02-28-2017 12:53 PM
I am trying to find out how to make a commitment in reference to AT&T wanting to stop there customers from getting WBRC on their contracts.I think that is very unfair.It looks as if money is the main reason for this. Big corporations just want to change THE LITTLE PERSON MORE MONEY and yes we are the ones who end up paying for it. If AT&T take WBRC off Direct-Tv then we will have to look for another carrier.
02-28-2017 1:10 PM
WRBC wants to cahrge more money, which in turn will cost you more money
its in directvs interest to carry them, they dont want the station to go dark.
if it disapears, its the station that stopped the signal
have you contacted them?
tell them to stop being greedy.
02-28-2017 2:28 PM
AT&T/Directv does NOT want to stop carying the channel. Agreement comes up with local affiliate, so they negotiate the next agreement, hopefully before the current one ends. If they are still in talks when the current agreement comes up, the local affiliate can either stay on during the talks, or go "dark" to upset customers to use them as leverage. Only the local affiliate (the channel owner can turn the broadcast off).
Why should AT&T/Directv, and in the end you as the paying customer, give in to a higher cost from a local affiliate that you still can get free over-the-air with antenna as always?
03-01-2017 11:27 AM
03-01-2017 3:17 PM
Most of the time they do get worked out. Unfortunately some locals try to play hardball and hold out for a few days, but Directv has a very good track record for getting them back. I would be patient because switching would not be a true fix as all providers have to go through this as they don't own the channels. So would hate for you to switch and then shortly find out it is that time with the new provider.