I doubt it. This would more effectively be achieved by just creating tiered plans (e.g., 2 GB, 100 GB, unlimited).

Am I the only one that doesn't have a problem with tiered Internet access? I see nothing unreasonable about letting a grandmother that only uses Facebook pay less than somebody that watches 3 hours of Netflix a day.

Regardless of the system in place they will put it to work to extract as much money from people as possible. A tiered system only gives them a few more parameters to tweak to aid this goal.

I think I would take everything CSR says with a grain of salt. Within ATT they are probably near the last to know of any official policy change. My hunch is that it's just a rumor.

Not to mention "charge extra for Netflix" could also mean they are working on some sort of agreement with Netflix whereby AT&T resells the service as part of some package.

Let's enumerate the possible ways this could be wrong:

1. The OP is lying to us or misremembering the discussion with the rep.

2. The OP misunderstood the rep's explanation of the new policy.

3. The rep was lying to the OP.

4. The rep misunderstood the new policy or thought there was a new policy when there wasn't.

5. The rep was reporting something that he felt was likely but didn't actually have any evidence for.

6. The rep thought the OP was a clueless non-technical user and said what he did so the OP didn't think Netflix was free.

There is no reason whatsoever to post this (or vote it up) without evidence. Of course it's just a rumor. That's what rumor means, a story without evidence. I know I'm supposed to say this, but I flagged it, and I hope other users will do the same. Do we really want an HN of people posting theories unsupported by even the slightest shred of evidence?

OP here!

It was one of the escalation reps, not just a tier one phone monkey.

Their quote was (more or less) "while we currently don't charge extra to use Netflix on our network, that will change in the near future".

I HOPE that the rep misunderstood the wording of a new agreement where you can bundle Netflix and/or Hulu with your ATT subscription or something similarly benign.

It's not explanations 1, 2, or 6. We had a pretty long discussion about ATT's services including the technical aspects.

I put "apparently" in the title because I wanted it to be clear that it was based on what a rep told me rather than something that was in the ATT earnings report or shareholder meeting (if such a thing exists).

I appreciate your use of logic in the response!

Which service? Wireless? Home internet?

uverse internet

Ok, I still think it's highly unlikely, but that makes more sense than with wireless. On wireless they're moving to contract-free plans (bring your own device setup, basically), and there are too many options in most areas. Unless competitors did the same thing, T-mobile is just one SIM card away, and Verizon (with some phones) may not require a new phone.

For uverse, they do have fewer direct competitors. But, at least for me, I didn't mind ditching cable for slower DSL when their service (despite the speed difference) became too expensive. DSL is still fast enough for Hulu/Netflix/Steam game downloads. People will vote with their feet if they're tasked with spending $x extra a month for a service they already pay for (unless this is a bundle of some sort).