> While most of the industry is trying to lure cost-conscious consumers by offering cheaper packages with fewer channels, Denver-based Layer3 has gone in the opposite direction. It sells an online-TV subscription with hundreds of channels that starts at $75 a month. Layer3 is betting there’s a market for consumers who are willing to pay a premium for TV that is delivered in high definition and is easier to navigate.<p>I don’t see how T-Mo succeeds at that price point when streaming w/sports + Netflix or Hulu is about half that cost.
This is interesting as it presents T-Mobile with three new areas to make money in, existing license agreements, OTT video delivery, and the existing wireline infrastructure that Layer3 says they have. They saw Comcast get into their game, so they're going to get into theirs.
> a TV service that lets you watch "what you want, when you want, where you want"<p>I hope this means full on-demand and not the half-assed cable/satellite game of a broadcasting model with a DVR tacked on. I didn't become a cord cutter for the sake of a lower bill, but because I was spoiled by DVD box sets that I can (re)watch anytime at my own pace. Traditional channels are just grating to me now, and I have no idea why that model should be imposed on IP-based services.
Why didn’t they buy Dish which includes Sling TV.
And a lot more spectrum?<p>I’m an ATT subscriber and with our data plan Direct TV Now is offered for a small added fee. GreAt svc and it allowed two family members to ditch their Comcast tv svc.<p>No Brainer other wireless carriers will follow.
I think the title here should be updated to reflect that they're explicitly purchasing Layer3 TV, not the networking company that most people are probably assuming the headline is referring to.