AT&T U-verse catching up to Verizon FiOS subscriber base

AT&T U-verse catching up to Verizon FiOS subscriber base

Summary: AT&T could take the lead in the telco TV landscape by the end of 2013 -- albeit it will probably only be a slight lead at best, according to IHS iSuppli.

SHARE:

When it comes to telecommunications providers playing in the TV/video subscription space, Verizon is still considerably leading with its FiOS service. AT&T, meanwhile, continues to play second fiddle with U-verse.

However, according to a report published on Monday by IHS iSuppli, the race for subscribers is closing in.

IHS senior principal analyst Tom Adams predicted in the report that AT&T could take the lead in the telco TV landscape by the end of 2013 -- albeit it will probably only be a slight lead at best.

The stepping stones are already in place for AT&T as it added more video subscribers to U-verse during the fourth quarter of 2011 with 208,000 more members.

By comparison, Verizon only signed up 194,000 new FiOS subscribers. That's reportedly the 10th straight quarter in which AT&T has managed to exceed Verizon on that basis.

There are a lot of factors that could affect the fluxation of subscribers over the course of the next year, depending on everything from how much more these services expand geographically to even natural disasters, as cited in the report.

Of course, those rumors about Verizon planning a new video-on-demand service that could rival Netflix -- whether it is available to FiOS customers or not -- could figure in as well if they pan out.

Graph via IHS iSuppli

Related:

Topics: Processors, Browser, Hardware, Laptops, Mobility, Software Development, Tablets, AT&T, Verizon

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

12 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Yes, we disconnected your phone. No, we can't turn it back on.

    It seems unlikely, but perhaps AT&T can execute a work order to install this stuff without screwing it up. We know Verizon can't.
    Robert Hahn
    • worked here

      Our U-Verse install was efficient and painless, way less hassle than our bad DirectTV experience (dish mounting didn't survive the first thunderstorm).

      Frankly I'd get U-verse just for the high speed internet that comes along with it. Roadrunner/Comcast internet was faster than our previous AT&T DSL "on-paper" but it could never come close in throughput because of all the 0-bps outages.

      Like with UPS vs. Fedex your location may vary, we have great UPS (and USPS too!) service and very poor FedEx in my neighborhood.
      wally_333
      • Would Love Uverse

        if it were in my area. Unfortunately, it's only Fios and Cablevision, and Fios prices are actually higher, despite the advertisements to the contrary.
        zdnetreader123
  • still unavailable

    I'll sign up for whichever one becomes available first. Anything to replace Comcast.
    john-whorfin
  • That's just a factor of availability and uncaptured market in areas they...

    own. Verizon offers incredible quality of service, AT&T's conversely sucks and is epically limited. It's not like people have a choice in which phone company they use in an area, and as another commenter wrote, ANYTHING is better than the cable companies.
    Tea.Rollins
  • So, what real information does this give us? None!

    Since these services do not compete head to head but against the entrenched cable provider in the areas they exist a comparison of subscribers of these two NON-COMPETING services is meaningless.

    Giving us a comparison between each of them and the cable service which they actually compete against for the areas in which they exist would be enlightning.

    PS: After the local cable provider provided less than even minimum customer service I jumped for joy to switch to U-verse when it became available. Even with the enevitable bumps of being one of the first on the service when it started it has been way above the service provided by the local cable company. There was no way they could have had worse service.
    PeterBoyles
  • AT&T - worthless technology

    I signed up for U-Verse a month ago and live in a neighborhood that has been established since the 1950's. My house is also within a mile of an AT&T switch building and AT&T doesn't have the technology to get U-Verse to my house.
    wharchitects
  • Who Cares?

    We'll never see it here and the same with FIOS because our town has "only"14,000 people we are stuck with cable or DSL (about like going back to dialup...) God forbid anyone give us modern technology! And another "who cares"... , I could have 100mbps connection, but don't you dare actually USE it, we'll have to throttle you connection......
    winddrift03
  • Looking for low-hanging fruit

    Verizon seems to have given up in our area (NY Capital Region) on FiOS after making a big deal of their arrival. They made an initial push into one area, but have since stalled because, as some have suggested perhaps the density isn't there to support the tremendous cost. On top of that, you have great downward pressure currently on household costs, so people are not willing to pay for more; in fact, they're looking to pay a lot less for what they now have. My guess is the subscriber rate in our area hasn't paid off very well for them, so they're going to sit on their plans and hope demand, and the economy, pick back up.
    ejhonda
  • More subscribers equals less room

    I have been a Uverse subscriber for more than three years and with the growth of consumer interface items, (Android & ios) I 've noticed a degradation of the connection to Uverse. I have noticed more jitter in the HD & SD TV signals and more dropouts on the internet. This commonly happens the most in the evening & weekends when more people are home watching TV and/or surfing the internet. AT&T needs to boost their system while adding subscribers. Still I shouldn't complain, where I live FiOS in not an option and Uverse is still light years better than Time Warner or crappy Comcast.
    smithscotte
  • uverse/cable/etc.

    As I have said before WHEN they actually let me see what I want--channel wise--then I will consider it. There is nothing that I need them for anyway. We have many broadcast stations here in OKC, why pay for something that would be rarely used? There are so many useless channels out there, that I would never watch any of their programming, and see no need to pay for them, to get something I might watch.
    dhays
  • uverse is cheaper

    Here in Indianapolis uverse internet is about $38 (after the introductory pricing) for 3mb down and 1mb up. It is cheaper than cable. Verizon not available here.
    jscottu