What is DIRECTV going to do about Discovery Plus?

TV providers don't have say in what programming a channel has. They get an agreement to carry the channel, but the channel owner can change content as they wish.

It does appear that some of these networks are moving popular programming to their self-provided streaming services that the TV providers cannot touch as is completely separate.

Not a fan of the trend itself, but thankfully it has not affected what I enjoy (so far). The key point is DirecTV, AT&T, or any other TV provider cannot be blamed for this as they have no control over it. This is completely in the purview of the content owner themselves (in this case Discovery). Sorry you find this disturbing, but we are just seeing the reality for what it is. Understanding it and liking it or not are not the same thing.

Wow Juniper I can see your one of those (Edited per community guidelines) who just has to have the last word so let me make one more comment.(I will have the last word until your compelled to comment again) Your defense of crap practices for big corporations that don't give a (Edited per community guidelines) about you is absolutely disgusting. Again not "blaming the provider I am blaming Discovery" I AM ABSOULTLEY disgusted that the cable provider does not seem to be making even a peep about this on our behalf!!! So your key point is mute.

Oh and providers get in (Edited per community guidelines) matches with cable companies and vice  versa all the time. That's why the cable companies refuse to pay what they want and the channel(s) will be dropped from time to time i.e. Nick Jr, AMC and so on. So go on tell me another one. 

Oh and I am glad your the only one with such a firm grasp on the realities of Telecommunication's, Internet, Satellite. Cable TV, you should be nominated to head the FCC. 

Maybe even the new CEO of DIRECTV. HAHAHAHAH!

@Scottmj9 

Excuse me but I am not defending anything. I merely pointed out how it is. TV providers have no say in what content is available on a network and certainly cannot tell a network owner that it is not allowed to have their own streaming service. I would expect that how this comes into play for a channel's popularity would be a factor the next time negotiations come around.

TV providers do not drop the channel. What happens is if a new agreement is not reached by the time the current one ends with a network, then the network sometimes pulls their channel (as they own the broadcast rights) until a new agreement is reached. Most of the time either a new agreement is reached and everything continues as normal, or the channel owner allows the programming to continue as a sign of good faith. It is local channels that are more commonly pull their feeds during negotiations. In regards to Nick Jr, well that is part of Viacom and they have tried to strongarm negotiations the last two times betting that the loss of the "babysitter" will force parents to make such a fuss to force higher rates. As for AMC, their last big negotiation was in the middle of The Walking Dead season, but thankfully did not result in any interruption. In fact it worked out for us customers because it used to require Choice and higher, but after that negotiation they were put in all packages except Family.

Again I am not defending anything. I have pointed out how it works and where the rights are when it comes to these situations. I certainly do not like it when negotiations use customer's as leverage, and certainly am not pleased when programming gets moved to a network's personal streaming service. However since a better deal for the networks means higher costs from the TV providers which in turn would be that much more on our bills, I am content to watch other programming in the meantime when a network pulls their feed (especially if a local as I didn't go to pay TV for what I can get free over-the-air).

Though we may have different perspectives on the situation, I have strived to keep discussion constructive and civil. I would hope you could do the same.