NBC's Streaming Service 'Peacock' Launching in July With Three Subscription Tiers

[ActionableMango]

Pretty soon we'll have companies that you pay $50 a month for access to Netflix, Hulu, Disney+, Apple+, HBO Go, and Peacock... and just like that, we'll have gone full circle and have cable companies again.

Not soon. Amazon Prime already does this.

Apple's TV app also kind of does this, in its own way. You still pay for everything separately, but it does put the content together in a single application. (But only for those services that co-operate. Last I heard, Netflix is still holding out.)

No, I meant a streaming service.

iTunes isn't a streaming service? I guess you can download content locally, but I think streaming is the primary method of watching.

 

[UnusedLoginID]

Lame, I got excited for a second regarding the Olympic coverage but realized its still the lame end of the day digested content. Give us access to a live stream of the event...

Got excited about this… and then big letdown when I read what they are actually going to show.
I guess I’ll keep watching the Olympics channel online.
As to Premier League soccer, I have that with Sling. Unless they manage to have multiple channels showing all live games at the same time. Then I’ll pay for the $5 tier.

 

[PickUrPoison]

I believe that the term channel will soon have about the same cultural relevance as the term flip phone.
Personally, I can’t imagine wanting to watch a channel. I can’t even wrap my head around it.
I like content. I like shows.
I don’t like channels. I can’t imagine instead of thinking: “I want to watch something funny” or “I want to watch something sci-fi”, thinking “I don’t care what I’m watching; as long as I get to see a cbs or nbc logo, I’ll watch whatever!”.
The idea of paying for channels, to me, is exactly the same as throwing your money away on cable- paying for a bunch of garbage you don’t want, & having one or two things you do want.
With Netflix, Amazon Prime, HBO, and Disney+... I can find a good show or movie of any genre, any time I want. I struggle to see why I’d want channels, instead of full streaming services.

Agree with everything, but there’s also a shift in meaning happening in conjunction with the shift from broadcast/cable to streaming.

The word “channel” is starting to mean streaming service. Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Disney+ are increasingly the equivalent of channels; Amazon and Apple refer to the third party streaming services available by subscription directly from inside their apps as “channels”.

HBO is a good example of bridging/merging the meaning of channel as both a cable channel and streaming “channel”.

 

[fairuz]

Your story isn’t adding up, man.
Sounds like you’re trying to claim both sides of the tracks!
You are either someone only moderately into television, or just barely into television (as you claim); in which case “just Netflix and maybe Hulu” are more than enough, and likely overkilll.

Not if the one thing I want to watch isn't on there. At the moment that happens to be Rick and Morty, which is only on the sucky Adult Swim service (seriously it's the worst one I've ever seen), and the next thing I want to watch probably won't be there. It would be perfect for me if I cared enough to sign up for whatever I want then cancel, but I don't, so I don't bother.

Enough about me. Those of you who care about TV shouldn't want the content creators to also be the service providers. It's like having a bunch of little trusts, plus they don't have the right engineers. The ideal scenario is that they just create content and distribute through a few competing streaming services. It was perfect a few years ago.

Disney+, pretty broken site. ESPN and Fox Sports are so broken that both times I paid for them to watch the World Cup, the only program I ever care about, I still resorted to piracy cause the paid streams kept dropping. Of course, they aren't streaming experts and don't need to be either.

 

[fairuz]

iTunes isn't a streaming service? I guess you can download content locally, but I think streaming is the primary method of watching.

Yeah, it's a streaming service, also one of the best.

 

[Michael Scrip]

My point about not watching TV on their schedule was regarding the latest episodes of shows I followed which were all on demand, not random episodes of NCIS.

My bill was about to increase to 180/month (with internet)which is why I dropped the box in favor of an a la carte selection of channels for 30/month so my total bill is 100 with internet.. I don’t watch enough TV to justify the full cost especially when I could just purchase seasons of the few shows I watch for less money. Everything else I’m slightly interested in will probably drop on Netflix eventually. I never stated I thought cable was “so good”, I was pointing out a feature that seemed you were not aware of.

Again... I am aware that some cable companies offer on-demand services.

But not everything is available on-demand. It's a crapshoot.

I can watch every episode of Stranger Things on Netflix on-demand.... but there's no guarantee that [insert show here] will be available on-demand from my cable company.

Depending on the show... you'll either watch it live... or you'll set your DVR.

 

[unplugme71]

All these streaming services makes me want to go back to......Comcast. Yuck

 

[EightyTwenty]

Get back to running your dying empire!!!
CEOs of cable companies shouldn’t be wasting time posting on MacRumors.

If you’re not a CEO, desperate to make a case for your CLEARLY inferior and VERY CLEARLY more expensive product.... then, ummmm- I guess you’re just extremely confused??

Cable is garbage. Google & Facebook have taught us that if you are willing to endure ads.... the product is then free! They’re paid for by the ads.
Cable makes the revenue off the ads, but STILL charges you!
They force you to take that which you don’t want; then charge you for it.
Cable/satellite requires professional installation. You need to plan a time to be home to allow a stranger in, to run stuff all throughout your house, drill holes in your roof to mount equipment, or put a pole/stand in your yard. For the pleasure of this process (which you perplexingly consider convenient?), you also get locked into a contract. Typically, 2 years. With HUGE cancellation penalties.
If your provider gets in a battle with content creators or sports conglomerates & quits airing say the one show & one sports team you love- there’s no recourse. You can’t get out of your contract.
This sounds like a miserable experience and “deal” to me. I cannot think of a single LESS CONVENIENT business model for a service or product. It’s absolutely the worst.
On top of that... cable is like $100/month (discounting scammy temporary discounts).
Streaming services are $5-$10.
So....... if I have the top 5 streaming services; I have access to far more television & movies than that cable package, it’s all on-demand, there’s no equipment, there’s no contract, & it’s half the cost.
Welcome to 2020, where people are no longer forced to endure annoying advertising, alongside their home entertainment.
Further- if you enjoy ads or are simply unwilling to pay for a streaming service so you don’t have to be subjected to them... I guess you missed the part where they’re offering a free tier that includes those ads you may miss out on, were you to join the rest of us in this cheaper/better/more convenient paradigm shift?

Take a deep breath and relax.

Literally all of your cable criticisms apply to Internet, which is a prerequisite for all streaming services, and almost certainly being purchased through your local cable company.

Lastly (I’ll keep this short, unlike you) streaming services are certainly not cheaper (in all cases) - YouTube TV alone is $50 USD, “better” is an entirely subjective term, and this increasingly fractured and siloed content is anything but convenient.

You like streaming. Good for you. Not everyone has to. People can have different preferences.

 

[Futurix]

So. Any word on whether this will available only in the U.S.? Hopefully Canada will some of that action.

I'll subscribe instantly for any streaming service with SNL back catalogue... but I'm in Germany, so there's nothing (although there's nothing in UK either! Netflix used to carry some SNL compilations back in 2012, and that's it).

 

[jlc1978]

If 15 golf streaming services come out- at least 14 will quickly fail. For the first time in the history of television, consumers, and NOT companies are in control of the success or failure of content.

Actually, a few big companies will provide virtually all of the content that appeals to the broadest audience; along with some that peopel are willing to pay a premium for, such as sports.

You think crap like the home shopping network would exist, if people were given the choice not to pay for them?

Actually, they are in a better position because they make money from selling stuff, and don't have to produce shows, pay talent big money, etc. All they need is a way to stream and they aree on the air.

The more niche ones that appeal to small markets will go away, such as science fiction channels, home improvement, history etc. that may not have enough subscriber base to go at it alone; or a pared down version will be offered by a big company that is the parent as long as it doesn't lose money. The can dump old shows they used to syndicate on it. I agree it won't be a big lose at any rate.

That is the best part about this move away from cable, imo.
It seems clear that the quality of content simply MUST increase for media companies to survive.

Not really, they will go for the mass market and live sports because that is where the money is; and occassionaly make something that is good.

We’re still in a fairly nascent position, and already the quality on Netflix, Amazon, Disney+, etc. are orders of magnitude higher than traditional networks.

As a said, a few big players will control most of the content. The question is can Netflix and Amazon create enough revenue to survive making original content as shows get pulled from them and become exclusives on the owner's service? We're already seeing that with Disney and Netflix. Disney is even following the network model of releasing shows over time so you can't just subscribe, binge the Mandalorian and then drop your subscription.

I think we will eventually see the streaming version of what OTA with UHF/VHF was - a few large players who dominate the market with maybe one or two niche players; except now we have to pay for each channel.
[automerge]1579360840[/automerge]

I'll subscribe instantly for any streaming service with SNL back catalogue... but I'm in Germany, so there's nothing (although there's nothing in UK either! Netflix used to carry some SNL compilations back in 2012, and that's it).

And unfortunately only a limited set of seasons are available on DVD; although the are many of the great ones.
[automerge]1579360949[/automerge]

No, I meant a streaming service.

I know, but that is the future of single show streaming, at least in terms of pricing; i.e. very expensive.

 

[TraceyS/FL]

If it won’t count towards my data I will probably cave... otherwise, we are pushing the 1tb each month with streaming and gaming already. Ugh. Except I think I have some form of Comcast tv with my cable - so maybe I’ll get it for “free”?

 

[Digital Skunk]

That’s not remotely “insane”.
You just listed less streaming services than there are car companies... or types of toothpaste... or styles of socks... or pretty much any other consumer choice.

... restaurants ...

I have spoken.

HA!

Show me where people pay a subscription to socks .... although I'm sure that exists.

The day I have to subscribe to get different styles of socks or flavors of toothpaste is the day I'll say this comment is right on. Until then it's a bit off base.

 

[Justanotherfanboy]

Show me where people pay a subscription to socks .... although I'm sure that exists.

The day I have to subscribe to get different styles of socks or flavors of toothpaste is the day I'll say this comment is right on. Until then it's a bit off base.

Not at all!
Your comment was that all the choices of subscription services were “insane”.
Not anything to do with whether you or I like, despise, or are indifferent to the idea of subscriptions in general; that’s a distinctly separate topic that you are pivoting to now.
My comment that choosing what streaming service you want is no more difficult, unwieldy, or fraught with nuance than any other consumer choice, is spot on!
Bringing up the absurdity of a sock rental service in no way invalidates that claim, as it has nothing to do whatsoever with either of our positions.

 

[Digital Skunk]

Not at all!
Your comment was that all the choices of subscription services were “insane”.
Not anything to do with whether you or I like, despise, or are indifferent to the idea of subscriptions in general; that’s a distinctly separate topic that you are pivoting to now.

Since the thread was talking about subscription services, I was in no way pivoting to the idea of the number of SUBSCRIPTION services being insane. Besides, mentioning things we don't pay a subscription for is a poor rebuttal nonetheless.

Hyperbole? Sure.

But in context I don't know how anyone could miss the main point, especially once I bring up our ancient predictions about ala carte tv.

Talk about that. Everything else is just moot.

 

[Justanotherfanboy]

Since the thread was talking about subscription services, I was in no way pivoting to the idea of the number of SUBSCRIPTION services being insane. Besides, mentioning things we don't pay a subscription for is a poor rebuttal nonetheless.

Hyperbole? Sure.

But in context I don't know how anyone could miss the main point, especially once I bring up our ancient predictions about ala carte tv.

Talk about that. Everything else is just moot.

Fair enough.
I guess I missed the “point” because it’s so silly?
I guess having 15+ choices of vehicles is NOT insane or difficult for you.
Sounds like having 15+ choices for every single other product/service you’ve ever encountered in your life (choosing a doctor, an auto mechanic, etc.) is NOT insane for you.
If I’m reading you right- there is some indescribable quality about streaming services that set them apart in your mind... that make their parity of choice with every other consumer product, an “insane” notion.

I certainly could go see every single doctor in my neighborhood, every time I have a medical issue. However, imo- that would be as insane as subscribing to every single subscription service available.
In both those cases (and all others), I simply choose the product and/or services I want & don't worry about the rest. I believe that is what most people do!
I’m not trying to pick apart your overreaction to streaming services- it was just a casual mention that while (because this is a relatively newer product) one may think “wow, all these services exist?? crazy!!”; if you slow down to think about it- there’s certainly nothing crazy about it whatsoever.

 

[Digital Skunk]

if you slow down to think about it- there’s certainly nothing crazy about it whatsoever.

I would agree, and if there's one thing that's certain about me is I'll overreact to just about anything related to tech.

 

[jlc1978]

If I’m reading you right- there is some indescribable quality about streaming services that set them apart in your mind... that make their parity of choice with every other consumer product, an “insane” notion.

To me, the big differences between consumer products and streaming services is most competing consumer products have the same set of core capabilities so you pretty much get the same functionality. Streaming services, with exclusive content, OTOH, require multiple subscriptions to access a core set of functionality. Balkanization of content is the inevitable outcome of cord cutting as companies seek to maximize revenue and makeup for lost cable revenue. As more content providers go to their own streaming services firms such as Netflix will be hard pressed to remain viable.

 

[cwwilson]

All these streaming services are driving me nuts! When is enough going to be enough?

 

[JoeShades]

All these streaming services are driving me nuts! When is enough going to be enough?

This is all going to lead back to another type of hulu service in about ten years, 25 a month for one subscription and everything is on that.

 

[jlc1978]

This is all going to lead back to another type of hulu service in about ten years, 25 a month for one subscription and everything is on that.

The challenge will be that popular channels, such as sports, will want a large fee in order to carry them, driving the price well above $25. Hulu+ is already almost $60. ESPN+ is $5 by itself, and Mickey isn’t going to lease it cheaply to competitors. The future may well be Hulu+, YouTubeTV, TMobile and the legacy cable companies that bundle internet with streaming.

TVision is $90 but I would not be surpriser if the bundle 5G with it once it is rolled out and keep the price around $100 to be cheaper than streaming plus internet.

 

[MacClueless]

Just as I had longed for, today I can assemble a slate of my favourite content providers and pay for only those that I watch. If I don't watch Prime Video anymore, I cancel the subscription and maintain the ones I do watch. You couldn't do that in the days of cable monopoly.

Bro you could always cancel Prime, and you could always cancel premium channels from your cable provider. You’re not making sense.

 

[jdclifford]

I think this actually better than expected.

Free with ads is certainly a good thing anyway you slice it.

$4.99 for the same thing + full seasons of originals and new shows (vs. only the current season on free) + more live sports + early access to late night shows + access to more shows seem like a fine deal to me. It will be perfect for the Olympics. $5 more for no ads is a bit on par with Hulu.

And if you are Comcast customer, you get $4.99/month service for free.

New Battlestar Galactica by Mr. Robot's Sam Esmail alone sold me.

And the list of catalog titles, including older Battlestar Galactica, Brooklyn 99, Cheers, Frasier, Park & Rec, and The Office.

And many new contents will be in 4K UHD.

Now only Comcast would increase their stubburn and stupid stupid 1 TB monthly cap. Either get rid of it or at least double it to 2 TB.

If you are a Comcast customer (I have been for very long time) why would you need this as Comcast has its own streaming app, “Xfinity Stream”?

 

[MacClueless]

They do, it's called iTunes. You can buy seasons of TV there, for a price.

I’ve never bought a tv show or movie, can’t imagine why anyone would when you can just stream
It?

 

[jlc1978]

I’ve never bought a tv show or movie, can’t imagine why anyone would when you can just stream
It?

IIRC, the OP I responded to was complaining that youo could not get shows a la carte but had to subscribe to a streaming service; my point was yuo can buy or rent shows, even if it is more expensive that way.

As for buying, there are advantages since you can watch them without a connection, do not have geographical limitations, do not lose them when a license expires and is not renewed, etc. You can also put them on your own server to stream them to devices, plus the DVD/BR is still avaialbe as a backup should something happen to the digital copy.

In the end, it comes down to personal preference.

 

[MacClueless]

IIRC, the OP I responded to was complaining that youo could not get shows a la carte but had to subscribe to a streaming service; my point was yuo can buy or rent shows, even if it is more expensive that way.

As for buying, there are advantages since you can watch them without a connection, do not have geographical limitations, do not lose them when a license expires and is not renewed, etc. You can also put them on your own server to stream them to devices, plus the DVD/BR is still avaialbe as a backup should something happen to the digital copy.

In the end, it comes down to personal preference.

Not really. Buying doesn’t make economical sense. That’s sort of like if the OP was complaining about vacation car rentals and you said “just buy one it’s a matter of personal preference”. It’s just not the same thing.