Paramount joining?

[casperuk]

Originally Posted by tjritter79

What you're NOT understanding is there is NO financial benefit to either of the outside three joining MA (MGM, Paramount or Lionsgate).

If you use iTunes exclusively, and you buy "Star Trek" anything on iTunes....how does "going MA" benefit Paramount? You already BOUGHT the title on iTunes, the fact that it potentially now spreads to Google Play, VUDU, Amazon, etc neither benefits the consumer who bought it OR the studio who sold it.....and to DO that it COSTS the studio a "fee".

Now what about users who use several services? I've been buying digital for 6 years now. I'd be pretty pissed if lo and behold Transformers bundle, which I own on BOTH iTunes and Vudu....suddenly goes MA and the realization that I bought it twice when if I just waited......didn't have to?

You're only looking at a single-side of the coin, you cannot do that if you're a business out to make money...unless you write the MA fees off as a "promotional expense"....THEN it may be worth it...
Which is WHY I said months ago and still believe today, if Paramount was going to join MA sooner rather than later, the PERFECT time was during the relaunch of Paramount+. That PR bump and brand awareness would have given an even larger jump to Paramount+ in my opinion. PR that would have more than justified the fees. That didn't happen, I really have doubts now it ever will.

.....Lionsgate owns STARZ by the way!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starz

no, I do understand, but. it's about customer expectations and again, there are people out there that wont buy any digital product from paramount because they aren't on MA, that doesn't really matter outside of the US tbf. You shouldn't have to buy the same set of movies twice, it's a digital licence you should be able to use that on any service or your preferred service and that's what MA was meant to be. but it's stuck in the US and it won't leave.

Paramount, and they are still one of the old "big four", not being apart of MA is very telling, as i said before i don't think it's about the cost of joining MA, that's nothing to a billion dollar company, it's the marketing budget.. it's them saying ***** we'll do it ourselves and we can do it better.

Comcast will have a good go in Europe as they rule the UK on home set-top boxes and they can add things into that ecosystem as much as they want, they have a solid base of Universal Studio's, the hoarder of all movies forever. and they own Dreamworks. they could go full on and just say only Sky in UK/Europe and Xfinity in the US can access our content. the VOD services from these providers will then be used to access it. Sky UK has SkyGO which is their way to watch it wherever you are, doesn't include the BBC on this online platform, as the BBC have the iPlayer and "britbox" (joint owned by ITV and Channel 4).
Then you'll have to either leave them and only use one of the other "plus" services or pay all you want.

$80 a year isn't bad for Disney+ when i was paying £50 a MONTH for sky here in the UK, and that doesn't include the sports channels. and then on top for amazon and Disney+, i ditched Netflix last week.


I'm an Android user, I don't use any apple products, but until recently i couldn't access my small UK iTunes movies library on another device other and a PC with iTunes installed on it. but now even apple have realised that it's silly to limit yourself to one platform and have apple tv (box and service) which allows you to access apple tv+ on many different devices, and a side benefit of having access to your iTunes library.

so if apple, the biggest company in the world, thinks a "plus" service is the way to go then VOD services are going to go. We'll have 1 company 1 service. no cross pollination no licencing deals., Sky/Comcast, Netflix, Amazon whoever else, will lose anything they don't own. it's already happening.


You people in the US are lucky you have MA, and it's only missing 3 movie studios, the rest of the world doesn't have this luxury and we are stuck having to contend with many digital retailers that aren't linked and all offer a vastly different cost per title and overall user experience. I think the UK has 9 different digital retailers (inc apple, amazon, gp/youtube).

Sky being the biggest with it's SkyStore front end, don't need to be a Sky customer to use the service, but it's all built into the set-top box, nice and easy to access, why wouldn't you want something like MA here in the UK, if i were comcast i'd be going, we should do this. it keeps people happy and content and easy to spend money and oh look, i have all my movies in one place even though i bought them on apple or google. that's nice of Sky to allow this. same thing would be said if you were an apple or android user, it's all in one place.

hell about 2 years ago all of the big retailers all did one massive joint cross promotion where they had loads of movies starting at £2.99, about 80% of the titles were all the same and at the same price. i thought they would be bringing out MA then.. no

[tjritter79]

Originally Posted by bhampton

Think VHS, 78s and 45s can not be played now ?
I wasn't very into any of those formats as the one thing that ALL had in common is you damage the media with every play.

[Show spoiler]I have my movies backed up

... Not to mention multiple players...

I"m sure my movies will be playable when I'm gone. I still have CDs from the 80s that still play like new 40 years later. In forty years I won't be able to tell a disc from a stream.

I am curious now which of the remaining online movie lockers will fail next. Overnight it could be Movies Nowhere.

Last I was in a store, NOBODY sold VHS players, or turntables. Yes these CAN be bought online, most with USB connectivity. But they ONLY run 33's, not 78's or 45's.
You are correct, with the older media it WAS damaged with every play. Since the arrival of digital media (Yes, FWIW, DVD, BD, CD and UHD is ALL digital) that isn't the case anymore. But DVD, BD and the rest have players that do run mechanically. Digital streaming is strictly electronically, and has the most room for improvement...why do you think all first-run theaters have converted to digital delivery since 2010?
Do you think your BD or UHD disc is superior to theirs?
Of course not. Consumer electronics is LIMITED to the ability AND affordability of the technology available to them. In time, that "studio master" will be the identical format delivered in the home.
Maybe 10 years? Maybe longer, but ultimately, that is the goal.

[tjritter79]

Originally Posted by casperuk

no, I do understand, but. it's about customer expectations and again, there are people out there that wont buy any digital product from paramount because they aren't on MA, that doesn't really matter outside of the US tbf. You shouldn't have to buy the same set of movies twice, it's a digital licence you should be able to use that on any service or your preferred service and that's what MA was meant to be. but it's stuck in the US and it won't leave.

Paramount, and they are still one of the old "big four", not being apart of MA is very telling, as i said before i don't think it's about the cost of joining MA, that's nothing to a billion dollar company, it's the marketing budget.. it's them saying ***** we'll do it ourselves and we can do it better.

Comcast will have a good go in Europe as they rule the UK on home set-top boxes and they can add things into that ecosystem as much as they want, they have a solid base of Universal Studio's, the hoarder of all movies forever. and they own Dreamworks. they could go full on and just say only Sky in UK/Europe and Xfinity in the US can access our content. the VOD services from these providers will then be used to access it. Sky UK has SkyGO which is their way to watch it wherever you are, doesn't include the BBC on this online platform, as the BBC have the iPlayer and "britbox" (joint owned by ITV and Channel 4).
Then you'll have to either leave them and only use one of the other "plus" services or pay all you want.

$80 a year isn't bad for Disney+ when i was paying £50 a MONTH for sky here in the UK, and that doesn't include the sports channels. and then on top for amazon and Disney+, i ditched Netflix last week.


I'm an Android user, I don't use any apple products, but until recently i couldn't access my small UK iTunes movies library on another device other and a PC with iTunes installed on it. but now even apple have realised that it's silly to limit yourself to one platform and have apple tv (box and service) which allows you to access apple tv+ on many different devices, and a side benefit of having access to your iTunes library.

so if apple, the biggest company in the world, thinks a "plus" service is the way to go then VOD services are going to go. We'll have 1 company 1 service. no cross pollination no licencing deals., Sky/Comcast, Netflix, Amazon whoever else, will lose anything they don't own. it's already happening.


You people in the US are lucky you have MA, and it's only missing 3 movie studios, the rest of the world doesn't have this luxury and we are stuck having to contend with many digital retailers that aren't linked and all offer a vastly different cost per title and overall user experience. I think the UK has 9 different digital retailers (inc apple, amazon, gp/youtube).

Sky being the biggest with it's SkyStore front end, don't need to be a Sky customer to use the service, but it's all built into the set-top box, nice and easy to access, why wouldn't you want something like MA here in the UK, if i were comcast i'd be going, we should do this. it keeps people happy and content and easy to spend money and oh look, i have all my movies in one place even though i bought them on apple or google. that's nice of Sky to allow this. same thing would be said if you were an apple or android user, it's all in one place.

hell about 2 years ago all of the big retailers all did one massive joint cross promotion where they had loads of movies starting at £2.99, about 80% of the titles were all the same and at the same price. i thought they would be bringing out MA then.. no

You speak as if because a company has customers, that they SHOULD be beholden to THEM. Acquiesce to their wishes and desires, to Hell with profitability....doing that, they wouldn't stay in business very long.

A company, REGARDLESS if its consumer product based or not, is beholden to ONE group and one group only, its stockholders! The REASON its in business is to make a profit...NOT to make you or I able to go where we want to watch what we want.

Why these services have a streaming outlet is they could no longer count on vMVPD's (You Tube TV, Sling, Hulu "L") to keep buying their wares with a 24/7 outlet. Its too expensive and they SHARE in the wealth that it brings. So these companies went D2C and NOW they claim 100% of whatever revenue comes in, instead of sharing with a vendor.

Warner (HBO Max) and Universal (Peacock) followed with "Why not us?"
But this happened SO fast that there are still existing agreements regarding sharing of content. Why Warner owns "Harry Potter" but its shown on HBO Max and Peacock simultaneously.

The NEXT logical step, once these previous agreements all run their course, is exclusivity, especially as the pay-tv industry continues to erode and cable competition becomes null and void.

[Alan Gordon]

Originally Posted by bhampton

How long before Disney pulls the rug from people who think they "own" movies on Movies Anywhere ?

That's kind of the point of Movies Anywhere. You own a movie on Movies Anywhere, you own it EVERYWHERE! I have a few movies on Movies Anywhere that I don't own on iTunes because iTunes doesn't have that title or considers it a TV show compared to other storefronts, but at the end of the day, I have my movies spread across multiple storefronts.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by casperuk

no, I do understand, but. it's about customer expectations and again, there are people out there that wont buy any digital product from paramount because they aren't on MA, that doesn't really matter outside of the US tbf. You shouldn't have to buy the same set of movies twice, it's a digital licence you should be able to use that on any service or your preferred service and that's what MA was meant to be. but it's stuck in the US and it won't leave.

Paramount, and they are still one of the old "big four", not being apart of MA is very telling, as i said before i don't think it's about the cost of joining MA, that's nothing to a billion dollar company, it's the marketing budget.. it's them saying ***** we'll do it ourselves and we can do it better.

Comcast will have a good go in Europe as they rule the UK on home set-top boxes and they can add things into that ecosystem as much as they want, they have a solid base of Universal Studio's, the hoarder of all movies forever. and they own Dreamworks. they could go full on and just say only Sky in UK/Europe and Xfinity in the US can access our content. the VOD services from these providers will then be used to access it. Sky UK has SkyGO which is their way to watch it wherever you are, doesn't include the BBC on this online platform, as the BBC have the iPlayer and "britbox" (joint owned by ITV and Channel 4).
Then you'll have to either leave them and only use one of the other "plus" services or pay all you want.

$80 a year isn't bad for Disney+ when i was paying £50 a MONTH for sky here in the UK, and that doesn't include the sports channels. and then on top for amazon and Disney+, i ditched Netflix last week.


I'm an Android user, I don't use any apple products, but until recently i couldn't access my small UK iTunes movies library on another device other and a PC with iTunes installed on it. but now even apple have realised that it's silly to limit yourself to one platform and have apple tv (box and service) which allows you to access apple tv+ on many different devices, and a side benefit of having access to your iTunes library.

so if apple, the biggest company in the world, thinks a "plus" service is the way to go then VOD services are going to go. We'll have 1 company 1 service. no cross pollination no licencing deals., Sky/Comcast, Netflix, Amazon whoever else, will lose anything they don't own. it's already happening.


You people in the US are lucky you have MA, and it's only missing 3 movie studios, the rest of the world doesn't have this luxury and we are stuck having to contend with many digital retailers that aren't linked and all offer a vastly different cost per title and overall user experience. I think the UK has 9 different digital retailers (inc apple, amazon, gp/youtube).

Sky being the biggest with it's SkyStore front end, don't need to be a Sky customer to use the service, but it's all built into the set-top box, nice and easy to access, why wouldn't you want something like MA here in the UK, if i were comcast i'd be going, we should do this. it keeps people happy and content and easy to spend money and oh look, i have all my movies in one place even though i bought them on apple or google. that's nice of Sky to allow this. same thing would be said if you were an apple or android user, it's all in one place.

hell about 2 years ago all of the big retailers all did one massive joint cross promotion where they had loads of movies starting at £2.99, about 80% of the titles were all the same and at the same price. i thought they would be bringing out MA then.. no

You are right, I have been saying this for many years. Sky are building a new studio for in house content (film and tv) and they realise HBO will split in 2024. They are looking to integrate Peacock and Paramount+ I think (I recall reading it somewhere). They want to be in bed with as many services as possible.

[casperuk]

Originally Posted by tjritter79

You speak as if because a company has customers, that they SHOULD be beholden to THEM. Acquiesce to their wishes and desires, to Hell with profitability....doing that, they wouldn't stay in business very long.

A company, REGARDLESS if its consumer product based or not, is beholden to ONE group and one group only, its stockholders! The REASON its in business is to make a profit...NOT to make you or I able to go where we want to watch what we want.

Why these services have a streaming outlet is they could no longer count on vMVPD's (You Tube TV, Sling, Hulu "L") to keep buying their wares with a 24/7 outlet. Its too expensive and they SHARE in the wealth that it brings. So these companies went D2C and NOW they claim 100% of whatever revenue comes in, instead of sharing with a vendor.

Warner (HBO Max) and Universal (Peacock) followed with "Why not us?"
But this happened SO fast that there are still existing agreements regarding sharing of content. Why Warner owns "Harry Potter" but its shown on HBO Max and Peacock simultaneously.

The NEXT logical step, once these previous agreements all run their course, is exclusivity, especially as the pay-tv industry continues to erode and cable competition becomes null and void.

first things first, any company selling a service to a consumer must and always will need to bend the knee the it's user base. or they will not have a user base going forward. shareholders or not, both the company their the shareholders make money from OUR pockets!
Their profit is linked to my spending habits, if I don't wanna spend there anymore they will lose my business, just like netflix has, but I am but a drop in the ocean, times me by 100 and it's a bigger issue. times it by 1000 and yeah they start to notice. i work in customer services, and the customer is always right (even when fecking wrong!) so yeah we are the group the shareholders want!

as i said, and i do agree, once licensing agreements expire you'll lose access to loads of stuff. Disney+ is a good example of how Aliens is on there, but Alien isn't. same with the Die Hard movies, 1 is missing the rest are on their, i don't know where they are licenced too, but they aren't with Disney (at least in the UK)

it also means that the big Christmas movie shown on TV where someone like the BBC would hype it up for weeks in advance will go away, as you won't have to wait to see Batman 57 on TV, as you'll already have it on a VOD platform.

"free to air" and "free to view" TV will go away and be replaced by live streams. won't surprise me if the cinemas go the same way.

Originally Posted by Steedeel

You are right, I have been saying this for many years. Sky are building a new studio for in house content (film and tv) and they realise HBO will split in 2024. They are looking to integrate Peacock and Paramount+ I think (I recall reading it somewhere). They want to be in bed with as many services as possible.

this is it isn't it, they all want our money, and it's up to us how we want to spend it, but at the same time, they know a good majority of us will buy into having more than one platform. i have sky, amazon and disney.

the last 2 cost me £160 a year Sky costs me nearly double that for something i don't really need. it's why i dropped netflix, other than 1 or 2 shows i don't watch it nor does my family.
Amazon gives me free delivery and free movies and shows. double the benefit. but i don't really watch everything on there, but i've found what i do watch is better on Amazon than netflix.

They are building a massive film Studio in Essex/East London, some sort of joint venture with a few different studios iirc. so Sky could well be using that.

you've always got to remember, Sky in the UK and any other set-top box operator around the world has an install base, this will be used to push whatever they want, and Comcast has a good load of stuff it can shove into peoples homes without disney, mgm/amazon or paramount, and they don't really need to do anything to get it into your home if they are already a customer.

these big US companies only ever think about the US, when they have a massive (i'd say a billion+) amount extra people outside that are willing to consume their media. Disney+ as of this year only has 100 million world wide and they have only been going a year/year and a half? Netflix has 200+ million world wide. that's not a lot seeing as the US is what nearly 400 million people on it's own and the UK is close to 70 million people.

next thing to go will be account sharing :S

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by casperuk

first things first, any company selling a service to a consumer must and always will need to bend the knee the it's user base. or they will not have a user base going forward. shareholders or not, both the company their the shareholders make money from OUR pockets!
Their profit is linked to my spending habits, if I don't wanna spend there anymore they will lose my business, just like netflix has, but I am but a drop in the ocean, times me by 100 and it's a bigger issue. times it by 1000 and yeah they start to notice. i work in customer services, and the customer is always right (even when fecking wrong!) so yeah we are the group the shareholders want!

as i said, and i do agree, once licensing agreements expire you'll lose access to loads of stuff. Disney+ is a good example of how Aliens is on there, but Alien isn't. same with the Die Hard movies, 1 is missing the rest are on their, i don't know where they are licenced too, but they aren't with Disney (at least in the UK)

it also means that the big Christmas movie shown on TV where someone like the BBC would hype it up for weeks in advance will go away, as you won't have to wait to see Batman 57 on TV, as you'll already have it on a VOD platform.

"free to air" and "free to view" TV will go away and be replaced by live streams. won't surprise me if the cinemas go the same way.




this is it isn't it, they all want our money, and it's up to us how we want to spend it, but at the same time, they know a good majority of us will buy into having more than one platform. i have sky, amazon and disney.

the last 2 cost me £160 a year Sky costs me nearly double that for something i don't really need. it's why i dropped netflix, other than 1 or 2 shows i don't watch it nor does my family.
Amazon gives me free delivery and free movies and shows. double the benefit. but i don't really watch everything on there, but i've found what i do watch is better on Amazon than netflix.

They are building a massive film Studio in Essex/East London, some sort of joint venture with a few different studios iirc. so Sky could well be using that.

you've always got to remember, Sky in the UK and any other set-top box operator around the world has an install base, this will be used to push whatever they want, and Comcast has a good load of stuff it can shove into peoples homes without disney, mgm/amazon or paramount, and they don't really need to do anything to get it into your home if they are already a customer.

these big US companies only ever think about the US, when they have a massive (i'd say a billion+) amount extra people outside that are willing to consume their media. Disney+ as of this year only has 100 million world wide and they have only been going a year/year and a half? Netflix has 200+ million world wide. that's not a lot seeing as the US is what nearly 400 million people on it's own and the UK is close to 70 million people.

next thing to go will be account sharing :S

Excellent point about Sky being focussed on British audiences despite American ownership. Sky will go the internet route with fibre, I have no doubt. They want to capture a even bigger audience. They will also be well placed when our government update digital/ Public service broadcasting rules. They will play nice with everyone and enter into some multi year partner deals.

Netflix is a nice compliment to Sky but I mostly watch repeats like Louis Theroux docs, Afterlife, Derek, The Office and stuff like that. Of the newer stuff I love Cobra Kai and enjoyed ‘The Stranger’ but like you, I don’t watch it as often as I could.

Sky, Netflix and Disney+, along with a couple of ad supported streaming services is more than enough for me.

Film wise, I collect Blu-ray and UHD so I only watch films that are streaming exclusives. I don’t subscribe to Sky cinema.

[casperuk]

i ran out of space or i'd still be buying physical media, the digital stuff i buy when it's cheap, only available in the US and i can get it of someone from here, only on Digital or it's something i really like and i don't mind buying it more than once (I'm looking at you Transformer the movie!).

Sky in the UK is the main player, Virgin Media never really took as big as a hold as they hoped, and i think that's because it's cable based and people in the butthole of nowhere Wales or Scotland can get a good cable connection, as there is no money in it, that and Parts of London, yeah one of the biggest cities in the world still doesn't have good fibre connections to buildings.

but i don't think Sky will get multi year deals with the likes of Disney or even Paramount if they want to bring their services to the UK, so then it leaves Sony and the smaller studios to fill the gaps. and the ones that fill the gaps are basically already freely available on other platforms as no one cares about their movies, look at all the movies free on PlutoTV or Rakutan, basic rubbish no one would watch

Disney+ means i don't need to buy more marvel or stars wars stuff.

idk if i'd buy into Paramount+ without digging into their back catalogue to see if it's something i'd want.

and tbf if sony did a + service, god knows if i'd buy into that either.


i do miss the days of getting a one stop solution

[tjritter79]

Originally Posted by casperuk

first things first, any company selling a service to a consumer must and always will need to bend the knee the it's user base. or they will not have a user base going forward.

Permit me to introduce you to AT&T, whom since buying DirecTV & Warner quickly became the scourge of customer service awfulness, surpassing even Comcast.

Originally Posted by casperuk

as i said, and i do agree, once licensing agreements expire you'll lose access to loads of stuff. Disney+ is a good example of how Aliens is on there, but Alien isn't. same with the Die Hard movies, 1 is missing the rest are on their, i don't know where they are licenced too, but they aren't with Disney (at least in the UK)

NO streaming service have the capacity to contain EVERY bit of content they can distribute within their vaults. They ALL cycle month-to-month, even Disney with Marvel and Warner with DC. They may have most but not all. Disney+ has YET to premiere some past titles that played endlessly on TDC on cable:
Condorman...
Lt. Robin Crusoe U.S.N.
The Three Lives Of Thomasina...
So even within their brand, they cannot deliver the "entire" vault, its no surprise they cannot do this with Fox titles either.
...but the issue is, some Fox content was previously licensed to Tubi long term before Disney bought Fox, Disney has to honor those agreements.

Originally Posted by casperuk

"free to air" and "free to view" TV will go away and be replaced by live streams. won't surprise me if the cinemas go the same way.

Actually broadcast TV will be monetized, just like cable...this is why the USA is adopting ATSC 3.0.

Originally Posted by casperuk

this is it isn't it, they all want our money, and it's up to us how we want to spend it, but at the same time, they know a good majority of us will buy into having more than one platform. i have sky, amazon and disney.

The most recent CCN (Cord Cutters News) survey out of thousands showed 59% subscribe to 5 or more streaming services. That doesn't count Netflix free through T-Mobile, Disney+ free through Verizon, or MLB.TV free again via T-Mobile...Personally I have HBO Max, Shudder, Paramount+, Locast, Criterion and Peacock. I pay each one annually and get the ad-free option except for Locast & Peacock, each costs me $5 monthly. Locast is the only one with ads...I HATE ads!

Originally Posted by casperuk

next thing to go will be account sharing :S

The sooner the better....

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Excellent point about Sky being focussed on British audiences despite American ownership. Sky will go the internet route with fibre, I have no doubt. They want to capture a even bigger audience. They will also be well placed when our government update digital/ Public service broadcasting rules. They will play nice with everyone and enter into some multi year partner deals.

LOL, Comcast cannot even play nice with Disney. They're already in a dispute over that remaining 30% of Hulu Disney holds in escrow.

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Netflix is a nice compliment to Sky but I mostly watch repeats like Louis Theroux docs, Afterlife, Derek, The Office and stuff like that. Of the newer stuff I love Cobra Kai and enjoyed ‘The Stranger’ but like you, I don’t watch it as often as I could.

In the past two years Netflix has LOST content and had TWO price increases in the USA. The top tier of Netflix is NOW $18@month for 4K/HDR and 4 streams...If i wasn't getting it free I'd dump it like a bad habit. Netflix no longer has the value its had the past two years. Their growth in the USA has been stagnant the past two years, all their growth has been internationally. I'm confident the rest of the world will learn what the rest of us in the USA have...no value!

[Vilya]

Not to go off topic or anything , but is there any concrete indication that Paramount is planning to join MA? That's really all I care to know and I'll be on my merry way.

[casperuk]

https://metro.co.uk/2021/08/11/more-...-15073001/amp/

Looks like Sony might be up to something, maybe a "plus" service

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by tjritter79

Permit me to introduce you to AT&T, whom since buying DirecTV & Warner quickly became the scourge of customer service awfulness, surpassing even Comcast.



NO streaming service have the capacity to contain EVERY bit of content they can distribute within their vaults. They ALL cycle month-to-month, even Disney with Marvel and Warner with DC. They may have most but not all. Disney+ has YET to premiere some past titles that played endlessly on TDC on cable:
Condorman...
Lt. Robin Crusoe U.S.N.
The Three Lives Of Thomasina...
So even within their brand, they cannot deliver the "entire" vault, its no surprise they cannot do this with Fox titles either.
...but the issue is, some Fox content was previously licensed to Tubi long term before Disney bought Fox, Disney has to honor those agreements.




Actually broadcast TV will be monetized, just like cable...this is why the USA is adopting ATSC 3.0.



The most recent CCN (Cord Cutters News) survey out of thousands showed 59% subscribe to 5 or more streaming services. That doesn't count Netflix free through T-Mobile, Disney+ free through Verizon, or MLB.TV free again via T-Mobile...Personally I have HBO Max, Shudder, Paramount+, Locast, Criterion and Peacock. I pay each one annually and get the ad-free option except for Locast & Peacock, each costs me $5 monthly. Locast is the only one with ads...I HATE ads!



The sooner the better....



LOL, Comcast cannot even play nice with Disney. They're already in a dispute over that remaining 30% of Hulu Disney holds in escrow.



In the past two years Netflix has LOST content and had TWO price increases in the USA. The top tier of Netflix is NOW $18@month for 4K/HDR and 4 streams...If i wasn't getting it free I'd dump it like a bad habit. Netflix no longer has the value its had the past two years. Their growth in the USA has been stagnant the past two years, all their growth has been internationally. I'm confident the rest of the world will learn what the rest of us in the USA have...no value!

Comcast owned Sky have already negotiated a deal with Warner for 4 more years of HBO shows and films. That was last year.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by casperuk

https://metro.co.uk/2021/08/11/more-...-15073001/amp/

Looks like Sony might be up to something, maybe a "plus" service

That’s not what I had in mind when I suggested they might offer streaming alongside the games. Odd choice and not something I would pay for.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by tjritter79

Permit me to introduce you to AT&T, whom since buying DirecTV & Warner quickly became the scourge of customer service awfulness, surpassing even Comcast.



NO streaming service have the capacity to contain EVERY bit of content they can distribute within their vaults. They ALL cycle month-to-month, even Disney with Marvel and Warner with DC. They may have most but not all. Disney+ has YET to premiere some past titles that played endlessly on TDC on cable:
Condorman...
Lt. Robin Crusoe U.S.N.
The Three Lives Of Thomasina...
So even within their brand, they cannot deliver the "entire" vault, its no surprise they cannot do this with Fox titles either.
...but the issue is, some Fox content was previously licensed to Tubi long term before Disney bought Fox, Disney has to honor those agreements.




Actually broadcast TV will be monetized, just like cable...this is why the USA is adopting ATSC 3.0.



The most recent CCN (Cord Cutters News) survey out of thousands showed 59% subscribe to 5 or more streaming services. That doesn't count Netflix free through T-Mobile, Disney+ free through Verizon, or MLB.TV free again via T-Mobile...Personally I have HBO Max, Shudder, Paramount+, Locast, Criterion and Peacock. I pay each one annually and get the ad-free option except for Locast & Peacock, each costs me $5 monthly. Locast is the only one with ads...I HATE ads!



The sooner the better....



LOL, Comcast cannot even play nice with Disney. They're already in a dispute over that remaining 30% of Hulu Disney holds in escrow.



In the past two years Netflix has LOST content and had TWO price increases in the USA. The top tier of Netflix is NOW $18@month for 4K/HDR and 4 streams...If i wasn't getting it free I'd dump it like a bad habit. Netflix no longer has the value its had the past two years. Their growth in the USA has been stagnant the past two years, all their growth has been internationally. I'm confident the rest of the world will learn what the rest of us in the USA have...no value!

People here won’t shut up about Netflix. I’m sick of hearing it’s bloody name even though I now subscribe.

[casperuk]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

That’s not what I had in mind when I suggested they might offer streaming alongside the games. Odd choice and not something I would pay for.

It depends on how much and what it offers. I'm not a massive animé fan as it it. But if they roll in the Sony movies back catalogue, say it's 60 a year I might.

[casperuk]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

People here won’t shut up about Netflix. I’m sick of hearing it’s bloody name even though I now subscribe.

It started off amazingly. But now it's just turning into a content vomiting service

[bhampton]

Originally Posted by Vilya

Not to go off topic or anything , but is there any concrete indication that Paramount is planning to join MA? That's really all I care to know and I'll be on my merry way.

There is only evidence to the contrary. Paramount is backing it's Paramount+ service and giving codes with physical media that can redeem in iTUnes or Vudu

[Chedwiggen]

Dang it Paramount, join! Join! Join! Join!

[steve_dave]

Originally Posted by Chedwiggen

Dang it Paramount, join! Join! Join! Join!

It costs too much for them to join now. Besides the fee to join, they also have to pay monthly.

[brooks101189]

I sometimes find it hard to believe that Paramount feels the fee is too much for them. They're not Lionsgate or MGM (which really has/had James Bond) - they're the home of the Mission Impossible, Star Trek, Transformers, Spongebob Squarepants and more.

It's not likely necessarily just due to the fee.

But then again, I could be seriously wrong.