- 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: Peacock being forced on YouTube Premium subscribers
Posted on 7/27/26 at 12:19 pm to Ingeniero
Posted on 7/27/26 at 12:19 pm to Ingeniero
quote:
For a while it was more convenient and cheaper to cut the cord. Now companies have become money hungry and changed to a system where you essentially need multiple streaming platforms to watch what you want, and the combination is more expensive than cable. Back to the high seas for me.
Some of that battle is hurting local TV too. Look at the mess of Affiliation changes last week where Nexstar dropped CBS in favor of promoting its CW to some major TV stations in some markets, and it shifted CBS onto a Subchannel of some Hearst stations. The issue with the IPTV cable networks is that they negotiate carriage on the network level at a network rate instead of the interest of the local stations.
Of course some station groups are also guilty in raising the prices of cable this way because the station groups negotiate with the cable carriers directly instead of the network. All the networks, now require some sort of network compensation fee. It used to be that local TV stations had a license to print money. Local TV station owners owned the local TV license and the network wanted distribution on a local TV station, so they got paid to rebroadcast the networks. Because national advertising paid enough for the content to be redistributed that way.
Now, as more stations have popped up and astronomical rebroadcasting rights fees for sports like the NFL, that changed the model to where TV stations have to pay the networks for rebroadcasting network programming. So that is why some stations continued to increase fees on cable systems where they could still get revenue from these sources at the cost of increasing cable rates and shifting viewers else where to OTA where the TV station receives no revenue or streaming IPTV providers where they may not receive as much compensation.
All this is doing is created fractured markets where content and content providers are searching for an audience.
One day local TV will be just local TV and no networks. I wonder if there will even be a day where even the syndication model collapses and old TV shows go onto online streaming platforms only and cut out distribution in syndication to local TV stations, retro TV networks, or cable channels.
Posted on 7/27/26 at 12:20 pm to redneck hippie
quote:its all about the provider you choose but yes, it has all the local channels in every market in the US so you can pick the one that you want with all the local flavor.
Does IpTV work well with local sports? I’ve used KODI off and on over years but it’s wonky and half the addons don’t work or go extinct. It’s not really point and click like YouTube TV or Netflix
you still have ads just like regular TV that you could pull off an antenna if you are in an area where that is an option so not sure why everyone is so butthurt about IPTV.
again, fix your fricking product. we shouldn't be forced to pay for ad-supported local TV stations because they've pretty much made the 'diy' option impossible for most people.
its all by design.
Posted on 7/27/26 at 12:23 pm to Tarps99
quote:
Look at the mess of Affiliation changes last week where Nexstar dropped CBS in favor of promoting its CW to some major TV stations in some markets, and it shifted CBS onto a Subchannel of some Hearst stations. The issue with the IPTV cable networks is that they negotiate carriage on the network level at a network rate instead of the interest of the local stations.
fricking THIS!!!
we never had this problem when you could stick rabbit ears on your TV or mount an antenna on your roof.
"oh but the FCC mandates that locla stations in HDTV be available free via antenna"
frick off, this isn't remotely true. i'm in TN and the hills by my house mean i have ZERO options for local TV (verified by antennaweb) so frick you if i want to watch local tv and found a way to do it.
Posted on 7/27/26 at 12:29 pm to Cosmo
quote:
But not youtubeTV right?
Every time I cancel peacock they offer me a year for like $20 so i do it
I mean this could be a good deal depending on your situation.
quote:
YouTube Premium is the subscription version of the streaming platform that offers videos without ads and the ability to download most videos, depending on the subscription tier. The service offers a variety of plans beginning at $8.99 per month. Peacock Premium currently costs $10.99 per month.
I already pay for peacock so if they have something that combines these for lower than the price of paying separately, that's good for me.
Posted on 7/27/26 at 12:29 pm to CAD703X
quote:
Well yeah because you are stealing
FIX YOUR frickING BUSINESS MODEL LIKE SPOTIFY AND APPLE MUSIC DID WITH MUSIC AND MAYBE PEOPLE WOULD QUIT WORKING AROUND THE ISSUES
But you are still stealing so comparing yourself to others is pointless. I steal too but let's not pretend like we have found some legitimate loophole.
Posted on 7/27/26 at 12:31 pm to Ingeniero
quote:
For a while it was more convenient and cheaper to cut the cord. Now companies have become money hungry and changed to a system where you essentially need multiple streaming platforms to watch what you want, and the combination is more expensive than cable. Back to the high seas for me.
I don't know about this.
My parents charter bill is $421/ month. Over half of that is the cable package.
Posted on 7/27/26 at 12:39 pm to bbap
quote:we just donated $20k to a guy who provides lsu baseball games for this entire site so nobody on here better act holier than thou
But you are still stealing so comparing yourself to others is pointless. I steal too but let's not pretend like we have found some legitimate loophole.
i can get into the semantics of what i am 'allowed' to watch (oh sorry a technical glitch means your show didn't get picked up by your DVR..or my favorite...the DVR cuts out the beginning or the end at the most critcal point)
especially awesome during football season where you are almost guaranteed a show you paid HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS for will get fricked by overtime.
my point is, spotify and apple fixed this problem for music. guess what? music piracy practically vanished overnight. for $10/$15mo, its not worth the hassle.
DVR is shite; streaming is better but suffers from "oh sorry, you didn't watch that show in time..and NOW ITS GOINE" frick. YOU.
i'll watch WHAT I WANT WHEN I WANT and frick YOU TO THE PEOPLE TELLING ME NOT TO DOWNLOAD A CAR.
Posted on 7/27/26 at 12:39 pm to dgnx6
quote:
My parents charter bill is $421/ month. Over half of that is the cable package.
jesus christ. the mafia was never this bad.
eta and they're probably only watching the evening news and reruns of matlock for that price
so who's actually stealing from who here?
This post was edited on 7/27/26 at 12:46 pm
Posted on 7/27/26 at 12:44 pm to Cosmo
quote:
even more expensive once ESPN unlimited is integrated
FIFY. My jaw hit the floor when I saw Unlimited was $35 a month on top of Hulu.
Posted on 7/27/26 at 12:47 pm to LemmyLives
quote:
more expensive once ESPN unlimited is integrated
Doubt it goes up more than $10
Reading the deal it sounds like ESPN caved a lot more than google/youtube did
Posted on 7/27/26 at 3:00 pm to LSUneaux
How is this a bad thing, assuming they don't raise my rates?
Posted on 7/27/26 at 4:10 pm to dgnx6
quote:
My parents charter bill is $421/ month. Over half of that is the cable package.
$200+ for television in 2026 is diabolical.
Your parents are paying for it but dude, this is almost as bad as what payday loans do.
Posted on 7/27/26 at 4:12 pm to LSUneaux
I already get it free because I have Comcast.
This gives Youtube another excuse to raise prices on premium.
This gives Youtube another excuse to raise prices on premium.
Posted on 7/27/26 at 4:41 pm to dgnx6
quote:
My parents charter bill is $421/ month

Posted on 7/27/26 at 4:45 pm to LSUneaux
quote:
The partnership comes weeks after Comcast announced NBCUniversal would split from its parent company.
What would become a shocker in the industry is if Comcast ditched the cable TV business and ceeded all TV products to YouTube TV.
I know some Cable or ISP's that have ditched the TV side of programming and went Internet Only and told their customers to sign up with YouTubeTV or another IPTV cable provider.
I wonder if the FCC will one day mandate YouTubeTV and other IPTV providers to carry PEG channels. Like Acadiana Open Channel and other local channels that may only rebroadcast local council meetings or school board meetings. Of course some of these have already made the transition to stream online.
This post was edited on 7/27/26 at 4:51 pm
Posted on 7/27/26 at 6:14 pm to CAD703X
quote:
haven't had a cable or streaming bill in a decade.
I have everything setup with jellyfin after plex got a little too streamy feeling.
Combined that with the 700 channels included with the LG TV and YouTube premium, and that's an infinite amount of content.
My wife has never once used one of the above options.
Prime, disney, hulu, netflix... It's all just shite and she wants it all.
This post was edited on 7/27/26 at 6:15 pm
Posted on 7/27/26 at 10:58 pm to X123F45
quote:
My wife has never once used one of the above options.
Prime, disney, hulu, netflix... It's all just shite and she wants it all.
How much time do people really need to be watching TV? I realized when I have it on it’s just background noise when I’m on my iPad. The free over the air channels have been working well in the month since I’ve given up YouTube TV.
Popular
Back to top

1









