01-07-2014 2:15 PM
It's not April Fool's. It seems like companies will be able to 'sponsor' certain types of data usage, namely their products and services, so the general customer won't see it coming out of their data plan..
What do you guys think? As I see it:
Many of your favorite sites, google/youtube/amazon/pandora may eventually because 'free' for you to use.
You may inevitablly be able to lower you data plans, since much of it will be 'covered'.
With many people inevitably opting for the 300mb plan, you won't want to visit alternate sites, like vimeo, IHeartRadio, since you won't have the extra data for it.
Short term gain, long term loss?
Then again voters in my area voted to repeal a major education improvement plan because it was going to add 7 cents to property taxes. So maybe for many people, I imagine, it really is just about the bottom line.
Anyways, post your comments and ideas.
01-15-2014 11:14 AM
The main thing that concerns me is that we may get innundated with ads. We will be told that the ads do not use any of our data, so we shouldn't be concerned. I don't want ads on my phone. I'll pay for an app without ads rather than use the free version if it has ads. I'll tolerate the brief ads I see on the likes of YouTube and links to news videos (although I rarely go there on my smartphone), but I don't want to see a steady stream of ads somehow being pushed to my phone.
If I can be assured that continual advertising won't be an issue, I'd be happy to see sponsored data. I get enough advertising pushed through the mail slot in my front door.
01-21-2014 2:22 PM
You're right. I can see companies preloading software, like HP does for example that include ad run programs, maybe even embed ads into the OS home page.
My original line of thought was, what if Pandora, for example got a sponsorship deal for data. How many people would drop spotify or slacker, despite the other being potentially better. Also imagine how much pandora would increase it's ads to keep up with the cost of sponsorship.
Even if other music streaming places got sponsorships also, they'd needs to increase their own ads to keep up.
New music streaming service would have a hard time breaking into the market because of the minimum sponshorship cost, that people would expect.
The first video service that does it would be rolling in it, much like when AT&T got exclusivity rights to the iphone.
If your idea for ads comes true, Maybe there'll be additional discounts for 'sponsored' phones with ads on phones, where the top of every homepage will have a little ad.
01-21-2014 2:52 PM
I sure hope that the new Beats Music streaming service will be covered by sponsored data too!
01-27-2014 7:03 PM
There is no Pro to the consumer for this program.
We're not going to get a break on our bill because we "don't have to pay" for NetStreamCo.
We'd be paying for the ad content (60% of network traffic is now ad content). The advertiser would be paying NetStreamCo. and NetStreamCo. would go up because "they're paying for the ability to stream". And the telco would make money from all 3 sources, which is basically the consumer...
We pay the advertising bill for the advertisers, we pay for the Stream service, we pay for them to be allowed to use ATT's network and we pay ATT.
We pay x$ per month to streaming sites to not have to deal with advertising...
I can't believe H+ gets people to pay a monthly fee...
Definitely won't be a level playing field:
Jon's Movie Stream doesn't have the money to spend like Bob's Super Movie Warehouse.
Jon's isn't going to get charged 5$ a month while Bob's pays 200.
Not counting against our "data cap" isn't a Pro. Data caps are never a pro.
The new Sponsored Data pretty much kills the idea that a data cap is needed.....
I can stream 4billion GB of Netflix and not be charged as long as Netflix pays the monthly/yearly fee?
Michael Powell even stated that caps are "more about pricing fairness vs congestion"..
In May of last year CEO Randall Stephenson told investors that AT&T anticipated reducing expenditures on its network and that data caps were really about charging content providers. He repeated his confidence in AT&T's Network in December.
It'll be like the old cable tv model that telcos are desperately clinging to, except online.
Content providers paying their "fee" for using AT&T's network by advertising.
It's the same thing Fbook does with advertising.
People are leaving that site because of the constant bombardment from advertising, the never ending adding of sweet new features!