AT&T recently launched , its in-car entertainment platform. CruiseCast is a joint venture with , and delivers 42 channels, 22 broadcast video and 20 radio, via satellite to in-vehicle entertainment devices. Content includes popular choices like USA, CNN, Discovery, and ESPN Mobile. It costs $1,299 to install and has a monthly subscription cost of $28.

Tara Seals of poses a very interesting question – ? “The single bill [where AT&T would charge for both U-Verse and CruiseCast together] is not there today, but we are very interested in making that happen. We’re talking to various groups within AT&T,” Winston Guillory Jr., president of RaySat Broadcasting Corp. tells VON. To that we would respond, why just bundle the two? Why not rebrand CruiseCast as U-Verse or U-Verse Auto? There’s tremendous brand recognition with U-Verse already. Why not extend it to this new line of business, which Frost & Sullivan predicts will grow to a market of 65 million by 2017. It’s probably too late, given CruiseCast as a brand just got off the ground and we’re sure a lot of work went into its development. But as an outsider looking in, it sure makes sense to us.

Join the Conversation

2 thoughts on “Is U-Verse Coming to Cars?

  1. They wouldn’t do that because U-Verse is closely aligned with IP, and they’re trying to build awareness around that. U-Verse is very much a wireline strategy.

  2. I’ll push back on this a little. There may be very legitimate reasons not to use the U-verse brand. But it’s alignment with IP shouldn’t be one. This thinking is illustrative of our industry’s over reliance on ‘technology.’ I would argue that customer’s could care less if U-Verse is aligned with IP – they just care that it works and it offers compelling value. If by using the brand, they could extend a good value proposition beyond the home, I would argue it’s a legitimate approach. I’ll also admit, some circles may question whether U-Verse is a ‘valuable’ brand. For the sake of this argument, I’m assuming its built up some decent brand value.

    Now, as I mentioned before, there certainly could be very legitimate reasons not to use the U-Verse brand in this way – reasons that I’m not privy to. But I hope its not because it wouldn’t be delivered over IP.

    Bernie Arnason
    Managing Editor, Telecompetitor

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Don’t Miss Any of Our Content

What’s happening with broadband and why is it important? Find out by subscribing to Telecompetitor’s newsletter today.

You have Successfully Subscribed!