AT&T Follows Time Warner Acquisition With Reveal of Live 'WatchTV' Service and New Unlimited Phone Plans

One week after completing its acquisition of Time Warner, AT&T today announced the impending launch of an all-new live TV service called "WatchTV," which unsurprisingly includes many channels under the Time Warner umbrella (via Engadget). This appears to be the service not focused on sports that AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson said in April would be coming very soon.

The announcement came alongside AT&T's reveal of two new unlimited wireless plans, called "AT&T Unlimited &More" and "AT&T Unlimited &More Premium." WatchTV will be directly tied into these cellular plans, offering plan subscribers access to the TV service at no additional cost.

The service includes 30+ live channels, over 15,000 TV shows and movies on demand, and will be available on "virtually every" smartphone, tablet, browser, and streaming device. Subscribers to &More Premium will be able to add one of several premium services for no extra charge: HBO, SHOWTIME, Cinemax, Starz, Amazon Music Unlimited, Pandora Premium, or VRV.

Here's the full list of channels available on WatchTV at launch:

A&E
AMC
Animal Planet
Audience
BBC World News
BBC America
Boomerang
Cartoon Network
CNN
Discovery
Food Network
FYI
Hallmark Channel
Hallmark Movies & Mysteries
HGTV
History

HLN
IFC
Investigation Discovery
Lifetime
Lifetime Movies
OWN
Sundance TV
TBS
TCM
TLC
TNT
TRU TV
Velocity
Viceland
WE TV

Channels coming soon after launch include:

BET
Comedy Central
MTV 2
Nicktoons
Teennick
VH1

The &More Premium plan (starting at $80/month for an individual line) offers WatchTV, a premium service add-on, 15GB of high-speed tethering, access to 1080p high definition video, and a $15 monthly credit to put towards DirecTV, DirecTV Now, or U-verse TV, similar to the carrier's current unlimited plans. On the lower tier, &More (starting at $70/month) offers WatchTV, a $15 monthly credit to DirecTV Now, access to 480p video, and up to 4G LTE unlimited data.

AT&T didn't give many other details about the new unlimited plans, but said that more information will be coming when they launch, which is expected sometime next week. Additionally, the company confirmed that WatchTV will be available as a $15/month standalone live TV streaming service for those not on an AT&T unlimited cellular plan, and those details will also come at a later time.

Tags: AT&T, Time Warner

Top Rated Comments

wsuschmitt

109 months ago

With net neutrality gone, they can prioritize THEIR streaming service over anyone else's and have an unfair competitive advantage on their own network! AT&T customers can stream the AT&T service, but Netflix and Hulu might not work as well...

Score: 8 Votes (Like | Disagree)

Braderunner

109 months ago

I have zero interest in live tv. Even if it's free. And, I will never go back to AT&T.
When I read the headline, I saw: But 1 turd, get 1 turd free.
No thanks. They can keep their crap. :cool:

Score: 7 Votes (Like | Disagree)

TimUSCA

109 months ago

With net neutrality gone, they can prioritize THEIR streaming service over anyone else's and have an unfair competitive advantage on their own network! AT&T customers can stream the AT&T service, but Netflix and Hulu might not work as well...

This is the literal definition of FUD. You're worrying about things that a company might possibly maybe do just because they can.

Yes, they can do it. Let's not freak out unless they do though. They still have to compete with other carriers, so just because they can doesn't mean it's a smart business move.

Score: 6 Votes (Like | Disagree)

malcolmman89

109 months ago

It is getting so tiresome to hear carriers throwing around the term "Unlimited" like they do, when in reality there are still data caps on high-speed data. If you use more data than they want you to, your connection is slowed to the speed of a fax machine. I feel like it is just a word used to lure unsuspecting customers, when in reality there are more strings attached than ever before.

Score: 6 Votes (Like | Disagree)

Mac 128

109 months ago

I agree, which is why I'm with PS Vue. But the question was how how it compared to the new WatchTV.
[doublepost=1529592604][/doublepost]
If you're going make ridiculous comparisons, then just don't contribute. There are obviously situations where government interference is a good thing and where it's a bad thing, otherwise we'd be a dictatorship since the government obviously knows what's best for everyone.

Besides, I never even said I was against NN. I am simply pointing out that there's no need to freak out until we're given a reason. There's a strong argument to be made that we were fine before NN was a thing for a very short period of time.

Then perhaps you shouldn’t contribute either, if you don’t care for gross simplifications of the issue. There are plenty of simple comparisons involving public safety where simple barriers thought unnecessary were erected after the first injury. Public regulations are designed to prevent such potential injuries before they occur, in situations where they might reasonably occur, if unlikely. Simply because no one ever fell off a ledge before the barrier was erected is not rationale enough to assume one was not necessary to prevent future injuries. Just because we were fine before NN doesn’t mean we should ignore the opportunity for abuse based on predictable, historical, business practices alone, however unlikely we hope it may be. A simple precautionary barrier will prevent public injury before the failure to self regulate occurs — and history all but guarantees it will.

The irony is you’ve gone full speed into a head-on crash into FUD, by implying NN regulations constitutes “a dictatorship”, to say nothing of the hyperbole that “the government obviously knows what’s best for everyone” by legislating regulation. Last I checked, at least in the US, the government reflects the will of the people who elect representatives to look out for their concerns, which are expressed by votes and lobbying. In the case of NN, the regulation was repealed after public opinion was overwhelmingly rejected by those in power, which is literally the definition of “dictatorship”.

Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)

deeddawg

109 months ago

With net neutrality gone, they can prioritize THEIR streaming service over anyone else's and have an unfair competitive advantage on their own network! AT&T customers can stream the AT&T service, but Netflix and Hulu might not work as well...

Yes, it's awful how we've returned to the hellacious Internet conditions that existed before February 2015.

Remember how the Internet barely worked, and no new services or companies ever come into existence in the lawless period from 1990 to 2015?

Woe is us. We are lost.

[doublepost=1529588748][/doublepost]

And DTVN is still complete garbage. I tried it for a week, ultimately decided to go with Sling for my live TV needs. Sling has its drawbacks, but at least it works. DTVN was nothing but buffering, app crashes, and a half-assed DVR that was full of bugs.

Odd that you've had that experience when DTVN works just fine for myself and many others.

We use it as our primary live-tv source, sharing the account between home and our vacation place.

No it's not perfect, but for us it works fine for the most part and isn't at all what your description suggests.

Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)

Read All Comments