2 Baby Bell SBC is interested in buying DirecTV. After federal and state anti-trust authorities shot down DirecTV's purchase of EchoStar recently, their purchase by a corporation that already has its own state-mandated telephone monopoly is... "interesting" to say the least. Those of us who dislike government monopolies are left hoping either News or GE wins this one (if a sale even takes place)." One of the other suitors for DirecTV has been Murdoch's Fox.

6 of 233 comments (clear)

  1. Anybody but SBC! by TopShelf · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here in Indiana, we've gotten horrible service from SBC. Over the last 3 years I've probably had about a dozen service calls required for our phone service, all of which were due to their system (nothing wrong inside our house). Their technicians failed to show up when promised, and at one point we had no phone service for over a week (and no, there weren't any unusual circumstances like extensive storm damage in the area). Granted, a satellite system should be less service-intensive, but I'm a happy DirecTV customer who doesn't want to send another dime SBC's way!

    --
    Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
  2. Well, that just about caps off my Monday as crap by CTD · · Score: 5, Funny

    SBC = horrible. Horrible.

    Let's hope FOX is the winner. Yeah I might loose CNN or something, but if SBC gets my DirectTV I'll order Porn for the weekend and end up with soccer or something. :(

    --
    Grimwell - old, cranky, mean, obsessive
  3. Not necessarily a monopoly by 706GL · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Just because SBC operates as a monopoly in many local phone markets does not make the entire firm a monopoly. If it acquired DirecTV it would defiantly have to be a competitive firm as it entered the Cable/Satellite market.

    The real benefit I see to SBC in this is that they want to encourage people to have satellite tv since satellite TV subscribers usually have DSL and not cable modems. They may try and cut you some deal if you sign up for both, a "switch away from your cable company" kind of deal.

    Another weird side not is that I've seen in Fort Worth where SBC provides "cable" service to apartment complexes but their "cable boxes" are really DirecTV receivers and they just have one dish for the entire complex (or area, I'm not sure) and split the signal from it up to all of the apartments.

    --
    ...
  4. I don't have a problem with SBC by vasqzr · · Score: 5, Interesting


    Great service, great support.

    We've got a T1 and ISDN circuit from them

    Their long distance service is horrendously expensive, so we only use them for the circuits.

    McLeod USA used to re-sell the SBC service around here. With them getting in the way, it was horrible. But lately, SBC has been doing 'buy-backs' and we're getting better pricing that McLeod gave us (Which was much better than what SBC originally offered)

    SBC around here used to be Ameritech, and Michigan Bell before that.

  5. Re:DTV Will Need a Few New Satellites by jeaton · · Score: 5, Informative

    1. You do need a new IRD and a triple-LNB dish, but aiming the dish isn't considerably harder than aiming the standard dish.

    2. DirecTV also offers Showtime in HD. You won't get your local stations in HD, but can continue to recieve the standard feed of your local stations. Also, several HD-capable DirecTV IRDs also include a built-in tuner for local OTA HD stations. Add a standard antenna, and you have local stations in HD.

    None of the terrestrial cable systems that I am aware of are currently offering HD signals. AT&T here won't even indicate when or if they will start carrying HD feeds.

    DirecTV has to add additional satellites to add capacity. Local terrestial carriers have to upgrade their distribution networks to add more capacity. Where's the difference?

    I can't comment on Time Warner's quality, but I can on AT&T in this area. AT&T cable has frequent dropouts on many digital channels, and horrible pixelation everywhere. Analog channels are fuzzy and ghosty. My DirecTV picture has never dropped out, even in the worst weather, and pixellation is minimal on everything I watch. AT&T can't compete on price, either. I have a comparable set of channels as my in-laws down the street, yet I pay about $15 less for my service than they do for theirs, even after including the charges I pay for additional recievers (2 at $5 each) - which they would also have to pay in order to recieve digital cable on more than one set (assuming they had more than one TV).

    I'm a happy DirecTV subscriber. I don't yet have HD-DirecTV at home, mostly because I am unwilling to give up my TiVo. Now, if someone builds a box which integrates TiVo service, DirecTV standard and HD tuner, and a local OTA HD tuner, I'll buy it.

  6. Re:When will they get networks on DirecTV? by lambadomy · · Score: 5, Informative

    I work at DirecTV. We really really want to carry local channels in every market, we just can't yet. Every damn day I work on some kind of upgrade aimed at carrying more locals.

    And yes, if enough people in an area petition, they get moved up the list of where we go next...we've don't about the top 50 markets and want to try to do them roughly in order, but we have definitely skipped a few to move to areas with more subscribers/interest.