- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Time Warner Wants to Gut Hulu?
Posted on 2/4/16 at 4:09 pm to TeddyPadillac
Posted on 2/4/16 at 4:09 pm to TeddyPadillac
quote:
People are wiling to pay for what they watch, evident by Netflix/Hulu/Slingtv, but we are tired of paying for the boat load of shite we don't watch that have to be a part of our cable subscription.
I don't need 250+ channels. I'd be fine with 15.
I'm cutting the cord, b/c i'm essentially paying the $130/month for directv just so i can record shows and watch live sports. I haven't watched a live show outside of sports in probably 5 years. Well Netflix and Hulu solve the dvr problem and Slingtv solves the live sports. Most people have netflix anyway, so instead of paying the $130/month i'm paying $30/month and watching the same things i was before.
Literally the only thing that we watched that we can't watch now is the Walking Dead and Pelicans games(although i can find streams of that). And my wife just buys the walking dead episodes for $2 on Prime. So she pays about $50/year to watch the Walking Dead.
Exactly my thoughts. I cut the cord for this reason, and I am finding ways to watch the content elsewhere. Mostly that's on Netflix and Amazon Prime, which I pay for. I am using KODI to watch the channels that I want to live, because I am tired of paying $135/month for 3 channels. We have been ripped off long enough.
0
Posted on 2/4/16 at 4:11 pm to CocomoLSU
We are not far off from our internet service providers capping the amount of data we can use each month. Non of us will be happy once this happens. I've heard 40gb a month is what cox and att will push for as soon as 2017.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 4:13 pm to tigerfan 33
quote:
We are not far off from our internet service providers capping the amount of data we can use each month
Comcast already gives you a data limit and charges you more if you go over it, like its a cell phone.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 4:13 pm to Breesus
quote:
Free? The frick? I pay Hulu
Do you honestly believe that Hulu would be 12 bucks a month or whatever it is now if cable subscriptions as we know it went away?
When it goes from bulk subscriptions to a la carte apps, be prepared for Netflix, Hulu, etc. to have their subscription price increase to bring the same content or have the way they function change.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 4:15 pm to CocomoLSU
quote:
Oh absolutely.
And I have very little sympathy for cable companies as well. If they're smart they'll see what happened to companies like Blockbuster and choose to adapt rather than stick their guns and be so fricking hardheaded that their businesses crumble. Time will tell if they're smart enough to do that though.
Exactly.
quote:
But ultimately, it's not Hulu's content, so when the owner of said content comes along and wants to stop it, he can (and will, apparently). And that sucks for Hulu.
But then it's sort of on them for how they draft their contracts for content with companies.
quote:
But the growing trend seems to be the opposite of how you feel. It seems to me that people want things for less and less money (ultimately free), and they also don't want to be bothered with advertising.
Oh I know, that's what I'm saying. I don't get the backlash. I've brought up my Netflix commercial idea and it gets shot down all the time. Content is not free people.
Unless I make it free because someone is being a d-bag.
quote:
Hell, I get pissed when I "have to" watch an ad on things like youtube most of the time.
Well that's because we spend youtube time watching 5 second gerbil reaction videos. Yeah, I don't want a commercial before that. A commercial before and during a 30 minute production is fine by me.
quote:
I think it will ultimately fall into production companies having their own apps and reaching the consumers directly that way. Most of them now seem to use some sort of outlet in the form of an existing company/app, like Netflix, Prime, Hulu, etc. But eventually what happens...they see those companies doing really well and then when it comes time to renegotiate a deal, they jack up the prices for their content. It sucks to say, but it seems like the power will be in the content owners' hands for the time being, because they have the supply to everyone else's demand.
Which is why I think Amazon's channel model can work. Buy Prime. By an extra 5-10 per month for specific channels of content.
I really want to try Shudder, just haven't pulled the trigger.
quote:
And I am damn interested to know why in the hell you "can't stand DVRs." That seems like an awfully weird thing to hate.
I don't hate them, but they've become a technological crutch for cable companies.
"If you want to watch TV anytime you want, buy this little device with old technology - see the HARD DRIVE - and record shows on it...More tech for your house!"
I'm a minimalist so I don't like yet another box. I like the efficiency of streaming. And it's ludicrous to think that with the technology we have now, I have to take that step of finding stuff to record.
But it's another piece of equipment, like the HD upconverter, the stupid cable box, etc., that cable companies can have you rent. Ok maybe I do hate them
I have a cable box that sits on a shelf unused, because it's cheaper for me to buy cable I don't use with Internet than it is to buy Internet alone. Tell me that makes sense?
Posted on 2/4/16 at 4:16 pm to Scrowe
quote:
Do you honestly believe that Hulu would be 12 bucks a month or whatever it is now if cable subscriptions as we know it went away?
The one that really gets me is when people think they'll be able to get all of ESPN's content for $10-$20 a month.
They won't even be able to get ESPN by itself for $20. Never mind ESPN2, ESPN3, ESPNU, ESPNEws, ESPNClassic, SECN, and LHN.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 4:16 pm to CocomoLSU
quote:
And I have very little sympathy for cable companies as well. If they're smart they'll see what happened to companies like Blockbuster and choose to adapt rather than stick their guns and be so fricking hardheaded that their businesses crumble. Time will tell if they're smart enough to do that though
I can answer that for you, they won't
It's the nature of things, these are entrenched companies that benefited from government granted monopolies, they can't adapt. Their business is built not on being innovative per se, but on getting political favors (bureaucracies are the same in the real world in the private sector just like government). So of course they are going to fight. Its the same thing with Uber, look where that is fought the hardest. Usually jurisdictions (NYC, Las Vegas, France) where existing taxis are cartels created by government licencing, which limits supply and locks in a certain level of profit.
This post was edited on 2/4/16 at 4:21 pm
Posted on 2/4/16 at 4:16 pm to Scrowe
quote:
Do you honestly believe that Hulu would be 12 bucks a month or whatever it is now if cable subscriptions as we know it went away?
When it goes from bulk subscriptions to a la carte apps, be prepared for Netflix, Hulu, etc. to have their subscription price increase to bring the same content or have the way they function change.
And I have no problem paying that. It isn't all about cost for me, it's convenience and efficiency. It should be a little cheaper because I'm not always consuming content over the wire, and I don't want to rent technology, but yeah, it can be $100 for Netflix if they had Cable levels of content, and new stuff.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 4:17 pm to The Godfather
quote:
Comcast already gives you a data limit and charges you more if you go over it, like its a cell phone.
There has to be a way to pay for infrastructure, cables aren't free and this is how they will begin to adapt to the changing market with many choosing to "cut the cord".
Posted on 2/4/16 at 4:20 pm to Dr RC
quote:
The one that really gets me is when people think they'll be able to get all of ESPN's content for $10-$20 a month.
They won't even be able to get ESPN by itself for $20. Never mind ESPN2, ESPN3, ESPNU, ESPNEws, ESPNClassic, SECN, and LHN.
ESPN's expansion was due to the cable model, as the market shifts, so will their revenue model. You won't need 10 channels because you don't need a literal "channel" for streamed content.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 4:26 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
you don't need a literal "channel" for streamed content.
What will also occur though is the loss of smaller niche shows that will lose their profitability due to the channel not being sold as a package along with the advertising blocks being sold as a package. Who's going to pay for advertisements just on a track and field meet on the SEC network for instance when the views won't be sufficient without the ability to "surf" channels which gives your ad the chance of being viewed with someone gaining interest from something that they would not normally watch.
The whole landscape is going to change, there are going to be many positives and negatives throughout the whole process.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 5:06 pm to Dr RC
quote:
The one that really gets me is when people think they'll be able to get all of ESPN's content for $10-$20 a month.
They won't even be able to get ESPN by itself for $20. Never mind ESPN2, ESPN3, ESPNU, ESPNEws, ESPNClassic, SECN, and LHN.
So what's going to happen to SlingTV? Why is ESPN letting them offer all of those channels for $25/month, on top of the other 20 channels they offer?
Posted on 2/4/16 at 5:21 pm to Dr RC
quote:
Do you honestly believe that Hulu would be 12 bucks a month or whatever it is now if cable subscriptions as we know it went away?
Id pay cable money prices for Hulu.
Watch when I want, what I want massive amounts of content new and old, new and old seasons, Movies, smaller shows.
Etc...
Cox Cable doesn't provide nearly the user friendly Internet interface, amount of content, accessibility of content, etc....
As for this:
quote:
The one that really gets me is when people think they'll be able to get all of ESPN's content for $10-$20 a month.
They won't even be able to get ESPN by itself for $20. Never mind ESPN2, ESPN3, ESPNU, ESPNEws, ESPNClassic, SECN, and LHN.
I think it would be funny how much ESPN's worth would suffer. ESPN is the single largest cost in everyone's cable bill. If we went alacart ESPN might go. Bankrupt unless they secure exclusive live coverage in every sport over the network companies. Which won't happen.
Who the frick would willing pay $30 a month just to watch ESPN?
Posted on 2/4/16 at 5:25 pm to CocomoLSU
quote:
While I agree with you in principle, it's a business
They're making it personal.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 5:27 pm to tigerfan 33
I think Cox and AT&T have this already. It's just set at really high currently so that you're extremely unlikely to go over. And when you do go over I don't think they actually add the charge anyway.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 5:31 pm to Breesus
quote:
Who the frick would willing pay $30 a month just to watch ESPN?
people who like sports and want to watch games?
Posted on 2/4/16 at 5:32 pm to Scrowe
quote:
Who's going to pay for advertisements just on a track and field meet on the SEC network for instance when the views won't be sufficient without the ability to "surf" channels which gives your ad the chance of being viewed with someone gaining interest from something that they would not normally watch.
SEC forms a streaming channel. Sets up and HD camera, streams event.
Why is this a problem?
You pay Hulu to air your ad. You don't pick which show it airs on.
Same principle.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 5:32 pm to Breesus
quote:
Who the frick would willing pay $30 a month just to watch ESPN?
Have you been to any of the other boards on TigerDroppings?
Posted on 2/4/16 at 5:32 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
people who like sports and want to watch games?
Most games aren't even on ESPN. What sport are you talking about?
Posted on 2/4/16 at 5:35 pm to Breesus
quote:
Most games aren't even on ESPN. What sport are you talking about?
Are you kidding? Outside of the NFL, most games (or at least a large number of games) ARE on ESPN or some ESPN channel.
ETA: of 13 LSU FB games last year (counting McNesse) I'm pretty sure 11 of them were on ESPN. Auburn and Bama were on CBS, the rest on the Mouse Network
This post was edited on 2/4/16 at 5:44 pm
Page 2 of 3
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News