quote:
After months of nasty contract disputes, Roku this morning announced it’s come to an agreement with Google which will allow it to continue to carry both YouTube and YouTube TV on its platform. Roku declined to share the specifics of the deal terms, beyond saying it’s a multi-year extension that covers both services.

For Roku and Google customers, however, that means they don’t know which party won the battle or what that means for Google’s access to Roku’s user data. During the spat, Roku brought to public attention how Google was allegedly demanding elevated access to customer data which Roku had then described as “outside the realm” of industry-standard practices. It said Google wanted more user data than Roku offered its other customers.

Roku also said that Google had threatened to retaliate by increasing the hardware spec requirements for YouTube TV if it didn’t get its way. That would have meant Roku’s low-end players would no longer have access to the service.

These are hefty complaints. And in the case of the user data-sharing agreements, it seems customers should have the right to know where the decision ended up.

quote:
“We’re happy to share that we’ve reached a deal with Roku to continue distributing the YouTube and YouTube TV apps on Roku devices. This means that Roku customers will continue to have access to YouTube and that the YouTube TV app will once again be available in the Roku store for both new and existing members. We are pleased to have a partnership that benefits our mutual users.”

Glad to see it's resolved for now, but I hate that not only has the channel carriage dispute bullshite carried over to streaming, we also have to worry about app/device disputes as well.

Will enough customers ever care enough to force major change in this industry? I want a la carte channels delivered in a standardized way to be consumed by my app and device of choice. Instead the industry is consolidating shows into their own services and apps, basically the opposite direction.

I realize that I'm in the minority and I like things different than most, but damn they are making piracy look more and more attractive.

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by SlowFlowPro

Simple Solutions to Complex Probs

Member since Jan 2004

450798 posts

Posted on 12/8/21 at 12:07 pm to Korkstand

It's so annoying b/c I invested in Roku to be provider agnostic and now Roku is at the center of every fight.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by LSUtigerME

Walker, LA

Member since Oct 2012

3892 posts

Posted on 12/8/21 at 12:25 pm to Korkstand

quote:
Will enough customers ever care enough to force major change in this industry?

It happened.

And this was the result:

quote:
…the industry is consolidating shows into their own services and apps

We wanted a la carte and were even “willing to pay for it” and that’s exactly what we got.

When there’s massive amounts of money involved, everyone wants their share of the pie and will flex their leverage to get it.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Korkstand

Member since Nov 2003

29000 posts

Posted on 12/8/21 at 12:36 pm to SlowFlowPro

Same here.

I don't know if Roku is picking fights hoping to win some regulatory battles or if the big dogs are trying to squeeze Roku out. Either way consumers lose, as usual.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by Korkstand

Member since Nov 2003

29000 posts

Posted on 12/8/21 at 1:21 pm to LSUtigerME

quote:
We wanted a la carte and were even “willing to pay for it” and that’s exactly what we got.

When there’s massive amounts of money involved, everyone wants their share of the pie and will flex their leverage to get it.

This is exactly what I expected to happen. It's obviously not my personal ideal, but IMO it's better for consumers to be able to buy content direct from the source rather than having to go through the cable company middle man who creates his own bundles and takes a cut.

What I want, and what I know we will never get, is a la carte at the channel/show level. This has been half-assed offered for a while now, you can buy individual seasons/episodes on various services, but the pricing is kind of silly and you are locked into using a particular platform. Basically they're priced for people looking to fill in gaps of content they've missed, not as a long-term entertainment solution.

So I know you're right. There is far too much money involved for the content owners to do anything other than what they're doing now. I really don't mind the consolidation, and the current price points are actually pretty good. I even understand the user experience and technical aspects to the walled-garden app approach. I just hate that the side effect of all this is that my access to content is always in flux, dictated by whether I've bought the right gear and by the whims of suits trying to squeeze out another dollar.

Page 1