Time Warner Deal Aftermath: AT&T Is About To Give Free TV To Its Wireless Customers

AT&T completed its $85 billion purchase of Time Warner yesterday and we're already starting to see some exclusive deals offered to its customers. CNBC reports that the company "will be launching a 'very, very skinny bundle' of television programming free to its mobile customers." From the report: "We will be launching, and you're going to hear more about this next week, a product called 'AT&T Watch TV,'" Chairman and CEO Randall Stephenson said on CNBC's "Squawk Box." "It will be the Turner content. It will not have sports. It'll be entertainment-centered." AT&T's unlimited wireless customers will get the service for free, Stephenson said, "or you can buy it for $15 a month on any platform." The service will be ad-supported, and AT&T will be ramping up an advertising platform, he said. He added that the company expects in coming weeks to make smaller acquisitions to enable those ad efforts. CNBC is also reporting that Time Warner is changing its name to WarnerMedia, and Turner Broadcasting CEO John Martin is departing the company.

Re:

[atrex]

Also let us scoop up extra cash from the Ads we can get you to watch, as well as get you invested in our exclusive programming so that you keep coming back for more.

Re:

[ole_timer]

you're free to get your phone elsewhere if you don't like at&t

Re:

[ole_timer]

exactly

Like Netflix, only twice as much and half as good

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

>> AT&T Watch TV - $15 a month - ad-supported

Just like Netflix, only twice as much and half as good, plus you have to watch ads.

Seems like a winner to me!

Re:

[ole_timer]

for the free to at&t customers, OR you can pay $15/mo. you should buy a T-Mobile phone...

No Sports... so... why?

[Dallas May]

Sure, I get that not everyone enjoys sports, that's fine. I have no issue with that.

But my question is, if there are no sports, who cares? I thought sports were basically the only reason left for anyone to not cut the cord.

Re:

[JackieBrown]

Cable news?

And some people (not me) enjoy channel surfing.

Re:

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

>> channel surfing

Might as well start using Facebook again and scroll my "feed" then, since that appears to be half videos no one cares about these days.

>> cable news

If you've been on the road for any part of your career, just the sight of a USA Today newspaper, CNN on a TV or anything Wolfgang Puck can ruin your day. (Obligatory explanation: that's most of what you'll see in hotels or in airports.)

Re:

[easyTree]

Isn't mainstream news just repackaged twitter posts?

Re:

[easyTree]

Oh, and out and out lies.

Re:

[JackieBrown]

It feels like that nowadays doesn't it?

The number of times the press uses twitter to justify whatever outage it wants to peruse is amazing especially after all the evidence of fake bots used by many social groups to amplify their own outrage.

Er mer freakin' gerd!

[b0s0z0ku]

Er mer freakin' gerd! They're offering something that's available to anyone over the air, with a Mohu HDTV antenna, for "free." Frankly, I'd rather have the cell plan be $5 per month cheaper.

Re:

[larryjoeb]

Er mer freakin' gerd! They're offering something that's available to anyone over the air, with a Mohu HDTV antenna, for "free."

Well, the short quote from the article was "It will be the Turner content. It will not have sports. It'll be entertainment-centered." So, it will include non-over-the-air channels, and it will not include sports. Of course, that's sort of contradictory. If Turner content includes TNT and TBS, then it will either include NBA games or those programs will be blacked out. It it did include sports, then I would consider canceling Sling TV and switching to AT&T.

I can bet what the content will be

[FudRucker]

when i tried DirecTV (owned by AT&T) they did not tell me that more than half the channels are spammy home shopping channels, i canceled in less than a month, so i bet their free TV will be served with even more spammy TV viewing, TV is terrible, i refuse to watch it because of the spammy advertising, i refuse to allow any corporation to turn any of my gadgets in to a platform for advertising

Re:

[antdude]

But did they have all the channels you wanted?

Really?

[DontBeAMoran]

...you can buy it for $15 a month on any platform.

Here's my $15. By the way, my platform is an old Nintendo DSi. Make it work or I'll see you in court for false advertising.

$15/mo with ads?

[OneHundredAndTen]

Are they crazy and/or stupid, or perhaps under the false impression that this still is the 20th century?

Re:

[ole_timer]

did you not read the OR; it's free OR you can pay?

Re:

[AlanBDee]

It's free for AT&T customers OR you can buy it for $15. It will have ads either way. It kind of reminds of the American cars of the early 80's; they were still crap but got better gas millage like the Japanese competition. Eventually, they will realize that the subscription and advertisement gravy train has left the station.

Re:

[sarren1901]

You have to be a customer to get it for free, so it's not really free. Sure, I get that the bill isn't going to go up and a subscriber would get additional benefits but they are still paying every month.

My cable company recently raised the download speeds, as if I can tell the difference between 50mb and 100mb 99.99% of the time. Most of the time, my download speed is not the limiting factor but rather the server I'm requesting from that has the slow down. They did this without changing my Internet bill. Ir

Re: It sucks they can give away things free

[triffid_98]

If his Trumpiness were a eunich He wouldn't have paid all that cash/hush money for sex workers and russian mail order brides

...It's the year 2018, can you all please just get over that Hillary lost already? I'm not saying she personally murdered people in Bengazi or any of that Fox News garbage but she had an opportunity to explain what her plan for the next 8 years was and...literally nothing. She was expecting a "freebie" since her opponent was a mysogonistic troll with tiny hands and I'm sorry sunshine,

Finally

[fahrbot-bot]

It will not have sports. It'll be entertainment-centered.

Someone acknowledges that sports are not entertaining.

Re:

[easyTree]

Sport may be entertaining if you're a participant which you can do for free.

I see the options as:
  * Lose the cardio benefit; sit on your ass; pay; lose ability to have an impact on the outcome -OR-
  * Take part in sport or indeed standard exercise yourself

Not clear why there's apparent difficulty in making the 'right' choice.

Re: Finally

[triffid_98]

That's patently unfair...what if you're a closeted pedophile watching Olympic women's gymnastics or a closeted gay guy watching Olympic male wrestling? If you haven't yet discovered the power of the internets I can see how that would be right up your..alley.

Free?

[easyTree]

You're going to have to do better than that!

$150/hour should do it.

Re: And nothing of value was gained,

[triffid_98]

Okay rose colored glasses guy. You do know the unpopular shows aren't on Hallmark (or whichever old people channel you watch) because they were terrible right?

While there has been some blatantly terrible television in the last 15 years the power of the internet is making it way better. Your choice is no longer "The Apprentice" or "Survivor" season 15, Amazon and Netflix will greenlight pretty much any crazy thing you want to pitch. While there are plenty of terrible ones there are also plenty of good one