U100 drops Fox News... Bad Move AT&T

[futuresq1]

what a bad move. so the market will respond. i dislike transparent disregard for the consumer. I will go elsewhere and take all my business with me, including my office system. I do not do business with people like this. you shouldn't either. suddenly fox is not part of my subscription, no notice, no chance to change, just pssst, gone. well same here. I am gone as well.

[gavainm]

I just switched to U-Verse about 6 months ago from Dish because every time the wind blew our service would drop.  Now U-Verse is dropping the only conservative leaning news network in an election year.  Why do I even bother?  I may just drop all these toolboxes and go with Hulu+ and Netflix.  I can stream my news on my computer or Roku (yes, Fox does understand marketing and is available that way for FREE).  It just seems a little too coincidental that the Communist News Network, Headcase News, and MSLSD all stay in U100, but Fox gets pushed to a higher tier 4 months before the presidential election (and just weeks before the RNC convention).  

I would have bought a higher tier from the beginning if the value proposition was there.  It's not worth the extra cash to get one or two more channels that you want.  And another thing ... quit advertising "100+ channels" when in reality 40% of those channels (or more) are shopping channels.  Those don't count.  Only count the channels with actual PROGRAMMING to watch, not washed up former celebrities and unknowns trying to hack their latest Ronco device.

I am disappointed.  I have about had it with all you worthless "entertainment" providers.  You keep doing dumb crap like this and you won't just lose a few disgruntled customers, you will have a full tilt rebellion on your hands.  We're only about 6 months to a year away from mass dispersion of Internet enabled TVs.  What do you think will happen to cable providers then? 

[gamegurou]

You all do realize that the Fox News change was supposed to be implemented on 1/1/2012, right? You should have received an email notifying you of the changes.

[dwinth]

---

futuresq1 wrote:
me too. I am out of here. i turned on fox news tonight and suddenly it is gone. I am done. researching next provider immediately--all the services I take==uverse, land line, modem. psssssst. dpne with this

---

Obviously you do not really care about watching Fox News Channel since you just found yesterday (June 19, 2012) that it was gone from your U-100 program when in reality it was removed on January 1, 2012.

If Fox News Channel is that important to you, I do not think the difference in cost between U-100 and U-200 is that great. Someone, please, post the difference in cost between the two levels so that futuresq1 can make a proper decision.

If you do decide to change your television provider, I do not see a need to disrupt everything, and change land lines, cell phones, internet, etc. To me, that is a lot more disruptive and harder to change, then just changing television providers. However, that is your decision.

I hope you respond to the posts here to show that you are not a One (or in your case a Two) and Done poster.

---

Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.

[Pushfoot]

Dwinth wrote: "Obviously you do not really care about watching Fox News Channel since you just found yesterday (June 19, 2012) that it was gone from your U-100 program when in reality it was removed on January 1, 2012."

Really, Dwinth?  You don't see a sudden spike in interest in this forum topic and think, "Huh.  Some people got to keep Fox News longer than others?"  Instead you assume the person who says it suddenly is gone has been oblivious for 5 1/2 months?  Come on, I thought you were smarter than that.

Some of us were lucky, I guess, and got to keep the Fox News Channel until June.  I was watching FNC -- I think it was the day before yesterday -- when the screen went black.  Since we've been having some odd service blackouts for the past week, I didn't think much of it (other than to curse AT&T under my breath.)  Then today I went to the channel and saw the message that I am not subscribed to it.  Funny, the AT&T website still shows it as part of my channel line-up, "as of June 20, 2012."

I have gone back through my e-mail messages looking for the warning e-mail message people on this forum (which I only found today) said I should have received, but I sure didn't see one.  I had no idea FNC was being removed from my channel line-up.  And yes, I was a frequent FNC viewer -- not necessarily every day, but almost.

I probably would have just remained a new lurker, reading the comments and resigning myself to a life without FNC, but your comment pushed my buttons.  Oh, and since U-verse is a bundle (in my case, including my land line, my internet, and my television) letting it go would mean changing all those things.

[texasguy37 ACE - Champion]

---

Pushfoot wrote:

Then today I went to the channel and saw the message that I am not subscribed to it.  Funny, the AT&T website still shows it as part of my channel line-up, "as of June 20, 2012."

---

Which website do you see that information?  The channel lineup websites do not show Fox News in the U100 Package:

https://uma.att.com/general/201-AMSS-X-DMA2-POPUP.html

http://www.att.com/u-verse/shop/channel-lineup.jsp

By the way, the U100 package has been discontinued and is no longer available to new customers.

[dwinth]

---

Pushfoot wrote:

Dwinth wrote: "Obviously you do not really care about watching Fox News Channel since you just found yesterday (June 19, 2012) that it was gone from your U-100 program when in reality it was removed on January 1, 2012."

Really, Dwinth?  You don't see a sudden spike in interest in this forum topic and think, "Huh.  Some people got to keep Fox News longer than others?"  Instead you assume the person who says it suddenly is gone has been oblivious for 5 1/2 months?  Come on, I thought you were smarter than that.

Some of us were lucky, I guess, and got to keep the Fox News Channel until June.  I was watching FNC -- I think it was the day before yesterday -- when the screen went black.  Since we've been having some odd service blackouts for the past week, I didn't think much of it (other than to curse AT&T under my breath.)  Then today I went to the channel and saw the message that I am not subscribed to it.  Funny, the AT&T website still shows it as part of my channel line-up, "as of June 20, 2012."

I have gone back through my e-mail messages looking for the warning e-mail message people on this forum (which I only found today) said I should have received, but I sure didn't see one.  I had no idea FNC was being removed from my channel line-up.  And yes, I was a frequent FNC viewer -- not necessarily every day, but almost.

I probably would have just remained a new lurker, reading the comments and resigning myself to a life without FNC, but your comment pushed my buttons.  Oh, and since U-verse is a bundle (in my case, including my land line, my internet, and my television) letting it go would mean changing all those things.

---

I was under the impression that Fox News was pulled from the U-100 level on January 1, 2012. That is very strange that some people were able to keep it, and while others were not able to keep it. You were lucky to have kept it that long.

[CMM1959]

I just got off the phone with the technical group at AT&T.  I live in suburban Chicago.  I have had a 100 series U-Verse TV package for about 5 years.  I pay $59.00/mo, $80.00/mo with receiver fees.  As of Monday, they have dropped FOX News from this package.  You can still get CNN and CNBC.  According to the agent, only FOX was dropped.  When I asked if I missed correspondence about this, he said no.... they just received a blast about this change this week.  Interesting that only FOX has been dropped.  I will be comparing prices tomorrow, because their offices closed at 6:00pm, and changing to another carrier.  

Interesting that the ONLY change is FOX. 

[rahotz]

Same here in Houston, TX!!

[dwinth]

Can someone explain the situation concerning the U-100 level and Fox News Channel. I was under the impression that Fox News Channel was dropped from the U-100 level as of January 1, 2012.

Today there are U-100 posters who are saying that they lost Fox News Channel as of today.

Did some U-100 people lose Fox News Channel as of January 1 and others lost it as of today? How did AT&T determine who lost it as of January 1 or as of today? This situation seems very confusing.

---

Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.

[texasguy37 ACE - Champion]

It may have been a mistake that some with U100 were still receiving Fox News.  The message below was posted on the U-verse Facebook page in response to a question from a customer:

 Hey Bruno, Fox News Channel moved from U100 to U200 in January. A great way to stay up to date on any programming changes on U-verse is to check out http://uverse.us/ProgramChanges. Hope this helps!

http://www.facebook.com/uverse/posts/462107897134438?comment_id=5785655&offset=0&total_comments=3

[dwinth]

---

texasguy37 wrote:

It may have been a mistake that some with U100 were still receiving Fox News.  The message below was posted on the U-verse Facebook page in response to a question from a customer:

 Hey Bruno, Fox News Channel moved from U100 to U200 in January. A great way to stay up to date on any programming changes on U-verse is to check out http://uverse.us/ProgramChanges. Hope this helps!

http://www.facebook.com/uverse/posts/462107897134438?comment_id=5785655&offset=0&total_comments=3

---

Thank you, Texasguy. It must have been a LARGE mistake on AT&T's part that all of these U-100 people were still getting Fox News Channel when they should not have as of January 1, 2012.

I should send you some New York strip sirloins to go with all of your steak knives.

[texasguy37 ACE - Champion]

[SomeJoe7777 ACE - Geek]

AT&T has made this sort of mistake before. I believe when they first rolled out the NFL RedZone channel, there was a 1-month free preview. However, Houston accidentally received the RedZone channel even if you were not subscribed to the HD premium tier for several weeks afterwards before it was actually turned off.

[texasguy37 ACE - Champion]

Good point, SomeJoe.  I remember that.  I also remember that for some strange reason those who had been receiving the NFL RedZone Channel for free, although others were paying for it, were highly upset when it was taken away.

[galebolton]

Shame on UVerse for taking Fox News off my plan without any notice!! I have to pay $13.00 a month extra to get Fox!! but CNN and msnbc and all the other liberal stations are still on my plan. I guess AT&T are part of the liberal media group trying to keep the conservative news off. I will be checking with another company today to find out about another plan. I have At&T for my phone, cell phone, TV, and Internet, but NO MORE!!!

[snowcon]

I lost FNC just 2 days ago. called customer service and told me it was removed on 6/18/12 from U-100 and asking me to if i'd like to upgrade to U-200. I'm in California. We were not informed, they just removed it. They can remove all the spanish channels from my package if they like but not FNC. I'm not upgrading either... I'm thinking of Dish + TWC internet. If not Dish, TWC TV was better from my experience.

[snowcon]

correction: Direct TV not Dish... i'm getting confused searching

[SomeJoe7777 ACE - Geek]

---

galebolton wrote:
Shame on UVerse for taking Fox News off my plan without any notice!! I have to pay $13.00 a month extra to get Fox!! but CNN and msnbc and all the other liberal stations are still on my plan. I guess AT&T are part of the liberal media group trying to keep the conservative news off. I will be checking with another company today to find out about another plan. I have At&T for my phone, cell phone, TV, and Internet, but NO MORE!!!

---

Did it ever occur to you that FOX might have demanded more money for the channel, forcing AT&T to move it to a higher package to compensate?  Whereas other channels might have lower fees, enabling them to be on a lower package?

Remember that just like any other for-profit company, FOX will attempt to maximize revenue.  If a huge number of people desperately want their channel, they can charge more for it, and that cost will fall on you.  Isn't that what conservatives always want -- for the market forces to be in full play?  Funny how you always seem to forget that when it's your wallet that has to open.

[snowcon]

Even if FOX demanded more money, other companies offer them at their lower packages.... Now if all these other companies moves FOX to a higher package like this, then probably their demand is significant enough

[texasguy37 ACE - Champion]

---

snowcon wrote:

Even if FOX demanded more money, other companies offer them at their lower packages.... Now if all these other companies moves FOX to a higher package like this, then probably their demand is significant enough

---

So, what's your point?  TV providers do no have the same package offerings.  U-verse offers some channels in lower tier packages that other TV providers offer in higher tier packages.  It would make no sense to expect the TV providers to be cookie cut images of each other.  

U-verse has the right to add, remove or transfer channels from and between packages.  You have the right to accept those changes or switch to a different provider who gives you what you need.  Arguing about this on the forum with other customers will not change that.

[dgw]

Business case and unintended consequences.  Business case:  Negotiations by ATT programming negotiators with News Corp or Fox News wherein Fox asked for more, ATT said if you do, we'll bump you off of basic package charge a premium.

Unintended consequences:

Fox, who owns cable news ratings leadership will have a portion of their ratings drop because the ATT basic  customers can no longer be included in their ratings.  Advertising revenues reflect lower viewership.

ATT.  Creates normal discontent among loyal Fox viewership when a package is changed, but also creates the perception that in a polarized political environment, during an election year, a week before a major Supreme Court decision ATT has decided to eliminate one political point of view while leaving the others intact.  Or, more accurately, creates the perception that they are charging a premium for one political point of view.  Negotiators did not take into consideration that motivated researchers will seek out names of senior ATT leadership to turn what is a lower level business decision into a corporate political decision, thereby affecting brand goodwill and shareholder perception of whether to continue to invest.

[texasguy37 ACE - Champion]

---

dgw wrote:

ATT.  Creates normal discontent among loyal Fox viewership when a package is changed, but also creates the perception that in a polarized political environment, during an election year, a week before a major Supreme Court decision ATT has decided to eliminate one political point of view while leaving the others intact.  Or, more accurately, creates the perception that they are charging a premium for one political point of view.  Negotiators did not take into consideration that motivated researchers will seek out names of senior ATT leadership to turn what is a lower level business decision into a corporate political decision, thereby affecting brand goodwill and shareholder perception of whether to continue to invest.

---

Your logic is flawed.  Negotiations involve two parties who much come to a mutual agreement. One party cannot unilaterally imposed it's wishes on the other.  In this case the parties are the TV provider (AT&T) and the channel owner (News Corp).  The TV provider and the channel owner must agree on the tier where a channel is placed because the carriage fee is paid per subscriber.  Thus, the tier placement determines how much money the TV provider must pay to to the channel owner.

Take your complaints to New Corp who negotiated the new deal with AT&T.

[dgw]

Thank you for correcting my logic - and for illustrating my point in the process.  My point was not a business one concerning the process of negotiating programming packages.  My point rather is that everyone has a lens through which these decisions are viewed.  Yours, for example, is as an apologist for the carrier, and so the larger point of unintended consequenses was not what you responded to.  Likewise, the lunchbucket UVerse customer and FoxNews consumer has a lens, which is why FoxNews is their station of choice.  The decision may have been a good one from the perspective of both negotiating parties.  Some customers, almost all of them outside of our waxing eloquent on this forum, will see the decision (wrongly) as a political one, eliminating one point of view while leaving the opposing point of view - during a highly charged election year.  The risk management team at ATT probably did not foresee a backlash of a political nature.  It may not happen, but in this era of seeking out corporate officers for criticism based on political perceptions, it is a potential unintended consequence which  could affect the ATT brand perception and prove a major distraction to the normal business flow of the company.  I'm not a forum guy and so I've said what I wanted and will move on with life now.