Frustrated by Uverse refusal to add sub-channels

Teacher

Frustrated by Uverse refusal to add sub-channels

Kansas City stations are adding several subchannels each year.  The Competitors are picking up these channels but Uverse has chosen not to.  Sad to see Uverse fall behind.  Seems they are losing their competitive advantage they once had in the Kansas City Market.  Please Explain.

Message 1 of 45 (3,314 Views)
Teacher

Re: Frustrated by Uverse refusal to add sub-channels

I live in the Nashville area and would like to see Uverse pick up the subchannels.

 

We have a good 24 hour local weather channel. On Saturday I tuned in to Uverse Weather  on demand channel. It said the temperature in Nashville was 7 degrees when in reality it was in the 40's. Accu Weather is not reliable.

I'd settle for Local on the 8's!

 

We have a 24 hour newschannel that broadcasts the news plus local talk shows.

 

One channel has a Retro TV subchannel.

 

I see people post that you could get an antenna and attach it to pick up the local channels. Why are we paying big money for cable/subscription television for? Most people want the clear reception it can give us over the added antennas!

Message 2 of 45 (3,000 Views)
ACE - Expert

Re: Frustrated by Uverse refusal to add sub-channels


JaCruTN wrote:

...

 

We have a good 24 hour local weather channel. On Saturday I tuned in to Uverse Weather  on demand channel. It said the temperature in Nashville was 7 degrees when in reality it was in the 40's. Accu Weather is not reliable. 

...


7 degrees Celsius is 44 degrees Fahrenheit.  I believe there is a setting to control which scale temperatures are to be displayed in if you prefer °F to °C.

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.
Message 3 of 45 (2,968 Views)
ACE - Master

Re: Frustrated by Uverse refusal to add sub-channels

[ Edited ]

Slee661 wrote:

Kansas City stations are adding several subchannels each year.  The Competitors are picking up these channels but Uverse has chosen not to.  Sad to see Uverse fall behind.  Seems they are losing their competitive advantage they once had in the Kansas City Market.  Please Explain.


Yeah, me too!  I do not understand the reluctance to carrying them and they may never carry them.  I had an email conversation with the GM of two local stations (WTTV/Fox59), who said that he offered AT&T free equipment, support and so on to get the subchannels on U-Verse and AT&T told him to get lost.

 

One could request the subchannels here but it is automated (i.e. no one reads the individual requests) and I'm not sure how effective it is.

 

Someone will be along directly to tell you that you can get an antenna, coax (and maybe an antenna rotator) to receive the subchannels over the air (OTA).  They will not be able to tell you, however, how to incorporate the U-Verse DVR............ Smiley Tongue

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.
Message 4 of 45 (2,951 Views)
Employee

Re: Frustrated by Uverse refusal to add sub-channels


dhascall wrote:

Slee661 wrote:

Kansas City stations are adding several subchannels each year.  The Competitors are picking up these channels but Uverse has chosen not to.  Sad to see Uverse fall behind.  Seems they are losing their competitive advantage they once had in the Kansas City Market.  Please Explain.


Yeah, me too!  I do not understand the reluctance to carrying them and they may never carry them.  I had an email conversation with the GM of two local stations (WTTV/Fox59), who said that he offered AT&T free equipment, support and so on to get the subchannels on U-Verse and AT&T told him to get lost.

 

One could request the subchannels here but it is automated (i.e. no one reads the individual requests) and I'm not sure how effective it is.

 

Someone will be along directly to tell you that you can get an antenna, coax (and maybe an antenna rotator) to receive the subchannels over the air (OTA).  They will not be able to tell you, however, how to incorporate the U-Verse DVR............ Smiley Tongue




I've seen you post that for years. It is incorrect. Please stop spreading this misinformation.

 

 

 

Employee Contributor*
*I am an AT&T employee and the postings on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent AT&T's position, strategies or opinions.
Message 5 of 45 (2,939 Views)
ACE - Master

Re: Frustrated by Uverse refusal to add sub-channels

[ Edited ]

I haven't been saying that for years. Smiley Indifferent  I have mentioned maybe 3-4 times, that IMHO that link isn't useful.  I was told that the channel names were electronically gathered and an aggregated  spreadsheet is provided to U-Verse managers once per week.  Is that not correct / Do you have any other information?  Thanks.  

 

As a subscriber (and entitled to my opinion), I am not sure of the usefulness of that link.  i.e. if a channel has ever been added by that link or not.

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.
Message 6 of 45 (2,934 Views)
ACE - Expert

Re: Frustrated by Uverse refusal to add sub-channels


dhascall wrote:

...  I was told that the channel names were electronically gathered and an aggregated  spreadsheet is provided to U-Verse managers once per week. ... 

 


People are likely to overlook the word "individual" in your statement to read it as "no one reads those requests."  Which, assuming the U-verse managers actually read the aggregated information, is not true.

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.
Message 7 of 45 (2,917 Views)
ACE - Master

Re: Frustrated by Uverse refusal to add sub-channels


JefferMC wrote:

dhascall wrote:

...  I was told that the channel names were electronically gathered and an aggregated  spreadsheet is provided to U-Verse managers once per week. ... 

 


People are likely to overlook the word "individual" in your statement to read it as "no one reads those requests."  Which, assuming the U-verse managers actually read the aggregated information, is not true.


I believe that managers do look at the aggregated results, however, when it comes to subchannels, in individual cities, the aggrageted results aren't going to amount to much, i.e. "only two people requested MeTV, WTHR 13.3.  I'm not going to pursue that, since only 2 folks out of 5 million subscribers requested it." 

 

Again, it is dhascall's opinion (for whatever it's worth) that the link isn't too useful.

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.
Message 8 of 45 (2,910 Views)

Re: Frustrated by Uverse refusal to add sub-channels

I've had UVerse so long I couldn't even begin to tell you what subchannels are available in the DFW area and to be honest, I don't have enough hours in the day to watch all the shows I record now as it is.  I WAS going to get an antenna and a Boxee Box but when they sold out to Samsung it's not available anymore so that blew that idea out of the water. I was going to use to record the shows the only I watch and not the ones my wife and I watch together.  I would like to see UVerse add more channels as well so the requests to add channel X and Y would stop, but I don't know if that will ever happen.

” Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports … all others are games.”- Ernest Hemingway
Message 9 of 45 (2,870 Views)
Explorer

Re: Frustrated by Uverse refusal to add sub-channels

I, too, am annoyed they don't have any subchannels.  Every Texas Rangers game on Friday night's is shown on a local station's subchannel up here in OKC which U-Verse does not get so I miss out on the Friday night game.  Lame if you ask me.....

Message 10 of 45 (2,836 Views)
Community Support

Re: Frustrated by Uverse refusal to add sub-channels

Although we can't guarantee what channels will or will not be added, you can request channels. Visit here to submit your requests! Smiley Wink

Did a post have a solution that worked for you? Help other people find solutions faster by marking posts that helped you as an "Accepted Solution". Learn about accepted solutions here.

Employee Contributor*
*I am an AT&T employee and the postings on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent AT&T's position, strategies or opinions.
Message 11 of 45 (2,799 Views)
ACE - Master

Re: Frustrated by Uverse refusal to add sub-channels

Smiley Wink

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.
Message 12 of 45 (2,791 Views)
Teacher

Re: Frustrated by Uverse refusal to add sub-channels

ATT is missing the point.  Both Competitors in Kansas City Metro Area are carrying Sub-Channels.  They are not asking their customers to use 1950s Antenna Technology ( kind of insulting).  They are listening to their customers and adding channels.  All I am asking is for ATT to keep up with their compitition.  ATT has been head and sholders above the other companies in KC, But they are a risk of losing their competitive edge.

Message 13 of 45 (2,755 Views)
Teacher

Re: Frustrated by Uverse refusal to add sub-channels

ATT is missing the point. Both Competitors in Kansas City Metro Area are carrying Sub-Channels. They are not asking their customers to use 1950s Antenna Technology ( kind of insulting). They are listening to their customers and adding channels. All I am asking is for ATT to keep up with their competition. ATT has been head and shoulders above the other companies in KC, But they are a risk of losing their competitive edge.
Message 14 of 45 (2,755 Views)
Highlighted
Expert

Re: Frustrated by Uverse refusal to add sub-channels


Slee661 wrote:
ATT is missing the point. Both Competitors in Kansas City Metro Area are carrying Sub-Channels. They are not asking their customers to use 1950s Antenna Technology ( kind of insulting). They are listening to their customers and adding channels. All I am asking is for ATT to keep up with their competition. ATT has been head and shoulders above the other companies in KC, But they are a risk of losing their competitive edge.

U-verse has added a number of channels recently.  I'm sure more than the competitors that  you are referring to.  By the way, using an OTA antenna to pickup free over the air broadcast channels instead of having to pay to view those channels is hardly 1950's technology.

Message 15 of 45 (2,714 Views)
Share this topic
Announcements

Welcome to the AT&T Community Forums!!! Stop by the Community How-To section for tips on how to get started.