Death of Streaming?

[Mark C Flick]

Will corporate greed be the death of streaming? I've gotta wonder just how much support there is out there for multiple streaming platforms? I mean, I have Netflix and Amazon Prime as well as DirecTV. and there is no way I'm going to add another one. Are people really willing to shell out for multiple streams from CBS, NBC, Hulu, AT&T, Criterion, DC, ESPN, Fubo, HBO, Philo, Playstation, Showtime, Starz... I mean, really, why don't we all just go back to cable?

 

[Todd Anderson]

I think it’s only in the early stages of shaking out.... right now, tho, it’s a mess! Too many options AND cable is still a major player if you like to watch sports.

 

[Travis Ballstadt]

I think you're absolutely correct. I was just posting something somewhere about this the other day. It's a different generation of corporate execs making the same mistakes as the past generation. Within 5 years, people will hate their streaming companies just as much as they hated their cable companies a couple years ago.

The ONLY thing any of them are doing right at this point is the fact that nobody is requiring a contract. I have an antenna, a Plex server, and Netflix. Well, Amazon Prime, too, but that's just a bonus, I'd pay for the shipping either way. I recently cancelled DirecTV Now, but come football season, I'll probably add something for a few months to supplement the antenna, and then let it go again after bowl season.

But as soon as everyone's subscription totals start creeping toward the cable bill they just freed themselves from, the numbers will drop. Problem is, streaming platforms are cheaper to operate, and you won't see platforms going away and merging because of low subscription numbers. That content has to be stored somewhere now that it's not in a vault on film/tape, and charging for access to it is just frosting.

 

[Mark C Flick]

Not to mention the fact that prices will increase dramatically (I think). And I didn't even mention Apple, Disney, You Tube and Facebook. I think it's going to get down right ugly.

 

[Travis Ballstadt]

I think it's important to separate them out. I think Hulu, Vue, Sling, YouTube and the like will see moderate increases in price, but will thrive. It's the orgs that think they are holier than thou and pulling their content from these services to charge separately that will suffer.

ESPN is the exception. If they were to offer a $20/mo subscription service for access to their primary channels (ESPN, ESPN2, ESPN News), you would quickly see the death of cable and satellite as we know it. ESPN is by far the highest cost channel to the distributors, but they are by no means making $20/customer. But there are enough people that would cancel cable/sat altogether and just pay for Netflix, Hulu and ESPN that it would be devastating.

 

[Mark C Flick]

Yeah, I dunno. IMO everything ESPN touches turns to crap... Monday Night Football, Friday Night Fights, UFC, etc etc. I'd be more than happy to see my satellite / cable bill drop $20, $30, $40 a month or more to get rid of ESPN.

 

[NBPK402]

The next step will they will do is to increase the cost for the internet...before you know it you will be paying the old exorbitant rates again.

 

[mechman]

ESPN is still around?? Even when I had it I rarely watched it. I guess I shouldn't make that past tense as I do have it now on YouTubeTV but there is nothing there that I watch.

YouTubeTV cost went up this month $15. They did add a bunch of channels recently though including Discovery Channel. The only one I'm missing now is History.

 

[Travis Ballstadt]

Yeah, I dunno. IMO everything ESPN touches turns to crap... Monday Night Football, Friday Night Fights, UFC, etc etc. I'd be more than happy to see my satellite / cable bill drop $20, $30, $40 a month or more to get rid of ESPN.

Except it doesn't add that much to your bill. It's probably responsible for $10 or so (before your cable company marks it up). The biggest cost inflation is channel bundling by the providers. Viacom will tell Comcast/Mediacom/Directv et. al that they can't have XYZ channel that customers actually WANT unless they also pay to carry these other 9 channels, that have nothing to offer, but Viacom wants them included in cable packages to inflate the subscriber numbers when they sell advertising. It's all a racket. They take the one decent channel and hold it hostage to force you to pay for all that crap you never want. That's how we got to where we are today.