& cplSiteName &
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View        ADD A COMMENT
Kelsey Ziser
Kelsey Ziser
7/31/2019 | 10:56:47 AM
Re: Branding Debacle
Clearly the answer to the branding question is "42." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aboZctrHfK8
Jeff Baumgartner
Jeff Baumgartner
7/31/2019 | 8:55:17 AM
Re: Branding Debacle
Speaking of Hitchhiker's, it appears they forgot this lesson. 

 MR.CI Don 't Panic Hitchhiker's Guide Vinyl Decal Sticker | Cars Trucks Walls Laptops Cups | Black | 6.5 inches | KCD841

And it's not clear if anyone there remembered to pack a towel. 
James_B_Crawshaw
James_B_Crawshaw
7/31/2019 | 1:20:44 AM
Re: Branding Debacle
I am reminded of the scene in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy when the marketing executive presents the wheel to the leader of the surviving humans on earth after an apocalype: "We're having a little difficulty there."

"Difficulty?" exclaims Ford (actually not from earth). "Difficulty? What do you mean difficulty? It's the single simplest machine in the entire Universe!"

The marketing executive sours him with a look. "Alright, Mr. Wiseguy, if you're so clever, you tell us what colour it should be."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVkYaZXCl8U
Phil Harvey
Phil Harvey
7/30/2019 | 7:06:53 PM
Re: Branding Debacle
I agree with Jeff in that DirecTV has always meant "live, pay-TV." The AT&T name has never had anything to do with entertainment or video. 

This might be a way of giving them an umbrella brand to stuff all the failed U-verse products into. I'm wondering if they'll be now messaging all U-verse customers and telling them their pay-TV product is now AT&T Whatever.
Jeff Baumgartner
Jeff Baumgartner
7/30/2019 | 4:53:59 PM
Re: Branding Debacle
I'd be in that camp too -- for a TV service of any kind, DirecTV seems like the stronger brand to me (for reasons that escape me, AT&T did not seek my advice on that one). 

Some might say, 'Well,  DirecTV's brand is old and represents old technology (satellite TV)." But I'd counter that it's still a fresh-faced kid in all aspects when put up against the much longer in the tooth brand of AT&T...and people still connect DirecTV with TV service. 

And as DirecTV's satellite TV sub base continues to erode, what exactly did AT&T really end up buying? A dying pay-TV service provider and a brand that it won't put to full use? I can think of better ways to spend tens of billions of dollars. 

And there's still going to be lots of confusion about how AT&T TV Now and AT&T TV will mesh and differ. While AT&T TV Now will mirror what DirecTV Now is today (limited skinny bundles), we still don't know for sure what AT&T TV will be until they launch pricing and packaging.

My guess is that at some point they will wrap it all under the AT&T TV service brand and then present a variety of channel packages -- fat, skinny and everything in between.

But in the meantime they are leaving it up to consumers to solve the riddle on what they can get (or can't get) from this multitude of options.  Given the state of the US pay-TV market, leaving it to consumers to figure it out against a vast array of very solid competitors (both OTT and traditional) sure seems to layer on a bunch of unnecessary  risk. JB 

 
Kelsey Ziser
Kelsey Ziser
7/30/2019 | 3:13:31 PM
Branding Debacle
I agree w/Colin Dixon - the DirecTV brand carries a lot of weight. Why change it? Also I think that's weird to refer to the premium package as the "workhorse." Whatever...as long as I can keep watching Bravo TV until I die.


Featured Video
Upcoming Live Events
October 22, 2019, Los Angeles, CA
November 5, 2019, London, England
November 7, 2019, London, UK
November 14, 2019, Maritim Hotel, Berlin
December 3-5, 2019, Vienna, Austria
December 3, 2019, New York, New York
March 16-18, 2020, Embassy Suites, Denver, Colorado
May 18-20, 2020, Irving Convention Center, Dallas, TX
All Upcoming Live Events