I'm curious what the "ads will be served in select live and linear content" means. Like for live content if they are just streaming a TV broadcast like a sports game that does the picture in...
I'm curious what the "ads will be served in select live and linear content" means. Like for live content if they are just streaming a TV broadcast like a sports game that does the picture in picture ads during play, I guess that makes sense, but what does it mean by "linear" content?
Still annoying that there is going to be some ads in the "no ads" tier, even if it's super minimal.
Except that live content has the space for ads built into it. If you're watching a sports event live, there's going to be commercial breaks even if you pay for no ads. I guess they could just have...
Except that live content has the space for ads built into it. If you're watching a sports event live, there's going to be commercial breaks even if you pay for no ads. I guess they could just have nothing on screen during those breaks, but since the break is unavoidable anyway, having commercials doesn't seem like a big deal to me.
I actually really like the way YouTube TV handles unsold ad breaks. Whenever there is unsold ad inventory, they literally just show a peaceful meadow scene and say something like “Your program...
I actually really like the way YouTube TV handles unsold ad breaks. Whenever there is unsold ad inventory, they literally just show a peaceful meadow scene and say something like “Your program will resume in a moment.” I’d rather something like that than Ryan Reynolds trying to get me to switch to Mint Mobile.
That sounds nice. I’d be down for just about anything besides ads. Show an image of Cinderella’s castle and play some muzak version of the old Disney songs. Maybe a slideshow of non-political news...
That sounds nice. I’d be down for just about anything besides ads. Show an image of Cinderella’s castle and play some muzak version of the old Disney songs. Maybe a slideshow of non-political news headlines. Bob Iger’s family vacation reel? Even a completely blank screen would be preferable to ads.
True, and that also crossed my mind since we also have YouTube TV. I think I just have a higher tolerance for ads and commercials than most so long as it doesn't heavily disrupt the experience....
True, and that also crossed my mind since we also have YouTube TV. I think I just have a higher tolerance for ads and commercials than most so long as it doesn't heavily disrupt the experience. Live programming has commercials/ads planned into them, so it's easy to just hit mute and ignore them compared to movies or YouTube videos.
Counterpoint, I am an NBA League pass subscriber, and there is nothing better than an ad-free ball game along with all the in-arena entertainment during breaks and half time.
Counterpoint, I am an NBA League pass subscriber, and there is nothing better than an ad-free ball game along with all the in-arena entertainment during breaks and half time.
Linear content refers to traditional TV broadcasting. It's linear because you have to watch in the order it is broadcast, vs on demand streaming where you can watch the same episode of the office...
Linear content refers to traditional TV broadcasting. It's linear because you have to watch in the order it is broadcast, vs on demand streaming where you can watch the same episode of the office on repeat if you wanted.
One interpretation I haven't seen listed is where part of the show is literally an ad. The most recent seasons of Summer Baking Championship on Max has literal Disney ads shown to the contestants...
One interpretation I haven't seen listed is where part of the show is literally an ad.
The most recent seasons of Summer Baking Championship on Max has literal Disney ads shown to the contestants (and hence us) as part of the challenge intros.
It is annoying AF and I would have stopped watching it just for that, but my kids were into it.
For once, it's cheaper in Europe. Are they trying to sell cheap to corner the market? I'm seeing: Standard with ads 1080p, 2 concurrent streams €5.99/month (no discount for 12 months for the price...
For once, it's cheaper in Europe. Are they trying to sell cheap to corner the market? I'm seeing:
Standard with ads
1080p, 2 concurrent streams
€5.99/month (no discount for 12 months for the price of 10)
Isn't that what people wanted? You hear complaints all the time that "streaming is so fragmented, I miss when I could just have one subscription". Well, it's working towards that.
Isn't that what people wanted? You hear complaints all the time that "streaming is so fragmented, I miss when I could just have one subscription". Well, it's working towards that.
I think what people wanted is non-exclusivity. Where platforms don't have exclusive content, and where they compete on the quality of their platform. (the software, the speed, the video quality,...
I think what people wanted is non-exclusivity. Where platforms don't have exclusive content, and where they compete on the quality of their platform. (the software, the speed, the video quality, ...)
Right now, everything is exclusive. You want to watch SomeRandomShow legally? The first season is on Hulu, the second on Disney+, the third on Netflix, ... But in two month the third season's rights are moving from Netflix to Apple TV. It is a nightmare.
This is not the case with music. Most artists use third-parties which publish the content everywhere, Spotify, Apple Music, Youtube Music, Deezer, ... This is because they want maximum reach, and get every penny from any listening. Music streaming platforms were basically competing on the quality of their software, before they turned to exclusivity on podcasts when Spotify bought rights for Joe Rogan.
Anyway, now, instead of balkanized exclusivity on TV/Movies, we're going to have oligopolies of exclusive content, this is neither a better or worse situation, in my opinion. It's just money moneying.
It is what it is. In the end, movies and TV shows are big, big productions, unlike music, which can be done with much less funds (sometimes even in the bedrooms of teenagers). So funding from...
It is what it is. In the end, movies and TV shows are big, big productions, unlike music, which can be done with much less funds (sometimes even in the bedrooms of teenagers). So funding from platforms for exclusivity is tempting.
Personally, I LIKE that exclusives exist - it means platforms have incentive to pour loads and loads of money onto new shows. So many of the best television that has been produced in the last few decades came from the era of every streaming site writing blank checks to producers and directors. These are things that wouldn't exist without content being part of competition.
Good point. Maybe we could think of a middle ground, where there is no exclusivity after 5 years. I find it crazy that I need to buy from ~5 platforms to watch the entirety of Futurama, which is a...
Personally, I LIKE that exclusives exist - it means platforms have incentive to pour loads and loads of money onto new shows.
Good point.
Maybe we could think of a middle ground, where there is no exclusivity after 5 years. I find it crazy that I need to buy from ~5 platforms to watch the entirety of Futurama, which is a 10 year old show. Or that I need to buy Netflix the quarter they have exclusivity on Ghibli to watch Princess Mononoke.
Well, you could just buy the things you like. If it's the convenience you are looking for, many movies are sold in a package with a disc and a voucher you can use to get it added to your account...
Well, you could just buy the things you like. If it's the convenience you are looking for, many movies are sold in a package with a disc and a voucher you can use to get it added to your account on a streaming service. For those where they don't, there's always the homebrew methods.
As I see it, people don't have the right to force streaming companies to serve them the arbitrary films they want - and so streaming services won't - but they absolutely do have the right to purchase those films and do whatever they want from there.
Agree on all counts, and just wanted to add that sports are like this too. Changing streaming contracts each year so if you want to watch your favorite team (legally) that season then you need to...
Agree on all counts, and just wanted to add that sports are like this too. Changing streaming contracts each year so if you want to watch your favorite team (legally) that season then you need to subscribe to whichever service bought the rights. Not the worst for American sports where there's really just one main league per sport, but for soccer/football this is a nightmare. A team in the Premier League might play in like five different competitions in one year, each with different contracts and streaming rights. So if you want to watch all games that season you literally need five different subscriptions. Which is absurd.
Have a second favorite team from a different country? Add even more streaming services to the mix.
Want to watch international games? Ha! Yet another streaming service.
It's a joke and a prime example of the hypermonetization of modern sports.
For a while I was watching the NWSL games on Yahoo, CBS Sports ( I think) and sometimes Twitch.... So I have a sense of how much of a mess this could be in Europe.
For a while I was watching the NWSL games on Yahoo, CBS Sports ( I think) and sometimes Twitch.... So I have a sense of how much of a mess this could be in Europe.
I mean this was always the outcome. Cable was the way it was because of all sorts of factors, both infrastructure related, companies chasing profit, and market forces. Streaming is very likely to...
I mean this was always the outcome. Cable was the way it was because of all sorts of factors, both infrastructure related, companies chasing profit, and market forces.
Streaming is very likely to head the same way, with the only real competitor being that in theory the barrier to entry for competition is lower.
That said that's really cherry picking the arguments. Yes people say "it sucks I need multiple subscriptions" now but they also very much said "I hate that cable forces me to bundle a bunch of junk I don't want and charges me for it".
Clearly the market consumers want something in the middle, but it's not really in the best interests of the larger companies to do so, so we'll of course see some regression.
Personally I'm hoping we'll eventually seem more patreon funded content take off. While it's fucking weird, Hunter the Parenting is also extremely high quality, and there's plenty of other projects like that. Of course they're using the free services of youtube so that's a whole other fiasco.
You say that, but we actually have exactly that best-of-both-worlds forming. You can get a bundle, for a discount, with many streaming services; or, you can pick and choose if you just want...
Clearly the market consumers want something in the middle, but it's not really in the best interests of the larger companies to do so, so we'll of course see some regression.
You say that, but we actually have exactly that best-of-both-worlds forming. You can get a bundle, for a discount, with many streaming services; or, you can pick and choose if you just want disney, or just want hulu, or just want hbo. You can subscribe for a year; or a month. You have the choice to pay for what you want, and discounts for bulk purchases. Perfetto.
Cable has much stronger centralizing forces... notably that the distribution method was completely owned by one collection of entities, which does not exist for the internet. Companies will form bundles, because price discrimination, and that's good, since it's carving out discounts for consumers who, for whatever reason, do need all three services.
Yes we do, i'd bet money it won't last. It's a hook, like every other subscription service or basic marketing, that will eventually be pulled away and replaced with "hey guess what you need all 3...
You say that, but we actually have exactly that best-of-both-worlds forming.
Yes we do, i'd bet money it won't last.
It's a hook, like every other subscription service or basic marketing, that will eventually be pulled away and replaced with "hey guess what you need all 3 and we're raising the price and adding ads." Just about every single subscription offering that people now hate started at "wow what a great deal!" levels of pricing.
I don't think it will. Let's say Netflix and Amazon agree to have a bundle; do you think that Netflix or Amazon will ever agree to surrender the sovereignty of owning their own subscription plan?...
I don't think it will. Let's say Netflix and Amazon agree to have a bundle; do you think that Netflix or Amazon will ever agree to surrender the sovereignty of owning their own subscription plan? Never.
Price increases? Sure. Bundles being the only option? Nah.
Verizon used to offer the whole Disney+ bundle (which includes Hulu and ESPN+) for free with some of their mobile plans, with no expiration (you keep access to the streaming services as long as...
Verizon used to offer the whole Disney+ bundle (which includes Hulu and ESPN+) for free with some of their mobile plans, with no expiration (you keep access to the streaming services as long as you're on the mobile plan). My wife signed up for one of those several years ago. They don't offer it anymore--instead I think they just offer a very slightly discounted subscription to the Disney+ bundle.
The price of that bundle has increased substantially since then, so I've been expecting our gravy train to come to an end for a long time now, but so far the worst they've done is try to trick my wife into "upgrading" to an ostensibly cheaper mobile plan without really spelling out that it would mean losing the Disney+ perk. I've wondered if it's due to some kind of consumer protection laws or something. Like maybe if they pull the plug they'll open themselves up to some class action lawsuits.
What people liked about streaming originally was that prices were incredibly low for the amount of content you got. I hate how expensive streaming has gotten too, but I can understand it. You...
What people liked about streaming originally was that prices were incredibly low for the amount of content you got.
I hate how expensive streaming has gotten too, but I can understand it. You can’t create multiple $150 million movies or TV shows and charge $6.99 while making a profit. If people want entertainment at the quality that used to be available only in theaters, it costs money.
Those big tentpole shows are what get people to sign up for these services, so they have to keep producing them to drive subscriptions.
It’s not the kind of entertainment I want, so it sucks for me (and many others in this thread, it seems) but I can see why it’s happening.
For a long time, when cable was the norm, what a lot of people said they wanted was à la carte channels. Why pay for TLC when you don't watch reality TV? Then we got Netflix as the only viable...
For a long time, when cable was the norm, what a lot of people said they wanted was à la carte channels. Why pay for TLC when you don't watch reality TV?
Then we got Netflix as the only viable streaming service. Lots of people loved that. If a show or movie were available to be streamed anywhere, it was almost undoubtedly available on Netflix. And the price was a tenth (or less) of what cable used to cost.
But that was never sustainable. Like u/JXM said, if we want high production value, quality TV shows and movies, we are never going to get those on a $15 a month single subscription.
If you ask me, what people really want is not reasonable. Ultimately, when people said they wanted à la carte pricing, with a wanted was to pay less than they were paying for cable.
Personally, I'm fine with paying substantially less and rotating through the various streaming services. The people that want access to every show and movie all the time are going to have to be realistic about what that's going to cost them. They can't have their cake and eat it, too.
If I could access all of the content I pay for from the same interface, then yes, this is closer to what I would want. I think the problem is that I have to have multiple logins and multiple...
If I could access all of the content I pay for from the same interface, then yes, this is closer to what I would want. I think the problem is that I have to have multiple logins and multiple interfaces and apps. Its annoying.
I don't live in US, so I don't really know, but I kept seeing how "we are returning to cable". It surely seems like that. They're gonna revolve full circle and then they will ask what they did...
I don't live in US, so I don't really know, but I kept seeing how "we are returning to cable". It surely seems like that. They're gonna revolve full circle and then they will ask what they did wrong... Sometimes I feel like providers are sooo muh etached from heir audience/customers yet they fail to see it.
The pricing is $16.99 a month with advertising and $29.99 without.
I'm curious what the "ads will be served in select live and linear content" means. Like for live content if they are just streaming a TV broadcast like a sports game that does the picture in picture ads during play, I guess that makes sense, but what does it mean by "linear" content?
Still annoying that there is going to be some ads in the "no ads" tier, even if it's super minimal.
This is why I'm ready to switch to piracy. I will pay for no ads, but it has to be no ads.
Except that live content has the space for ads built into it. If you're watching a sports event live, there's going to be commercial breaks even if you pay for no ads. I guess they could just have nothing on screen during those breaks, but since the break is unavoidable anyway, having commercials doesn't seem like a big deal to me.
I actually really like the way YouTube TV handles unsold ad breaks. Whenever there is unsold ad inventory, they literally just show a peaceful meadow scene and say something like “Your program will resume in a moment.” I’d rather something like that than Ryan Reynolds trying to get me to switch to Mint Mobile.
That sounds nice. I’d be down for just about anything besides ads. Show an image of Cinderella’s castle and play some muzak version of the old Disney songs. Maybe a slideshow of non-political news headlines. Bob Iger’s family vacation reel? Even a completely blank screen would be preferable to ads.
True, and that also crossed my mind since we also have YouTube TV. I think I just have a higher tolerance for ads and commercials than most so long as it doesn't heavily disrupt the experience. Live programming has commercials/ads planned into them, so it's easy to just hit mute and ignore them compared to movies or YouTube videos.
Counterpoint, I am an NBA League pass subscriber, and there is nothing better than an ad-free ball game along with all the in-arena entertainment during breaks and half time.
Linear content refers to traditional TV broadcasting. It's linear because you have to watch in the order it is broadcast, vs on demand streaming where you can watch the same episode of the office on repeat if you wanted.
One interpretation I haven't seen listed is where part of the show is literally an ad.
The most recent seasons of Summer Baking Championship on Max has literal Disney ads shown to the contestants (and hence us) as part of the challenge intros.
It is annoying AF and I would have stopped watching it just for that, but my kids were into it.
"linear" in this context means something that was pre-recorded but is still being watched on a traditional linear TV/cable channel.
For once, it's cheaper in Europe. Are they trying to sell cheap to corner the market? I'm seeing:
The age of balkanization is behind us, now we become the age of alliances and consolidation once more.
Isn't that what people wanted? You hear complaints all the time that "streaming is so fragmented, I miss when I could just have one subscription". Well, it's working towards that.
I think what people wanted is non-exclusivity. Where platforms don't have exclusive content, and where they compete on the quality of their platform. (the software, the speed, the video quality, ...)
Right now, everything is exclusive. You want to watch SomeRandomShow legally? The first season is on Hulu, the second on Disney+, the third on Netflix, ... But in two month the third season's rights are moving from Netflix to Apple TV. It is a nightmare.
This is not the case with music. Most artists use third-parties which publish the content everywhere, Spotify, Apple Music, Youtube Music, Deezer, ... This is because they want maximum reach, and get every penny from any listening. Music streaming platforms were basically competing on the quality of their software, before they turned to exclusivity on podcasts when Spotify bought rights for Joe Rogan.
Anyway, now, instead of balkanized exclusivity on TV/Movies, we're going to have oligopolies of exclusive content, this is neither a better or worse situation, in my opinion. It's just money moneying.
It is what it is. In the end, movies and TV shows are big, big productions, unlike music, which can be done with much less funds (sometimes even in the bedrooms of teenagers). So funding from platforms for exclusivity is tempting.
Personally, I LIKE that exclusives exist - it means platforms have incentive to pour loads and loads of money onto new shows. So many of the best television that has been produced in the last few decades came from the era of every streaming site writing blank checks to producers and directors. These are things that wouldn't exist without content being part of competition.
Good point.
Maybe we could think of a middle ground, where there is no exclusivity after 5 years. I find it crazy that I need to buy from ~5 platforms to watch the entirety of Futurama, which is a 10 year old show. Or that I need to buy Netflix the quarter they have exclusivity on Ghibli to watch Princess Mononoke.
Either way, the regulator would have to step in.
Well, you could just buy the things you like. If it's the convenience you are looking for, many movies are sold in a package with a disc and a voucher you can use to get it added to your account on a streaming service. For those where they don't, there's always the homebrew methods.
As I see it, people don't have the right to force streaming companies to serve them the arbitrary films they want - and so streaming services won't - but they absolutely do have the right to purchase those films and do whatever they want from there.
Agree on all counts, and just wanted to add that sports are like this too. Changing streaming contracts each year so if you want to watch your favorite team (legally) that season then you need to subscribe to whichever service bought the rights. Not the worst for American sports where there's really just one main league per sport, but for soccer/football this is a nightmare. A team in the Premier League might play in like five different competitions in one year, each with different contracts and streaming rights. So if you want to watch all games that season you literally need five different subscriptions. Which is absurd.
Have a second favorite team from a different country? Add even more streaming services to the mix.
Want to watch international games? Ha! Yet another streaming service.
It's a joke and a prime example of the hypermonetization of modern sports.
For a while I was watching the NWSL games on Yahoo, CBS Sports ( I think) and sometimes Twitch.... So I have a sense of how much of a mess this could be in Europe.
I mean this was always the outcome. Cable was the way it was because of all sorts of factors, both infrastructure related, companies chasing profit, and market forces.
Streaming is very likely to head the same way, with the only real competitor being that in theory the barrier to entry for competition is lower.
That said that's really cherry picking the arguments. Yes people say "it sucks I need multiple subscriptions" now but they also very much said "I hate that cable forces me to bundle a bunch of junk I don't want and charges me for it".
Clearly the market consumers want something in the middle, but it's not really in the best interests of the larger companies to do so, so we'll of course see some regression.
Personally I'm hoping we'll eventually seem more patreon funded content take off. While it's fucking weird, Hunter the Parenting is also extremely high quality, and there's plenty of other projects like that. Of course they're using the free services of youtube so that's a whole other fiasco.
You say that, but we actually have exactly that best-of-both-worlds forming. You can get a bundle, for a discount, with many streaming services; or, you can pick and choose if you just want disney, or just want hulu, or just want hbo. You can subscribe for a year; or a month. You have the choice to pay for what you want, and discounts for bulk purchases. Perfetto.
Cable has much stronger centralizing forces... notably that the distribution method was completely owned by one collection of entities, which does not exist for the internet. Companies will form bundles, because price discrimination, and that's good, since it's carving out discounts for consumers who, for whatever reason, do need all three services.
Yes we do, i'd bet money it won't last.
It's a hook, like every other subscription service or basic marketing, that will eventually be pulled away and replaced with "hey guess what you need all 3 and we're raising the price and adding ads." Just about every single subscription offering that people now hate started at "wow what a great deal!" levels of pricing.
I don't think it will. Let's say Netflix and Amazon agree to have a bundle; do you think that Netflix or Amazon will ever agree to surrender the sovereignty of owning their own subscription plan? Never.
Price increases? Sure. Bundles being the only option? Nah.
I think it's very possible that amazon just buys the netflix brand at some point.
Microsoft aquiring Netflix is my bet https://about.ads.microsoft.com/en/blog/post/november-2023/celebrating-one-year-of-netflix-ads
Verizon used to offer the whole Disney+ bundle (which includes Hulu and ESPN+) for free with some of their mobile plans, with no expiration (you keep access to the streaming services as long as you're on the mobile plan). My wife signed up for one of those several years ago. They don't offer it anymore--instead I think they just offer a very slightly discounted subscription to the Disney+ bundle.
The price of that bundle has increased substantially since then, so I've been expecting our gravy train to come to an end for a long time now, but so far the worst they've done is try to trick my wife into "upgrading" to an ostensibly cheaper mobile plan without really spelling out that it would mean losing the Disney+ perk. I've wondered if it's due to some kind of consumer protection laws or something. Like maybe if they pull the plug they'll open themselves up to some class action lawsuits.
What people liked about streaming originally was that prices were incredibly low for the amount of content you got.
I hate how expensive streaming has gotten too, but I can understand it. You can’t create multiple $150 million movies or TV shows and charge $6.99 while making a profit. If people want entertainment at the quality that used to be available only in theaters, it costs money.
Those big tentpole shows are what get people to sign up for these services, so they have to keep producing them to drive subscriptions.
It’s not the kind of entertainment I want, so it sucks for me (and many others in this thread, it seems) but I can see why it’s happening.
For a long time, when cable was the norm, what a lot of people said they wanted was à la carte channels. Why pay for TLC when you don't watch reality TV?
Then we got Netflix as the only viable streaming service. Lots of people loved that. If a show or movie were available to be streamed anywhere, it was almost undoubtedly available on Netflix. And the price was a tenth (or less) of what cable used to cost.
But that was never sustainable. Like u/JXM said, if we want high production value, quality TV shows and movies, we are never going to get those on a $15 a month single subscription.
If you ask me, what people really want is not reasonable. Ultimately, when people said they wanted à la carte pricing, with a wanted was to pay less than they were paying for cable.
Personally, I'm fine with paying substantially less and rotating through the various streaming services. The people that want access to every show and movie all the time are going to have to be realistic about what that's going to cost them. They can't have their cake and eat it, too.
If I could access all of the content I pay for from the same interface, then yes, this is closer to what I would want. I think the problem is that I have to have multiple logins and multiple interfaces and apps. Its annoying.
I don't live in US, so I don't really know, but I kept seeing how "we are returning to cable". It surely seems like that. They're gonna revolve full circle and then they will ask what they did wrong... Sometimes I feel like providers are sooo muh etached from heir audience/customers yet they fail to see it.
The fact that there is no 4k option is a deal breaker for me.