Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Disney to Pull Movies From Netflix, Launch New Streaming Services

nt5672 said:
Exactly. The cable companies are making bad choices about which channels to fund. If a channel can't get enough subscribers at a willing price point to be viable, then the channel needs to go away. That is how it is supposed to work. Welcome to natural selection. Welcome to the way the world has worked for 1000s of years.
Click to expand...
That makes no business sense. Lets keep it simple. Say "The NetWork TV" provider has "Popular Channel" and "Minority Channel" bundled together. 95% of people never watch "Minority Channel" but are happy to pay to receive "Popular Channel" which in-turn funds "Minority Channel". 5% of people are happy to pay the bundle fee to receive "Minority Channel." Now unbundle the two channels and "Minority Channel" goes out of business and "The NetWork TV" provider loses 5% of paid subscribers from "Minority Channel" as they have no interest in "Popular Channel".
Still believe that's how the World works?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ohio.emt, 69Mustang and jklps
Cougarcat said:
It's not ideal, but I just rotate what I am subscribed to. Game of Thrones on? Subscribe to HBO, cancel the others, and focus on HBO content for those seven-ten weeks. American Gods? Switch to Starz. The only one I continuously subscribe to is Amazon, but I really have that for shipping.
Click to expand...

kudos to you, but that is a *lot* of work!
 
The most strategically sound move Disney has made in years. Now they just need to fix the BAMTech apps, which are complete garbage (I'm looking at you, HBO Go).
 
  • Like
Reactions: jdillings
mmm1345 said:
I'm on Xfinity and I only pay $115 a month for Blast Internet (200 MBPS)
Click to expand...

the last time I had Xfinity I could not find a d*mn thing that I wanted to watch. The concept of TV channels belongs with the dinosaurs, and Comcrap is simply too dense to get it. I'll get my content from iTunes, and the occasional download.
 
No surprise but really Netflix or what I call it Notflix is already on thin ice. Everything is going away just recently the FOX content is going away. After Disney what is left CW WB wait I heard WB is doing there own streaming service too. So by 2020 Netflix aka Notflix will be nothing but original content no thanks since 85% of it is mature garbage with a pathetic 15% that cant hold a candle to the Disney WB family content.

I will however sign up for a Disney service. I am finding these micro sub necessary but I love Funimation for anime (I liked dubbed not sub which is why I don't want Crunchyroll) Boomerang for classic TV animation they add new content weekly, Hulu for much licensed content Fox shows soon TGIF shows.

Now NF just a few CBC shows like Heartland which I am getting tired season 5 same drama over and over. So by 2020 NF will be another HBO, Showtime, Starz with many grown up originals and B-rated dollar star bargain bin movies.
 
jklps said:
I think step 2 of this process will be pulling ESPN from all streaming services such as PS Vue, Directv Now, etc to make people who like sports have to use their service.
Click to expand...

The thing that drives me nuts
spinedoc77 said:
I don't mean to sound cheap, but honestly sometimes I am. TIVO is $14.99 so I can skip commercials, which isn't an issue for me. Don't get me wrong, this is only my take on it, and I do not blame you in the least if that's worth it to you. God knows I paid TIVO right from the beginning of their company up to about 4 or so years ago.

I should sell the boxes, I just haven't had the time. What really frustrated me was that I'd pay this huge lifetime membership, something like $600 or so, I think it was even more, but then technology would move on and my 480p TIVO box wasn't good anymore but my lifetime sub couldn't be transferred. Then 1080p, then 4k, etc, that's why I have multiple boxes sitting around.

But we definitely disagree, streaming content from a PC connected to my projector is the most liberating experience I've had in consuming content. I just sign on once with my cable (optimum) login, and never have to sign in again. I can browse all the content at my leisure, save it for later, or watch it right away completely commercial free. Plus my PC runs much faster than the TIVO boxes, although maybe they have gotten faster since I stopped using them. But I remember using the TIVO was sometimes a very slow, laggy experience. Once again maybe the hardware has improved over the last couple of years. I also have access to the content on any PC, my surface in bed, my projector, my PC at the office, etc.

You do have a point on the waiting period, although that differs from provider to provider. HBO, for example, lets you stream right away. Conversely AMC makes you wait 24 hours. But the nature of having any show available means I don't have to schedule it, I just pop into the website and if it's ready I watch it, and if not I watch something else, it's not like I'm killing myself to watch it *right now*.

Anyhoo I'm certainly NOT disagreeing with you, I just lost my taste for TIVO even though I was definitely diehard at one time. But the advent of Netflix, amazon prime, and vast improvement of each providers streaming experience let me ditch the hardware shackles and cost of TIVO.
Click to expand...

You don't have to pay $14.99, you can pay $200 for a box and $300 for lifetime service. That's $500 for a box that most people will use for 4-5 years ... which even if you toss it meant you paid $8.33 a month for... but tivo boxes have huge resale value because of their lifetime service.... I get every other generation box, so really about every 3-4 years or so... and I usually sell them for about 70% of what I paid... so say that $500 example, I'll sell the box for so for 4 years of service\hardware I pay $150 (aka $3 a month). I'd pay 3x that to have the reliability of Tivo's iOS app, and ability to watch my home TV from anywhere on the planet.
 
I've come to realise, every problem I have with any product or company always come back to some kind of "bundling".

"You want Great Show X? Then pay for subscription to crappy Streaming Service Y!"
"You want to play Game A? You have to buy over-priced console B!"
"You want to use our really cool OS? Then buy our low-spec, expensive hardware!"
"You want our really fast cable broadband service? You have to also take our terrible cable TV service.."

If they just offered each of these individually and let the buyer decide, there would be no complaining. We'd just buy what we want and avoid products we don't. It's the bundling/packaging/exclusives that are really annoying.

I have less and less sympathy for companies who make decisions like these then complain about piracy.
 
ghostface147 said:
No one will ever make a service that has the backing of all major studios and most cable channels for a set price for online access. People wanted a la carte, now you're paying for it. 10 here, 6, 5 here, 12 there....it adds up. Plus whatever you pay for your home internet service.
Click to expand...

People don't understand that ala carte is more expensive because you don't have the networks like QVC and HSN subsidizing your cable bill anymore in the hopes you might just one day tune in. LOL
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Scrip
The one upside I can see to this new world is that I can subscribe and unsubscribe with a click, and without having to deal with Comcast 'retention specialists'.
With the teensiest bit of patience, I can rotate through subscriptions, binge each for a month or two then cancel.
At least that how my behavior seems to have evolved.

But to me its worth extra just to not have to deal with Comcast.
Although, yes, I still need Comcast for my data pipeline, and of course they'll simply raise their data prices to make up for their lost content revenue.
Don't get me started on why they should be relegated to pure plumbing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jeremiah256
If this trend continues we'll see a future where Netflix only offers Netflix produced content, Hulu only Hulu produced content and Amazon only Amazon produced content while all the major movie studies like Disney, Sony, Warner, Paramount, Universal and so on will have their own streaming services.

For some people it's going to be more expensive than their rent at some point with all these subscription services.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tonyr6
that was short
[doublepost=1502230525][/doublepost]
pika2000 said:
But isn't that what everybody wants? A la cate instead of paying one provider (be it the cable companies or netflix) for things you don't need?

/s
Click to expand...
a la carte doesn't mean that providers can charge more than cable, at the very least should be same pricing scheme. Once everyone is a la carte only then prices should come down thanks to supply and demand.
 
I'll never subscribe to a streaming service for any single content provider.

*subscribes to HBO Now for two shows*
*subscribes to Showtime for Twin Peaks*
 
-BigMac- said:
Doesnt SJ own majority share already? Or is that only with pixar?
Click to expand...

Steve Jobs doesn't own anything anymore. His wife/family CUT their stake in Disney IN HALF a few months ago. Pixar is part of Disney.
 
jgelin said:
Fragmentation will be the death of this.
Eventually consumers just wont have the money to keep adding a monthly subscription service.
Click to expand...

In their attempts to squeeze as much as possible out of consumers, they're pushing those consumers to once again consider "alternatives".
 
whooleytoo said:
I've come to realise, every problem I have with any product or company always come back to some kind of "bundling".

"You want Great Show X? Then pay for subscription to crappy Streaming Service Y!"
"You want to play Game A? You have to buy over-priced console B!"
"You want to use our really cool OS? Then buy our low-spec, expensive hardware!"
"You want our really fast cable broadband service? You have to also take our terrible cable TV service.."

If they just offered each of these individually and let the buyer decide, there would be no complaining. We'd just buy what we want and avoid products we don't. It's the bundling/packaging/exclusives that are really annoying.

I have less and less sympathy for companies who make decisions like these then complain about piracy.
Click to expand...

And yet iTunes has basically offered a broad, unbundled diverse mix of shows al-a-carte and commercial free for years and years. Why hasn't that completely replaced classic bundling? Because people don't want to actually pay what the show creators want for their stand-alone shows.

The real issue that drives all of that is that we consumers have some delusion that there is some way we can get everything we want in media for a fraction of what we've traditionally paid. And everyone else in the chain wants to make more money, not less. So we continue with our delusion and they continue with their profit motives. We are getting the change we desired except for the fat discount part. And what are we doing with it? Whining about the cumulative cost of al-a-carte. Whining about how much we want a unified package for search and on-screen guides. Whining about broadband caps (which is just cable's way of making theirs no matter what). Etc.

I wonder how long until we are basically whining for "the good old days" of cable-like bundlers of all programming at a cable-like price that doesn't count against our broadband quotas. And as we learn how much of a subsidy commercials covered- that's commercials running on channels we watched and many channels we didn't- we might even find ourselves wanting some commercials to come back to reduce the fees all out of our pockets instead of only partially (and the rest paid by advertiser's OPM).
 
  • Like
Reactions: ohio.emt, sinsin07 and jklps
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back