collapse

* Recent Posts

Big East 23-24 NCAA and NIT Results by 1SE
[Today at 06:38:02 AM]


NCstate fan scouts Marquette by brewcity77
[Today at 06:05:33 AM]


Katz has MU in Final Four by Uncle Rico
[Today at 05:59:46 AM]


10 years after “Done Deal” … It’s Happening! by willie warrior
[Today at 05:53:49 AM]


UNLEASH THE POWER OF SCOOP!!! by Jay Bee
[Today at 05:13:02 AM]


Three Years Ago Today... by Newsdreams
[March 27, 2024, 11:34:10 PM]


Kam Jones 1st Round Mock - The Ringer by PGsHeroes32
[March 27, 2024, 10:40:15 PM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address.  We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or register NOW!


Author Topic: HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable  (Read 169162 times)

Canned Goods n Ammo

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5008
  • Ammo, clean shaven Ammo.
Re: HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable
« Reply #425 on: June 27, 2014, 06:38:07 AM »
Doesn't justify it, stealing is stealing.  You can rationalize it all you want, but if you watch it via BT, you aren't paying them subscriber fees or DVD sales.  Not a victimless crime.  The rationalization you mention is similar to the studies I've seen.  They feel if it isn't something like a car, a computer, an iphone, or something tangible, it's not really stealing.  "It's just data".  That's where we are as a society. Fortunately there is some very good work being done on the law enforcement side that will finally be helping.  One of the rare instances that the left actually cares about "petty criminal" behavior because it's costing their buddies in Hollywood a ton of money, and that includes down to the rank and file union guy that is a sound person, camera guy, lighting guy, etc.  Yes, things do trickle down.

I agree with you on this, but could you turn down the political rhetoric for 5min? It doesn't really help you make your point here.

Benny B

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5969
Re: HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable
« Reply #426 on: June 27, 2014, 09:14:52 AM »
I agree with you on this, but could you turn down the political rhetoric for 5min? It doesn't really help you make your point here.

As a cord cutter who despises the cable and satellite companies, I can only pray that Chicos finds himself working at Jack-In-The-Box sometime soon.  But sadly, Chicos is correct... those supporting the producers and distributors in Congress (counter-intuitively) are doing so only because they know who butters their bread, not because they think it's good for the consumer.  Unfortunately, that leaves the consumer with no ally in DC to fight the fight against big TV.

Wow, I'm very concerned for Benny.  Being able to mimic Myron Medcalf's writing so closely implies an oncoming case of dementia.

jesmu84

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 6029
Re: HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable
« Reply #427 on: June 27, 2014, 09:18:59 AM »
...those supporting the producers and distributors top of any industry in Congress (counter-intuitively) are doing so only because they know who butters their bread, not because they think it's good for the consumer.  Unfortunately, that leaves the consumer with no ally in DC to fight the fight against big TV anything.



FTFY

Chicago_inferiority_complexes

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 844
Re: HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable
« Reply #428 on: June 27, 2014, 09:36:35 AM »
As a cord cutter who despises the cable and satellite companies, I can only pray that Chicos finds himself working at Jack-In-The-Box sometime soon.  But sadly, Chicos is correct... those supporting the producers and distributors in Congress (counter-intuitively) are doing so only because they know who butters their bread, not because they think it's good for the consumer.  Unfortunately, that leaves the consumer with no ally in DC to fight the fight against big TV.



Welcome to libertarianism. This is exactly why I think regulation almost never does anything except help rent-seekers maintain monopolies.

Benny B

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5969
Re: HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable
« Reply #429 on: June 27, 2014, 12:05:45 PM »
FTFY

Understood and agreed.  I was merely attempting to stay on topic.
Wow, I'm very concerned for Benny.  Being able to mimic Myron Medcalf's writing so closely implies an oncoming case of dementia.

ChicosBailBonds

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22695
  • #AllInnocentLivesMatter
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable
« Reply #430 on: June 27, 2014, 12:08:26 PM »
As a cord cutter who despises the cable and satellite companies, I can only pray that Chicos finds himself working at Jack-In-The-Box sometime soon.  But sadly, Chicos is correct... those supporting the producers and distributors in Congress (counter-intuitively) are doing so only because they know who butters their bread, not because they think it's good for the consumer.  Unfortunately, that leaves the consumer with no ally in DC to fight the fight against big TV.



I wouldn't wish that on anyone.   I wouldn't wish for anyone to lose their job, their health, etc.  To each their own. 

Creating good content costs lots of money. Stuff isn't free or cheap, not the quality stuff anyway.  It isn't a widget.

brandx

  • Guest
Re: HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable
« Reply #431 on: June 27, 2014, 12:20:05 PM »
Welcome to libertarianism. This is exactly why I think regulation almost never does anything except help rent-seekers maintain monopolies.

Except for the elephant in the room.

Libertarians ALSO need millions of $$$$ to get in office. They are human and they WILL also chase the $$$$$.

Not a political statement - just a facts of life statement.

Benny B

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5969
Re: HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable
« Reply #432 on: June 27, 2014, 02:40:52 PM »
I wouldn't wish that on anyone.   I wouldn't wish for anyone to lose their job, their health, etc.  To each their own. 

Creating good content costs lots of money. Stuff isn't free or cheap, not the quality stuff anyway.  It isn't a widget.

Corporate office, Chicos; not the deep fryer.  You'll be better off in the long run.
Wow, I'm very concerned for Benny.  Being able to mimic Myron Medcalf's writing so closely implies an oncoming case of dementia.

ChicosBailBonds

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22695
  • #AllInnocentLivesMatter
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable
« Reply #433 on: June 27, 2014, 02:44:43 PM »
Corporate office, Chicos; not the deep fryer.  You'll be better off in the long run.

I worked the fryer at McDonalds when I was 16.   Have some good friends in Chicago working at McDonald's corporate, been offered a few times but said no. 

As I mentioned here a few weeks ago, my new gig is actually something you would be happy about.  Trying like the dickens to get something for cord nevers and cord cutters.  A low cost video package for those folks.  The complexity is convincing the content creators they should do this without jeopardizing their revenue streams they need to create and\or purchase (sports rights) new content.  A grand challenge that Apple, Google, Intel and others have failed in.  We'll see how it goes, but a tough slog to be sure.  If it does happen, then you might throw an atta boy out there.   ;)

Benny B

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5969
Re: HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable
« Reply #434 on: June 27, 2014, 03:02:20 PM »
I worked the fryer at McDonalds when I was 16.   Have some good friends in Chicago working at McDonald's corporate, been offered a few times but said no. 

As I mentioned here a few weeks ago, my new gig is actually something you would be happy about.  Trying like the dickens to get something for cord nevers and cord cutters.  A low cost video package for those folks.  The complexity is convincing the content creators they should do this without jeopardizing their revenue streams they need to create and\or purchase (sports rights) new content.  A grand challenge that Apple, Google, Intel and others have failed in.  We'll see how it goes, but a tough slog to be sure.  If it does happen, then you might throw an atta boy out there.   ;)

Holy crapola.... it took several years, but it looks like we finally got through to Chicos.  Atta boy, Scoop.
Wow, I'm very concerned for Benny.  Being able to mimic Myron Medcalf's writing so closely implies an oncoming case of dementia.

ChicosBailBonds

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22695
  • #AllInnocentLivesMatter
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable
« Reply #435 on: July 16, 2014, 11:02:41 PM »
Like I said 12 months ago, you're going to see major consolidation

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/07/16/rupert-murdoch-said-to-have-made-offer-for-time-warner/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

This one is dead right now, but don't count it out or don't count others from happening.  Tis the way of the world in this industry right now.

brandx

  • Guest
Re: HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable
« Reply #436 on: September 15, 2014, 07:23:58 PM »
Verizon is finally ready to acknowledge that cable TV just isn't working for a lot of us anymore.

The company is planning to launch its Internet-based TV service that can be watched on mobile devices in the "late first half of 2015," Lowell McAdam, Verizon's CEO, said on Thursday. It's unclear what exactly the service would look like, but McAdam said it would offer "a la carte" options, rather than being bundled like expensive cable packages are now.

Think Netflix, but with live streaming. McAdam said at the conference that the service would include programming from "the big four" networks -- CBS, ABC, NBC and Fox.

"No one wants to have 300 channels on your wireless device," he said. Greg Ireland, a research manager at IDC, the technology research firm, said Verizon's offering could borrow ideas from services like Netflix or Amazon Instant Video, which offer interactive menus and will remember where you are in a program, regardless of what device you started watching it on.
Verizon's move comes as the TV industry is set to undergo a massive shift. The rise of streaming services like Netflix, Amazon Prime Instant Video and Hulu, which for a flat fee offer on-demand viewing of movies, TV shows and original programming, pose a threat to traditional "linear" cable and satellite. An increasing number of people -- especially young people, a highly coveted demographic for advertisers -- are cutting the pay TV cord and opting for streaming services over expensive cable or satellite packages. According to a report this spring from Experian Marketing Services , nearly a quarter of young adults between 18 and 34 who subscribe to Hulu or Netflix don't pay for TV.

Experian also said that the number of cord-cutting homes has increased dramatically in just three years, from 5.1 million homes in 2010 to 7.6 million homes in 2013.

Pay TV subscriptions have been flat or declining slightly, while Netflix continues to grow at a rapid clip. Netflix ended the June quarter with 36.24 million members in the U.S., up from 29.81 million at the same time last year.
About 100 million households in the U.S. pay for traditional TV.

It's unclear what exactly Verizon's product would look like. But to get an idea, said IDC's Ireland, it could be helpful to look to what Dish is working on. The company is developing a service that would allow you to watch live TV on multiple devices, but not require a cable box.
"[It could be] a service that offers fewer channels at a smaller price point, targeting a piece of the market that may not now be pay TV subscribers," Ireland said of Verizon's new product. Such a service would "appeal to those outside of the pay TV universe today and get them back into that universe."

Verizon's Internet TV product will incorporate technology from Intel's OnCue, which Verizon announced it would buy from the chip maker in January. Intel previously planned to launch its own TV product by the end of last year, but ran into oppositionfrom cable and satellite companies, which make tons of money from expensive bundles.

Verizon's McAdam told investors that much of the technology is in place for the network. Now, the company is negotiating with content providers, which in the last two years have become much more receptive to delivering programming in different ways.

ChicosBailBonds

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22695
  • #AllInnocentLivesMatter
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable
« Reply #437 on: September 20, 2014, 04:19:01 PM »
Holy crapola.... it took several years, but it looks like we finally got through to Chicos.  Atta boy, Scoop.

It's been a crazy few months with the new gig.  My beliefs haven't changed, however, in fact they are hardened in many cases.  I said in the past you will see packages get smaller and the pipes will change, but I believe a la carte is so far down the road (though I said in the past if someone could do it would be HBO, but at great cost to them).

In dealing with the programmers daily, they have no desire to break the bundle and that remains the key as I stated the last few years.  Until they change, things aren't going to change dramatically.  It has to be a financial winner for them.  Which means one either pays a ton for an individual channel or slightly more for many.  Same thing I've been saying for years.  You only want 10 channels, well the content owners are going to say pay $65 for that 10 channels or pay us $90 and get 100 channels.  You decide....your cost per unit will be radically different, and not truly "a la carte"

Verizon made a comment last week about their new OTT service...this is the space that I now co-lead.  The pipes are changing, obviously.  Verizon talks of a la carte offerings.  I'll believe it when I see it because none of the conglomerates are allowing it (Disney,NewsCorp, Viacom, A&E, CBS, Comcast\Universal, etc).  Their CEO may have thrown that out just to get people excited, but the content producers aren't budging.

What you will see is some streaming services actually stream television networks in smaller packages.  That will catch on for those strapped for cash.  How good of a product it actually is (quality, number of streams, etc) remains to be seen...remember, I'm not talking SVOD, but streaming linear over IP.  There are also subscriber caps that the conglomerates put in to protect their revenue streams, meaning only a limited number of people can sign up before they stop selling it.  This will be popular in MDUs, college campuses, low income, etc.

Fun times...crazy times....same hurdles....those that own the content.

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/09/17/verizon-is-determined-to-make-a-la-carte-cable-a-r.aspx

jesmu84

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 6029
Re: HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable
« Reply #438 on: September 23, 2014, 03:21:36 PM »
Found an interesting commentary on the DOJ, antitrust laws and the TWC/Comcast merger:

"For one, we're talking about different antitrust issues. Broadly speaking, the antitrust laws prohibit (1) concerted action that harms competition, like price fixing cartels; (2) unilateral action by a monopolist that harms competition; and (3) mergers and acquisitions that significantly diminish competition.

Microsoft was alleged to have used its position as a monopolist to undermine competition. That's (2) above. Typically, monopolization entails an element of foulplay. Achieving or maintaining a monopoly through normal, reasonable business practices is not illegal.

Comcast and TWC are proposing to merge. That's (3) above. When evaluating a merger, the DOJ looks at whether the companies directly compete in any markets, and whether the merger is likely to reduce competition in those markets.

Comcast and TWC claim that they do not directly compete. That's true, but there's more to the story. Comcast and TWC will point out that cable systems are "natural monopolies" -- it costs a lot to lay cable, and where one company has already laid cable in a given area, it enjoys a huge cost advantage over other would-be competitors, who would have to lay their own cable to compete.

But on the other hand, Comcast and its rivals have also done some dubious stuff in the past that has led to the current competitive landscape. For example, Comcast, TWC, and others have engaged in a number of anticompetitive deals, such as geographic market allocation and customer swapping, to create large regional monopolies. These deals themselves arguably violate the antitrust laws -- see (1) above -- and indeed are the subject of ongoing litigation. But unfortunately, the DOJ most likely would not take this background into account when evaluating the likely effect of the merger on competition.

So when Comcast and TWC say that the merger will not reduce competition because they do not currently compete, that is in part due to the fact that they have already agreed not to compete. It's like two members of a price fixing cartel saying that merging would not reduce competition because, hey, they aren't competing anyway.

We don't know yet whether the DOJ will challenge the merger. The Obama DOJ has been decent in this area; they challenged the AT&T/T-Mobile merger and US Air/American Airlines merger. But neither of those cases played out -- the FCC killed AT&T/T-Mobile, and the DOJ caved once politicians began pressuring the agency to let US Air/American Airlines go through.
Given that Comcast is so well connected in Washington, and in light of the potential difficulties in establishing that the merger will actually reduce competition, I expect that the DOJ will approve the Comcast/TWC merger, subject to certain concessions.

Politics is a core issue when it comes to antitrust enforcement. In fact, I don't think the Obama DOJ would sue Microsoft today. Clinton's DOJ was a bit more aggressive in this area."

GOO

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1342
Re: HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable
« Reply #439 on: January 05, 2015, 02:56:28 PM »
Time Warner adding more fees.  The $8.00 per month modem "lease" fee kills me.

http://www.jsonline.com/business/time-warner-cable-adding-fee-for-sports-programming-b99419919z1-287524741.html

If you haven't taken the time and hassle to buy your own modem and set it up, this might be the incentive to do so.  I bought my own modem a couple of years ago. The fee isn't a big deal, but for the 8 year old modem I had from Time Warner, it was such a hugh rip off, that I refused to pay Time Warner.  They continue to prove that they will take advantage of their customers as often and in any way that you allow them to  :D  

At some point, as the costs continue to escalate, the cable cutting has to increase.  But Americans love their live sports, I guess. And paying for a leased modem, I guess.

I don't have cable TV, but with all of the taxes and fees (DVR, Modem, Remotes, Sports) I wonder what just the fees and taxes total, versus the actual price of the package.  
« Last Edit: January 05, 2015, 03:02:42 PM by GOO »

Coleman

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3450
Re: HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable
« Reply #440 on: January 05, 2015, 03:13:27 PM »
Time Warner adding more fees.  The $8.00 per month modem "lease" fee kills me.

http://www.jsonline.com/business/time-warner-cable-adding-fee-for-sports-programming-b99419919z1-287524741.html

If you haven't taken the time and hassle to buy your own modem and set it up, this might be the incentive to do so.  I bought my own modem a couple of years ago. The fee isn't a big deal, but for the 8 year old modem I had from Time Warner, it was such a hugh rip off, that I refused to pay Time Warner.  They continue to prove that they will take advantage of their customers as often and in any way that you allow them to  :D  

At some point, as the costs continue to escalate, the cable cutting has to increase.  But Americans love their live sports, I guess. And paying for a leased modem, I guess.

I don't have cable TV, but with all of the taxes and fees (DVR, Modem, Remotes, Sports) I wonder what just the fees and taxes total, versus the actual price of the package.  

Yup. Comcast just increased theirs too. It is now a $10 per month fee for me. My overall monthly rate went up about $6.

It pisses me off they increased my monthly rate with them just 3 months after switching over to them from RCN. I thought you were guaranteed that rate for a year. Annual increases are part of the deal but 3 months? I called and complained, and they refused to lower it, but threw me 3 months of Starz/Showtime for free.

Coleman

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3450

Tortuga94

  • Walk-On
  • *
  • Posts: 16
Re: HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable
« Reply #442 on: January 05, 2015, 03:23:30 PM »
I found this to be interesting. Pretty decent offer from Dish. I cancelled cable a few months ago but recently re-subscribed because I missed MU Hoops and NFL games. I do think this will eventually be the future of cable service, more of an a la carte model.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/102310691


GOO

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1342
Re: HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable
« Reply #444 on: January 05, 2015, 03:40:58 PM »
The sling tv is interesting.  Not a replacement for true cable lovers, but for those who just want a few channels or a few channels to go along with their antenna, this could work. 

If I could get fox sports 1 for $15 or $20 a month, I'd pay for it.  Everything else I can do without.

I noticed on Apple TV that CBS now offers all of their main shows for free, on demand, without cable verification.  The only catch is that the programs are a week old.

ChicosBailBonds

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22695
  • #AllInnocentLivesMatter
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable
« Reply #445 on: January 05, 2015, 03:49:00 PM »
A la carte has arrived

http://www.businessinsider.com/dish-internet-based-tv-includes-espn-2015-1

Nope.

It's not a la carte AND the Disney deal limits how many they subscriptions they can sell.  There is a cap....I spoke about this months ago.

But from a cost perspective, yes you're basically paying $20 for one channel (to be accurate, about $19 for one and about $1.00 for the rest).  Which I also said months and years ago to just get ESPN you're going to have to pay anywhere from 3x to 5x what the current going rate is....I was exactly right.  It's pure economics gents.  ESPN (Disney), isn't going to give up the $6 they get today from MVPDS when 90% of people MUST take it.  So if it goes a la carte (or even hybrid like this one), they're going to have to get 3x or 4x to make up the difference.  AND, they are going to cap it, as I stated, to prevent any downstream erosion.  These people aren't stupid.


ChicosBailBonds

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22695
  • #AllInnocentLivesMatter
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable
« Reply #446 on: January 05, 2015, 03:52:05 PM »
Time Warner adding more fees.  The $8.00 per month modem "lease" fee kills me.

http://www.jsonline.com/business/time-warner-cable-adding-fee-for-sports-programming-b99419919z1-287524741.html

If you haven't taken the time and hassle to buy your own modem and set it up, this might be the incentive to do so.  I bought my own modem a couple of years ago. The fee isn't a big deal, but for the 8 year old modem I had from Time Warner, it was such a hugh rip off, that I refused to pay Time Warner.  They continue to prove that they will take advantage of their customers as often and in any way that you allow them to  :D  

At some point, as the costs continue to escalate, the cable cutting has to increase.  But Americans love their live sports, I guess. And paying for a leased modem, I guess.

I don't have cable TV, but with all of the taxes and fees (DVR, Modem, Remotes, Sports) I wonder what just the fees and taxes total, versus the actual price of the package.  

Everyone's programming costs went up about 8% to 10%, those companies are trying to recoup those expenses.  NFL costs money.  MLB costs money.  Big Bang Theory costs money.  So on and so forth.

The reason they are taking up the costs on those other items is a bucketing exercise more than anything.  They are trying not to burden the costs as much on programming, even though that's where their expense like is getting jacked, so they raise DVR fees, or modem fees, or technology fees, or mirroring fees, or box fees.  That's all it is.  That's how that game is played.

Coleman

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3450
Re: HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable
« Reply #447 on: January 05, 2015, 03:58:19 PM »
Nope.

It's not a la carte AND the Disney deal limits how many they subscriptions they can sell.  There is a cap....I spoke about this months ago.

But from a cost perspective, yes you're basically paying $20 for one channel (to be accurate, about $19 for one and about $1.00 for the rest).  Which I also said months and years ago to just get ESPN you're going to have to pay anywhere from 3x to 5x what the current going rate is....I was exactly right.  It's pure economics gents.  ESPN (Disney), isn't going to give up the $6 they get today from MVPDS when 90% of people MUST take it.  So if it goes a la carte (or even hybrid like this one), they're going to have to get 3x or 4x to make up the difference.  AND, they are going to cap it, as I stated, to prevent any downstream erosion.  These people aren't stupid.



Nope what? How is it not a la carte? Fewer channels, lower total cost...

I think everyone with half a brain recognizes you are going to pay more per channel with this type of system. But for some people, that is still worth it.

I think we all see what is coming, and it is more of this.
« Last Edit: January 05, 2015, 04:00:27 PM by Bleuteaux »

Canned Goods n Ammo

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5008
  • Ammo, clean shaven Ammo.
Re: HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable
« Reply #448 on: January 05, 2015, 05:05:33 PM »
Nope.

It's not a la carte AND the Disney deal limits how many they subscriptions they can sell.  There is a cap....I spoke about this months ago.

But from a cost perspective, yes you're basically paying $20 for one channel (to be accurate, about $19 for one and about $1.00 for the rest).  Which I also said months and years ago to just get ESPN you're going to have to pay anywhere from 3x to 5x what the current going rate is....I was exactly right.  It's pure economics gents.  ESPN (Disney), isn't going to give up the $6 they get today from MVPDS when 90% of people MUST take it.  So if it goes a la carte (or even hybrid like this one), they're going to have to get 3x or 4x to make up the difference.  AND, they are going to cap it, as I stated, to prevent any downstream erosion.  These people aren't stupid.



You're mixing together a lot of stuff.

ESPN is offering an ala Cart option. Period.

It's not cheap, but it is a legit option. Period.

In the future, I don't think our cost per channel is going to go down (as you have correctly stated, bundling creates efficiency), but if I only watch 2 or 3 channels, I might be able to do it for $30 or $40 instead of $110 for 200 channels I don't watch.

To put it another way, I know if I buy a pallet of eggs, my cost per egg will drop to $.02 per egg... but I only eat 3 or 4 eggs per week, so I'm better off paying $3 per egg.

Television doesn't spoil like food, but my time is limited, so it's not like I can magically create more viewing opportunities to consume more television to get more value. I'm probably better off purchasing the amount of television content I actually use.

ChicosBailBonds

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22695
  • #AllInnocentLivesMatter
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable
« Reply #449 on: January 05, 2015, 07:05:42 PM »
You're mixing together a lot of stuff.

ESPN is offering an ala Cart option. Period.

It's not cheap, but it is a legit option. Period.

In the future, I don't think our cost per channel is going to go down (as you have correctly stated, bundling creates efficiency), but if I only watch 2 or 3 channels, I might be able to do it for $30 or $40 instead of $110 for 200 channels I don't watch.

To put it another way, I know if I buy a pallet of eggs, my cost per egg will drop to $.02 per egg... but I only eat 3 or 4 eggs per week, so I'm better off paying $3 per egg.

Television doesn't spoil like food, but my time is limited, so it's not like I can magically create more viewing opportunities to consume more television to get more value. I'm probably better off purchasing the amount of television content I actually use.


Nope, ESPN is not offering a la carte option to just purchase ESPN.  Disney is requiring you to take multiple channels which they forced on DISH (which they tried to force on DIRECTV), thus it is NOT a la carte.  Your statement is just plain false.  You MUST take ESPN, ESPN2, Disney Channel and ABC Family.  That is NOT a la carte.  You also MUST take some Scripps and Turner channels.  That is not a la carte.

Yes, it is a legit option, no one said it wasn't.  We agree.

We've done many calculations on how many people would take just ESPN at $15, $20, $25, $30.  We believe there is a market for it.  It will gain some traction, no doubt about it.  Here's where it gets interesting, however, in many cases it can hurt those conglomerates, which is why they put a cap on it.  If a bunch of people bail on pay tv to buy this product and DISNEY is no longer being paid on Disney XD, Disney Junior as they would a MVPD, then that's an issue for them.

Same goes for HBO.  Time Warner may hit a home run with OTT HBO, then again, it could mean their CNN, TNT, TBS, etc properties get crushed in the process.  Many smart people working on this, they aren't going to kill their golden goose.

I've been working as counter to this product for the last 7 months....we've been all over it with my new gig.  Today's article how this isn't a game changer is pretty interesting and what we have also been saying.  We believe there is a market, no doubt, but not a game changer in its current state.  It's not even an OTT product really. It's a PSN, which I have my own biases against for many reasons, but we'll see how those work.

http://variety.com/2015/digital/news/why-dishs-sling-tv-skinny-internet-bundle-isnt-a-game-changer-1201392269/?utm_source=sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=dailyheadlines

Also interesting about a Forbes and Motley Fool article the past week about what was actually a game changer....  :)     

http://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2014/12/26/directv-launches-over-the-top-streaming-service-for-u-s-hispanic-consumers/

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2015/01/03/directv-just-went-over-the-top-of-cable-companies.aspx





 

feedback