Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-25-2019, 11:43 AM
FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,745

Help me understand the world of streaming.


I’ve been wanting to watch some old shows recently, in particular Murder, She Wrote. I remember that a few years ago it used to be on Netflix, but now it’s no longer available their. Next I decided to check on CBS’s streaming service, which doesn’t have Murder, She Wrote either. I tried a google search and it appears the first 5 seasons are available on Amazon’s video streaming service, as well as on something called Philo.

While I was exploring these services, I found out a few other interesting things. CBS offers Cheers and Frazier, which I remember watching on NBC back in the day. On the other hand, some CBS shows, like the above mentioned MSW as well as Northern Exposure, seem not to be available. Philo seems to stream shows from various channels, but I thought some of those, like Discovery Life, had their own streaming services.

Needless to say, this is all somewhat confusing, and makes me hesitant to add another service other than Netflix which I already have. Why do these shows seem to jump from one property to another? Why are some shows unavailable, Evelin on their original channels? What’s the deal with services like Philo? I appreciate any answers to help out this newbie to the world of streaming.
  #2  
Old 08-25-2019, 11:51 AM
kenobi 65's Avatar
kenobi 65 is offline
Corellian Nerfherder
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brookfield, IL
Posts: 15,358
Part of "why is Cheers on CBS streaming, not NBC" has to do with who actually made the series, not with which network it originally aired. Cheers (and Frazier) was produced by Paramount, which now owns CBS (and, by extension, the CBS All Access streaming service).

And, as companies begin to launch streaming services, in some cases, they pull the programming that they own off of other streaming services which had previously carried it. For example, a lot of Disney properties are no longer on Netflix, and those that still are, are likely to eventually come off of Netflix, as Disney launches Disney+ this fall.

Last edited by kenobi 65; 08-25-2019 at 11:55 AM.
  #3  
Old 08-25-2019, 12:58 PM
Shoeless's Avatar
Shoeless is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The Sunflower State
Posts: 6,771
Are there any streaming services that show reruns of old TV series (30+ years or older)? For example I started watching Rockford Files on Netflix a few years ago and then suddenly it disappeared. I'd love to find reruns of Rockford, the original Magnum PI, Mission: Impossible, stuff like that. Anywhere I can find stuff like that, more or less in one place?
__________________
I'm not black, but there's a whole lotsa times I wish I could say I'm not white. -- FZ
  #4  
Old 08-25-2019, 04:37 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 46,341
Back when Netflix started and signed contracts to stream content, most of the providers thought they were nuts and happy to get money for nothing. Now they realize the value and everyone and his dog has set up streaming services with exclusive content.
  #5  
Old 08-25-2019, 06:29 PM
Tim R. Mortiss's Avatar
Tim R. Mortiss is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Lincoln Park, Chicago
Posts: 7,129
If you are not absolutely set on watching it on a streaming service, you can see Murder She Wrote on a channel called Cozi TV. I have it on my cable service (Comcast); not sure where else you can see it.
  #6  
Old 08-25-2019, 07:05 PM
gdave is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoeless View Post
Are there any streaming services that show reruns of old TV series (30+ years or older)? For example I started watching Rockford Files on Netflix a few years ago and then suddenly it disappeared. I'd love to find reruns of Rockford, the original Magnum PI, Mission: Impossible, stuff like that. Anywhere I can find stuff like that, more or less in one place?
Amazon Prime currently has Magnum, P.I. (original 1980s version) and Mission: Impossible(1960s series). I couldn't find any streaming services currently carrying The Rockford Files.

If you google "name of a tv series streaming", for example "magnum pi streaming", you'll generally get a box that lists streaming services that carry it. I think Amazon Prime is probably your best bet in general for shows in that range (1960s-1980s), but I'd suggest trying to google several of your favorites, and figuring out which service has the largest selection. You might also need to alter the search terms a bit; when I googled on the three specific ones you asked about, "magnum pi streaming" returned results for the 1980s original, not the current revival, but "mission impossible streaming" returned results for the Tom Cruise movie, and I had to try again with "mission impossible tv series streaming".
  #7  
Old 08-26-2019, 12:59 AM
zbuzz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,182
Just to make it even a little more confusing, Amazon Prime doesn't actually have all of Magnum, P.I. Out of 8 seasons, Prime is missing season 6.

The executive summary of why video streaming is such a cluskerfuck is that the entertainment industry is deathly afraid of getting iTunes'd again, to the detriment of the consumer.
  #8  
Old 08-26-2019, 02:03 AM
cochrane is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Nekkid Pueblo
Posts: 22,011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim R. Mortiss View Post
If you are not absolutely set on watching it on a streaming service, you can see Murder She Wrote on a channel called Cozi TV. I have it on my cable service (Comcast); not sure where else you can see it.
It's over the air on the subchannels of many stations. If it's on an affiliate in your area, it's likely to be on your cable system, too. Murder, She Wrote is also on WGN America.
  #9  
Old 08-26-2019, 02:08 AM
PastTense is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 7,646
There are a number of indexing sites for streaming:
https://www.consumerreports.org/stre...reaming-shows/

A streaming site is going to have a contract with the company which owns the show--and this contract will be for a fixed length of time--2 years, 5 years...whatever and you won't be able to see the show after that contract is up--unless the contract is renewed.
  #10  
Old 08-26-2019, 08:04 AM
ralfy's Avatar
ralfy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 624
From what I gathered, some have been losing money, and they are trying to come up with their own libraries of TV shows and movies. That means in order to access TV shows across different companies one will have to subscribe to each service.
  #11  
Old 08-26-2019, 10:03 AM
kayaker's Avatar
kayaker is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Western Pennsylvania
Posts: 32,536
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoeless View Post
Are there any streaming services that show reruns of old TV series (30+ years or older)? For example I started watching Rockford Files on Netflix a few years ago and then suddenly it disappeared. I'd love to find reruns of Rockford, the original Magnum PI, Mission: Impossible, stuff like that. Anywhere I can find stuff like that, more or less in one place?
I'm currently watching Perry Mason on Amazon Prime streaming.
  #12  
Old 08-26-2019, 10:22 AM
filmore is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,503
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlikTheBlue View Post
Why do these shows seem to jump from one property to another? Why are some shows unavailable, Evelin on their original channels? What’s the deal with services like Philo? I appreciate any answers to help out this newbie to the world of streaming.
The current streaming environment is that the companies are trying to figure out how to make the most money. The content owners have deals with certain services, and when those deals are over, they may license the content to a service which pays more money. That's why you can't count on any service having any content for any amount of time. Even the content owner may not be allowed to show it's own content depending on the deal. For example, part of the deal Netflix made for Friends may include that no other service can show Friends, including NBC. If you want to watch a particular show, you'll need to look on the web to see which service offers it.

As for services like Philo, there are also services which are kind of like cable. Services like Philo (and YouTubeTV, PSVue, etc). have a block of regular channels similar to what you find with cable TV. In addition, they also have some amount of on demand content for those channels.

The whole thing is pretty messy right now.
  #13  
Old 08-26-2019, 11:15 AM
tim-n-va is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,236
The current streaming market is success (Netflix) drawing competitors and a round of failures will be coming. My prediction is that next we will have aggregators which essentially will get us back to cable-like with a different licensing agreement.
  #14  
Old 08-26-2019, 11:38 AM
PastTense is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 7,646
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralfy View Post
From what I gathered, some have been losing money, and they are trying to come up with their own libraries of TV shows and movies. That means in order to access TV shows across different companies one will have to subscribe to each service.
Actually an alternative is switching the streaming services you use regularly:
This month subscribe to Netflix
Next month cancel Netflix and subscribe to Hulu
Month after than cancel Hulu and subscribe to HBO
...


This should work for movie/TV services--but not for sports services.
  #15  
Old 08-26-2019, 12:10 PM
cochrane is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Nekkid Pueblo
Posts: 22,011
If you have a smartphone, there are apps which have tons of old TV shows. There are apps from Pluto TV, MeTV, and Tubi TV, as well as from the major broadcast networks. They carry the shows you're looking for, such as Magnum, P. I., the A-Team, Cheers, Taxi, and the Incredible Hulk. If you have a Chromecast, you can send the shows to your TV.
  #16  
Old 08-26-2019, 12:12 PM
Lancia's Avatar
Lancia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Denial
Posts: 1,788
Quote:
Originally Posted by filmore View Post
The current streaming environment is that the companies are trying to figure out how to make the most money.

***

The whole thing is pretty messy right now.
A-fucking-men.

Perhaps I'm simply entering the "get-off-my-lawn!" stage of life and channeling my inner Abe Simpson, but the current state of streaming has me majorly pissed off. As a consumer I hate it with a passion.

Several years ago I was ecstatic that King of the Hill would finally be released in its entirety on DVD. For many years only seasons 1-6 (out of 13) were available. I was so happy, in fact, that I announced my glee here on the Dope. Someone responded with, essentially, "durr... yer dumb for buying those because it's available on Amazon Prime."

Well, I just checked today and KotH is no longer on Amazon Prime, indeed it's not available on Amazon at all: you can purchase the DVD's, but not the individual seasons via streaming. It is available to stream on Hulu. So if I want to watch KotH I have to pony up for a streaming service I don't have or buy the DVD's.

And therein lies the problem: nothing stays in one place, and premium content tends to float around from one service provider to another based on the contracts each provider has with the production companies. This means that, as a consumer, if I subscribe to a specific streaming service chances are that the content I want will not stay on that service long-term and if I want to keep watching it I'll have to subscribe to yet another service.

Additionally, the fact that many new shows that have been hyped seem to be on platforms I don't subscribe to. I've had several people tell me how good Cobra Kai is, but of course I don't subscribe to YouTube Premium. Same for Hulu's Shrill: I'd like to watch it but have no desire to subscribe to yet another streaming service. Obviously this is delibrate; Google can produce a show that a lot of people are clearly going to be interested in and put on a platform that not a lot of people were otherwise willing to pay for and rake in some serious bucks from new subscriptions.

I suppose all of this can be likened to non-streaming TV consumption. To use the above-mentioned Northern Exposure as an example, it was originally broadcast on CBS, then reruns were picked up by A&E. It was available on a streaming service (I forget which one, I want to say it was Hulu) for a short while then dumped, now the only way to watch it at all is on DVD. But the DVD's are incredibly sub-par and don't have much of the original music from the show—which was a big part of the magic of the show. So basically, if you wanted to watch that one show you originally had to pony up for basic cable (if you didn't have it already), then after that add a streaming service, and now you're out of luck.

Such is life I guess. But it frustrates me. My kids are obsessed with both Star Wars and anything Marvel, and my wife loves both old and new Disney productions. So guess what we're likely subscribing to in November?

  #17  
Old 08-26-2019, 01:28 PM
Ellis Dee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: New England
Posts: 14,407
I hate how many different user interfaces there are for watching video in general, with each individual streaming provider creating their own from scratch the same way DVDs all have their own unique interface. Why were no standards ever reached?

I'd love to come up with a shell that could serve content from any of your streaming services but have its own interface. A physical box that works like a roku, except it has no apps/channels to install. After signing into your streaming services all the shows and movies from all the services would just be available in a single unified interface.

I don't need any fancy "play in background when highlighted" crap like netflix does; just a list of titles, a user friendly way to navigate episodes of a series -- hulu's sucks ass, amazon prime is much better -- and the ability to play either the thing or the trailer for the thing.

Seriously, how shit is the user interface for CBS All Access? Yikes. And that (presumably) has a lot of money backing it.

How come nobody except amazon prime will let me easily see the names of the actors in the show I'm watching? Prime tells you the names of the actors on screen in the current scene! That's the greatest thing ever.

Last edited by Ellis Dee; 08-26-2019 at 01:29 PM.
  #18  
Old 08-26-2019, 03:14 PM
zbuzz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lancia View Post
Well, I just checked today and KotH is no longer on Amazon Prime, indeed it's not available on Amazon at all: you can purchase the DVD's, but not the individual seasons via streaming. It is available to stream on Hulu. So if I want to watch KotH I have to pony up for a streaming service I don't have or buy the DVD's.
If only there were more stores that sell King of the Hill streaming and King of the Hill streaming accessories.
  #19  
Old 08-26-2019, 04:21 PM
zbuzz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Dee View Post
I hate how many different user interfaces there are for watching video in general, with each individual streaming provider creating their own from scratch the same way DVDs all have their own unique interface. Why were no standards ever reached?

I'd love to come up with a shell that could serve content from any of your streaming services but have its own interface. A physical box that works like a roku, except it has no apps/channels to install. After signing into your streaming services all the shows and movies from all the services would just be available in a single unified interface.
The Apple TV box/app pretty much does all that if you subscribe from within the app to the various channels it offers (HBO, CBS All Access, Smithsonian, etc). So if you want to watch Star Trek: Picard, for example, you won't get punted out to the CBS All Access app, you'd just watch it from within the Apple TV app using its own interface. A big drawback — among others — is that there aren't too many channels available currently. It's nice that they have signed up some big name content at the beginning (it seems possible Disney+ might be a channel soon), but it's still far from a perfect solution. Early days, though I guess.
  #20  
Old 08-26-2019, 05:25 PM
Ellis Dee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: New England
Posts: 14,407
So if I have Netflix and Hulu through Apple TV, will there be a single list of shows that includes both Stranger Things and Handmaid's Tale?

EDIT: Assuming you can't get those through Apple TV, imagine if you could. Would there be a single list anywhere that included both shows, and you could start watching either of them through choosing them from that list?

Last edited by Ellis Dee; 08-26-2019 at 05:26 PM.
  #21  
Old 08-26-2019, 09:06 PM
Munch is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 22,206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Dee View Post
So if I have Netflix and Hulu through Apple TV, will there be a single list of shows that includes both Stranger Things and Handmaid's Tale?
No. I believe Android TV will aggregate these things, and Roku may have some solutions as well. I'll be getting a Roku-enabled TV in the next month or so, and everything I'm reading is saying that Roku-integrated smart TVs are one of the more user-friendly UIs out there, and pretty customizeable.
  #22  
Old 08-26-2019, 09:34 PM
Ellis Dee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: New England
Posts: 14,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Munch View Post
No. I believe Android TV will aggregate these things, and Roku may have some solutions as well. I'll be getting a Roku-enabled TV in the next month or so, and everything I'm reading is saying that Roku-integrated smart TVs are one of the more user-friendly UIs out there, and pretty customizeable.
Looking at this article, that first screen shot of the Roku TV is the same as the default interface on standalone roku devices. And yeah, the interface is somewhat customizable. But you can't play any media with the interface; you have to load an app (Netflix, Hulu, etc...) and run content from inside the app.

The "killer app" feature for the Roku interface is it lets you search for a title among all streaming services, even showing the ones you don't subscribe to and how much it would cost if it's a pay-per-view deal. A truly great feature.

But to play content you have to run that content provider's app, and then choose content from within the app. There is no unified media player.

Essentially, while I'm watching any show or movie on any streaming service, I want one single button sequence to toggle close captioning, and for tv shows, getting to the episode list. Those two things are radically different on all four I've tried so far: Prime, Netflix, Hulu, CBS All Access. And I do those things all the time.

Last edited by Ellis Dee; 08-26-2019 at 09:35 PM.
  #23  
Old 08-26-2019, 10:17 PM
Wesley Clark is offline
2018 Midterm Prediction Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 22,224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoeless View Post
Are there any streaming services that show reruns of old TV series (30+ years or older)? For example I started watching Rockford Files on Netflix a few years ago and then suddenly it disappeared. I'd love to find reruns of Rockford, the original Magnum PI, Mission: Impossible, stuff like that. Anywhere I can find stuff like that, more or less in one place?
I"m not sure which streaming service is best for 70s tv shows, but I believe hulu bought a bunch of 80s and 90s tv shows in the last year or so.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion
  #24  
Old 08-26-2019, 10:18 PM
doreen is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Woodhaven,Queens, NY
Posts: 6,528
Quote:
Originally Posted by zbuzz View Post
getting iTunes'd again
I probably should know what this refers to- but I don't. Help me out.
  #25  
Old 08-26-2019, 10:33 PM
Munch is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 22,206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Dee View Post
But to play content you have to run that content provider's app, and then choose content from within the app. There is no unified media player.
Yeah, that'd be the next great leap. But each provider wants you in their own ecosystem, being exposed to all of the content they have and have created. I think Android TV does this, but it's been a while since I've looked at it, and I seem to remember it losing support/interest from Google.

Quote:
Essentially, while I'm watching any show or movie on any streaming service, I want one single button sequence to toggle close captioning, and for tv shows, getting to the episode list. Those two things are radically different on all four I've tried so far: Prime, Netflix, Hulu, CBS All Access. And I do those things all the time.
With enough effort, I'm sure you could brute-force a Harmony remote to do all that.
  #26  
Old 08-26-2019, 11:54 PM
Ellis Dee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: New England
Posts: 14,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Munch View Post
With enough effort, I'm sure you could brute-force a Harmony remote to do all that.
Probably true, but it would be annoying to have to change something on the remote when switching to a different app, or more likely, having to use different macros to do the same feature in different apps.

When I got the roku I decided to get a universal remote, but I wanted it to fully replace the cable remote I've been using forever. I considered the harmony 665 but the button layout was too radically different. Amazingly, I found a universal with almost the exact button layout as my cable remote, so that was perfect for me.

Here's an image: My old cable remote on the left, my universal in the middle, the harmony 665 on the right. The universal I went with is cheap (<$20) but crappy; I've had to replace it twice. And it's a hassle (and finicky!) to program. But it controls my tv, cable, roku, blu-ray player, HDMI switcher, and even an ancient DVD/VCR combo unit I should just throw away.

The linked image isn't great quality, but the only difference between my cable and universal remotes is that the A, B, C(, D) buttons swap places with the Menu, Guide, Info, Exit buttons, above and below the menu navigation arrows. Other than that it's virtually identical.
  #27  
Old 08-27-2019, 03:34 AM
zbuzz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,182
Quote:
Originally Posted by doreen View Post
I probably should know what this refers to- but I don't. Help me out.
The major music labels gave up a lot of power and control when they began to put their music on iTunes in 2003. Apple was able to out-negotiate them on price, promotions, advertising, etc. and once that easy one-stop-shop method proved so popular with customers, the music pretty much just became a commodity whether you were buying from Apple, Amazon or some other online music store. There was very little room for them to maneuver a better position for themselves.

From that history (as well as seeing Netflix basically build a rival studio on the backs of their content) the film and TV studios learned the lesson that it is better to go it alone, keep control of their own content and be able to price it however they want.

Granted, it's a much different digital landscape now than in 2003, but handing over the keys to the kingdom is a mistake no one will make again for a long time. And unfortunately, that means a fragmented market, higher prices and worse experience for consumers.
  #28  
Old 08-27-2019, 08:33 AM
Fleetwood's Avatar
Fleetwood is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: NH-US
Posts: 1,027
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenobi 65 View Post
Part of "why is Cheers on CBS streaming, not NBC" has to do with who actually made the series, not with which network it originally aired. Cheers (and Frazier) was produced by Paramount, which now owns CBS (and, by extension, the CBS All Access streaming service).
Paramount does not own CBS. Paramount is owned by Viacom, which is set to (re)merge with CBS, so CBS will own Paramount.
  #29  
Old 08-28-2019, 12:14 AM
ralfy's Avatar
ralfy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 624
Quote:
Originally Posted by PastTense View Post
Actually an alternative is switching the streaming services you use regularly:
This month subscribe to Netflix
Next month cancel Netflix and subscribe to Hulu
Month after than cancel Hulu and subscribe to HBO
...


This should work for movie/TV services--but not for sports services.
I hear some have been doing that, especially with shows like Star Trek: Discovery. I'm not sure if companies like that, though, because they prefer long-term subscription that allows for a steady stream of revenues.
  #30  
Old 08-28-2019, 12:55 PM
iamthewalrus(:3= is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 11,925
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralfy View Post
I'm not sure if companies like that, though, because they prefer long-term subscription that allows for a steady stream of revenues.
I'm sure they don't, but what are they going to do about it?
  #31  
Old 08-28-2019, 01:28 PM
Ellis Dee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: New England
Posts: 14,407
They could require a minimum contract to sign up.
  #32  
Old 08-28-2019, 01:35 PM
enalzi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 8,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Dee View Post
They could require a minimum contract to sign up.
The first one to require a year long commitment will stop getting any new subscribers.
  #33  
Old 08-28-2019, 01:37 PM
filmore is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,503
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Dee View Post
They could require a minimum contract to sign up.
They'd have to have some really compelling content to make it worthwhile. Maybe Disney could do it, but not some random service. With so many providers, I suspect people will just watch something else.

What I expect will happen is that the yearly price will be at a major discount compared to going month-to-month. I'd think they'd have to make the yearly price at least a 30-40% discount off the price of 12 monthly charges. So for a $10/mo service, the yearly would need to be like $80 to entice people to sign up. Another alternative is that a service is bundled with something else, like Amazon Prime shipping or AT&T phone service. So giving up the streaming service would mean losing some other benefit.
  #34  
Old 08-28-2019, 01:53 PM
That Don Guy's Avatar
That Don Guy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,603
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamthewalrus(:3= View Post
I'm sure they don't, but what are they going to do about it?
Offer a reduced rate for longer terms - i.e. charge through the nose for "one month at a time" users
  #35  
Old 08-28-2019, 01:56 PM
Ellis Dee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: New England
Posts: 14,407
Maybe they combine them: $80 a year package, minimum 3 months to sign up. That way people might look at it as $30 for 3 month, or for "only" $50 more you get another 9 months.

Honestly I think they'd be better going the other way completely, and actively cater to the sampler market. Offer special discounted 3-month packages, only repeatable once per year per account. Price them the same as 2 months worth, maybe up to 2.5, and I bet you make more money out of people already sampling (because they probably would normally stop after a single month), plus extra money from people this "discount" would entice to try sampling.

Last edited by Ellis Dee; 08-28-2019 at 02:00 PM.
  #36  
Old 08-28-2019, 01:59 PM
cochrane is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Nekkid Pueblo
Posts: 22,011
Quote:
Originally Posted by filmore View Post
They'd have to have some really compelling content to make it worthwhile. Maybe Disney could do it, but not some random service. With so many providers, I suspect people will just watch something else.

What I expect will happen is that the yearly price will be at a major discount compared to going month-to-month. I'd think they'd have to make the yearly price at least a 30-40% discount off the price of 12 monthly charges. So for a $10/mo service, the yearly would need to be like $80 to entice people to sign up. Another alternative is that a service is bundled with something else, like Amazon Prime shipping or AT&T phone service. So giving up the streaming service would mean losing some other benefit.
AT&T does not have a very good reputation in the U. S. WRT streaming TV service.
  #37  
Old 08-28-2019, 02:09 PM
Dewey Finn is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 28,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by That Don Guy View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamthewalrus(:3= View Post
I'm sure they don't, but what are they going to do about it?
Offer a reduced rate for longer terms - i.e. charge through the nose for "one month at a time" users
Disney is doing that, for its new Disney+ service. You get a substantial discount but have to pay upfront for three years of service.
  #38  
Old 08-28-2019, 09:49 PM
ralfy's Avatar
ralfy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 624
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamthewalrus(:3= View Post
I'm sure they don't, but what are they going to do about it?
I'm guessing that long-term subscription guarantees a steady stream of revenues to continue development of a series. Without that, then they will probably cancel the series, charge per episode or season, include ads or, if possible, bring in more product placement, or lower production budgets.
  #39  
Old 08-28-2019, 11:48 PM
iamthewalrus(:3= is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 11,925
Quote:
Originally Posted by That Don Guy View Post
Offer a reduced rate for longer terms - i.e. charge through the nose for "one month at a time" users
They could do that, but it's probably cutting off their nose to spite their face.

Right now people who just subscribe and stay subscribed are the vast majority of their customers. Unless people who jump around become a sizable chunk, giving out, say, a 20% annual discount is just going to lose them revenue to stick it to a few people who are getting a better deal.

And they definitely can't afford to jack up prices for new subscribers. That will stop them from growing.

Last edited by iamthewalrus(:3=; 08-28-2019 at 11:49 PM.
  #40  
Old 08-29-2019, 10:04 AM
MeanJoe is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 2,308
I think many of the negatives of streaming and multiple streaming platforms and content agreements is exactly why I find it hard to grasp why someone would "cut the cord" and go streaming only. In my opinion streaming augments my entertainment but does not sufficiently meet my needs to be my only venue of consuming tv shows, movies, etc.
__________________
Father to sassy girls. Husband to a mad wife. And I will have my vengeance, in this life or the next.
  #41  
Old 08-29-2019, 11:14 AM
iamthewalrus(:3= is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 11,925
Just subscribing to Netflix provides more options for movies and television at my immediate fingertips than were possible at any price for the majority of my lifetime.

There's plenty to watch for $15/month. Sure, there are lots of shows that aren't included. But Netflix makes shows that I want to see faster than I can watch them, so I don't think it matters.

Signing up for HBO for one month a year when Game of Thrones comes out is not hard. They still have my credit card on file from last time. I just go to the app on my TV and click a few buttons.
  #42  
Old 08-29-2019, 12:40 PM
Dewey Finn is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 28,716
Sure, if you just want to have something to watch, Netflix will always have something you will like. (And so would Amazon, Hulu, Disney+, etc.) The problem comes if you want to watch something in particular. That show is on HBO, this show is on Hulu, another is on Amazon, etc.) And yes, you could subscribe to one of these services for a month, binge-watch a show and then cancel. But that may mean watching a show after it's aired, so you can't talk about it with others. For some shows, half the fun is talking about the show.
  #43  
Old 08-29-2019, 12:56 PM
Ellis Dee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: New England
Posts: 14,407
Honestly, binging doesn't lend itself to discussion like traditional tv. There is still some, but not enough to be a huge loss to miss out on.
  #44  
Old 08-29-2019, 01:07 PM
Dewey Finn is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 28,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by MeanJoe View Post
I think many of the negatives of streaming and multiple streaming platforms and content agreements is exactly why I find it hard to grasp why someone would "cut the cord" and go streaming only. In my opinion streaming augments my entertainment but does not sufficiently meet my needs to be my only venue of consuming tv shows, movies, etc.
Streaming is definitely not a perfect solution. For example, some movies will be available on DVD or Bluray before they come to a streaming service, if they ever do. So you might still want to go to Redbox to see a movie you missed in the theater. Other movies will never be released on DVD or Bluray, so the only way to see them will be via a streaming service. (Usually this is true of the ones that are produced or owned by one of the streaming services.)
  #45  
Old 08-29-2019, 01:42 PM
ISiddiqui is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Decatur, Georgia, USA
Posts: 6,700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Dee View Post
So if I have Netflix and Hulu through Apple TV, will there be a single list of shows that includes both Stranger Things and Handmaid's Tale?
No. Netflix refuses to play with Apple's TV App (probably because Apple demands some extra money for it).

---

Anyways, we are the wild west of streaming. In the early years, no one thought streaming would be worth much, so they sold streaming rights for little to Netflix. And then Netflix became big and Amazon and Hulu started buying streaming rights. And then they got to such a profitable level that the content producers said... hey wait, we can make more money if we started our own service (combined with people dropping cable more and more, with them losing money on those shows).

So here we are. It'll likely take a few more years of nuttiness before we reach some sort of equilibrium, but there will likely be 5-6 major players in the streaming content aggregator business.

On some level this is always what cord cutting was going to look like (the 'a la carte' people were living in a fantasy word) as content producers would be likely to start their own subscription services. It's still cheaper and ad-free than cable, so that's a good plus. Perhaps some more content aggregators will do like Apple or Amazon and put a bunch of channels together becoming the new cable - but it'll require the big guys to jump in (so far Netflix wants nothing to do with them - it'll be interesting to see if they offer channels themselves).
  #46  
Old 08-29-2019, 03:06 PM
MeanJoe is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 2,308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey Finn View Post
Streaming is definitely not a perfect solution. For example, some movies will be available on DVD or Bluray before they come to a streaming service, if they ever do. So you might still want to go to Redbox to see a movie you missed in the theater. Other movies will never be released on DVD or Bluray, so the only way to see them will be via a streaming service. (Usually this is true of the ones that are produced or owned by one of the streaming services.)
Right. Which is why I don't think I could ever fully cut the cable cord. Sometimes I want to channel surf and not have to look across multiple streaming services to find something. Just the simple channel guide of 400 channels is great. Sometimes I want to watch major network series or broadcasts or sports and sometimes I know Netflix has released the new season of OITNB or some other show and that's where I go. Or Amazon Prime when they finally begin delivering The Expanse. Since my tastes and desires are all over the place, I need them ALL.

Just wish it didn't cost so damn much money. Haha
__________________
Father to sassy girls. Husband to a mad wife. And I will have my vengeance, in this life or the next.
  #47  
Old 08-29-2019, 04:35 PM
iamthewalrus(:3= is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 11,925
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey Finn View Post
Sure, if you just want to have something to watch, Netflix will always have something you will like. (And so would Amazon, Hulu, Disney+, etc.) The problem comes if you want to watch something in particular. That show is on HBO, this show is on Hulu, another is on Amazon, etc.) And yes, you could subscribe to one of these services for a month, binge-watch a show and then cancel. But that may mean watching a show after it's aired, so you can't talk about it with others. For some shows, half the fun is talking about the show.
Sure, but that's the same way with cable. There are always shows that are on special channels that you don't subscribe to, unless you're paying like ~$200/month for cable.

Which is enough to subscribe to like 15 streaming services.

Unless you want to watch live sports, any number of streaming services seems better what you could get for the same price from traditional cable.

Quote:
No. Netflix refuses to play with Apple's TV App (probably because Apple demands some extra money for it).
I expect it's actually because Netflix doesn't want to become "just another commodity channel" on an Apple device.

If you have to launch the Netflix app, you're going to see the interface Netflix wants to show you, the promos that Netflix wants to show you, the recommendations that Netflix wants to show you. That's tremendously valuable to Netflix.

Netflix is betting that it's big enough that people are still going to go to a specific app to watch Netflix shows, and it's using that market position to cross-promote.
  #48  
Old 08-29-2019, 05:16 PM
Dewey Finn is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 28,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamthewalrus(:3= View Post
If you have to launch the Netflix app, you're going to see the interface Netflix wants to show you, the promos that Netflix wants to show you, the recommendations that Netflix wants to show you. That's tremendously valuable to Netflix.
Absolutely and Netflix tailors the promos and recommendations based on what it knows about what you like, to the extent that the images shown of a movie or TV show are designed to appeal to you. (If you like romcoms, the image will suggest that's what this movie is but if you like action films, it will suggest that. And that's for the same movie.) And they pay attention to what people watch, rewind and rewatch, and what they skip through. All of this represents valuable data. (I heard that they developed the American adaption of House of Cards after noting that their DVD-by-mail customers liked the original British House of Cards, Kevin Spacey movies and movies directed by David Fincher.)

One concern (perhaps more important for an investor than a viewer) about Netflix, though, is that they're spending massively on buying and producing movies and TV shows. ($12 billion in 2018 and $15 billion this year.) Spending that large requires them to go into debt. Can they sustain that?
  #49  
Old 08-29-2019, 09:20 PM
ralfy's Avatar
ralfy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 624
This reminds me of the film industry: large amounts of funds and pressure to invest them, very expensive flicks (with significant marketing costs) competing with and that resemble each other (e.g., lots of spectacle to capture international markets and even justify high ticket price), and viewers who are now growing more weary of over-saturation and increasing costs.
  #50  
Old 08-30-2019, 01:03 AM
nightshadea is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: a condo in hell 10th lvl
Posts: 5,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamthewalrus(:3= View Post
Sure, but that's the same way with cable. There are always shows that are on special channels that you don't subscribe to, unless you're paying like ~$200/month for cable.

Which is enough to subscribe to like 15 streaming services.
see to me that's the same thing as cable just with an extra layer of hassle ....... why do that when i could have and pay for all of it in one easy system and not have to worry about system requirements and internet bs and all of that?
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:30 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017