Streaming TV is about to get very expensive

Discussion in 'Now Playing - TV Show Talk' started by mr.unnatural, Jul 1, 2019.

  1. MikeMar

    MikeMar Go Pats

    45,186
    800
    Jan 7, 2005
    Boston...
    Peacock Streaming Service: Pricing Tiers, Release Dates, What Will Be on the New NBCUniversal Streaming Service, and More

    "The two tiers include “Peacock Free,” an ad-supported plan that’s available to anyone and will offer 7,500 hours of programming, including access to movies and classic TV shows. But if you want to see any of the service’s original content, including shows like MacGruber or Sam Esmail‘s new take on Battlestar Galactica, you’ll have to shell out for “Peacock Premium,” which gives access to the full 15,000 hours of programming – including sports and, for the first time ever, early access to NBC’s stable of late-night talk shows. New episodes of The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon will be available to stream on Peacock Premium starting at 8pm ET and Late Night with Seth Meyers will begin streaming at 9pm ET (both are about three and a half hours before their traditional broadcast slots)."
     
  2. warrenn

    warrenn Active Member

    710
    225
    Jun 24, 2004
    Tivoverse
    Thanks for the info. It looks like there are two tiers of content and three tiers of cost:

    $0 - Peacock Free (7,500 hours of older and limited content)
    $4.99 - Premium with ads (all content)
    $9.99 - Premium without ads

    I actually think this is a good pricing model for streaming services and I wish more services did it this way. The people who watch a lot of content can sign up for a subscription, but the people who only watch occasionally can watch for for free with ads. There are a lot of streaming services that I only want to watch once in a while. I'm never going to subscribe, but I'd watch occasionally even if it had ads.
     
  3. Bierboy

    Bierboy Seasoned gas passer

    12,689
    135
    Jun 12, 2004
    Fishers, IN
    Whoa...not interested in that bull pucky. I'm out... and will take the free.
     
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2020
  4. MikeMar

    MikeMar Go Pats

    45,186
    800
    Jan 7, 2005
    Boston...
    It's kinda 2 streaming services in 1
    1 - Their old/limited stuff (free with ads) (Just a big VOD of their backlog)
    2 - Hulu like streaming, $5 for all contact with ad's or $10 for all without ad's
     
    warrenn likes this.
  5. Amnesia

    Amnesia The Question

    11,368
    498
    Jan 30, 2005
    Boston, MA
    And Comcast X1 customers will get the Premium w/ads for no extra charge and pay just $4.99 for the Premium without ads options.
     
  6. Steveknj

    Steveknj Lost in New Joisey TCF Club

    51,766
    2,965
    Mar 10, 2003
    New Jersey
    I find it interesting that for the better part of the first 70 years of television that we've been looking for ways to avoid ads (everything from going to the bathroom of for a snack when they are on, to VCRs,) and then FINALLY get a DVR, and even Netflix and AP, where we can live in commercial-free bliss if we choose to, and now we are voluntarily PAYING for the privilege of watching ads on streaming services. Yes some will pay for the ad-free version, but I'd bet most subscribers won't. How soon before AP and Netflix and possibly even HBO with their greedy new overlords offer an ad based version of their streaming service? We've come full circle people!
     
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2020
    jasrub and pj1983 like this.
  7. pdhenry

    pdhenry Recumbent

    28,571
    4,810
    Feb 27, 2005
    PA
    I'd prefer to TiVo it and skip ads if I could, but not for $180/month, where my cable + internet bill had climbed.

    But all I said was free with ads is a valid business model. If HBO had a free-with-ads tier I'd give it a shot.
     
  8. Steveknj

    Steveknj Lost in New Joisey TCF Club

    51,766
    2,965
    Mar 10, 2003
    New Jersey
  9. pdhenry

    pdhenry Recumbent

    28,571
    4,810
    Feb 27, 2005
    PA
    The author's fallacy is in believing that one must remain subscribed to every service that offers programming that you might want to watch from time to time. There's nothing wrong with subscribing to two at a time and rotating among them. Delayed gratification is a great budgeting tool.
    If that's still too hard, a lifetime subscription of PlayOn is on special for something like $29.
     
    tlc likes this.
  10. Steveknj

    Steveknj Lost in New Joisey TCF Club

    51,766
    2,965
    Mar 10, 2003
    New Jersey
    I think part of the point is that each one of these services, as time goes on, will offer so much content that you might be less likely to jump from service to service. You don't think that these services are looking at this now to come up with a solution? Disney+ already offered a 3 year sub at a discounted rate, that's what will eventually happen, until, at some point they just drop the month to month, or maybe month to month just becomes too expensive. Hulu has also been offering discounts for a year's subscription. They are also counting on the laziness of most of us who will sign up and just forget about it. It's great if you are diligent in doing what you described, but I'll be most of us don't.
     
  11. Dawghows

    Dawghows Liberal Elitist

    3,108
    314
    May 17, 2001
    NJ
    This discussion goes back and forth all the time, but if someone cuts the cord primarily because of price, then they will do whatever the feel they need to do in order to keep their monthly cost low. For others, like me, cost was only one of several reasons I cut out cable. But I would need to subscribe to A LOT of simultaneous services before I would reach the level of what I was paying for cable before I cut.
     
  12. TAsunder

    TAsunder Debates Ghee vs Gi

    22,656
    1,899
    Aug 6, 2003
    Madison, WI
    Very few would have purchased 3 years of Disney+ if they didn't have a huge catalog of content that people wanted. What you are describing is good, not bad. There's always this worry that, "Oh no, the companies are going to start producing content I want!!" I honestly don't understand it. When companies have to actually compete, we get better content and less likelihood of being locked in. You don't have to buy a year of hulu, 3 years of disney, etc. You get a discount for doing so, just like you should, like you do everywhere else where competition exists.
     
  13. lparsons21

    lparsons21 Active Member

    429
    142
    Feb 17, 2015
    Hulu doesn’t have an annual plan.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
     
  14. pdhenry

    pdhenry Recumbent

    28,571
    4,810
    Feb 27, 2005
    PA
    The headline there isn't "Streaming is too expensive," it's "People are too lazy for their own good."
     
  15. Steveknj

    Steveknj Lost in New Joisey TCF Club

    51,766
    2,965
    Mar 10, 2003
    New Jersey
    I recently got 12 months of Hulu (ad supported) for $1.99 a month. So maybe it's not part of their standard offering, but they do things like this from time to time. Last year IRC it was a year for $1 per month.
     
  16. lparsons21

    lparsons21 Active Member

    429
    142
    Feb 17, 2015
    Yeah, I forgot about the ‘specials’ they do now and then.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
     
  17. Steveknj

    Steveknj Lost in New Joisey TCF Club

    51,766
    2,965
    Mar 10, 2003
    New Jersey
    That's just human nature. People forget, they have a million things going on. These companies know this.

    But back to my original point. Maybe I need to understand this better. So would you for example sign up for 3 months for Netflix, watch EVERYTHING you wanted to watch from the past year, then move on to HBO, do the same, and then move on to Hulu and so forth? Is that how you do it? What happens when there's this show on Netflix you are dying to watch? Do you wait 9 months to watch it, or are you suddenly tempted to activate your account again to watch that show? I know myself, I could never be that disciplined. I bet there are more like me than would do what I described.
     
  18. Steveknj

    Steveknj Lost in New Joisey TCF Club

    51,766
    2,965
    Mar 10, 2003
    New Jersey
    No, I agree, it's good. But that's my point. What happens if D+ had a lot of content, Netflix has a lot of content, HBOMax, Amazon, Peacock and so forth. Now you are less likely to swap out as there's always something there to watch. I'm not arguing that this is a bad thing, I'm arguing that because of all this great content, you'd be more likely to sign up for many of these on a more permanent basis and thus, it will cost you. And you might actually see that because of this a couple of things might happen. One is that that these streaming services will use the D+ model (as they did with the Mandelorian) and show their prime series weekly (which guarantees you are on the service for 3 months and find other stuff to watch too) and the other, is like I said, get you on a yearly sub instead of monthly.
     
  19. TAsunder

    TAsunder Debates Ghee vs Gi

    22,656
    1,899
    Aug 6, 2003
    Madison, WI
    Still not seeing the issue here. More high quality content = better for consumers. Period. If all of the major streaming providers have good enough content that I never want to drop them, that would mean that we are even better off than we are now (where, IMO, there are at most 10 good shows on broadcast+basic cable, and dozens or more on the streaming providers + premiums). Hulu has been doing weekly shows for years, as has HBO. You can still add them at the end of a season, binge, then drop them. You don't have to get Disney+ on day 1. Even if you don't drop streaming providers, right now HBO+Netflix+Hulu without ads+Disney+Amazon combined is still noticeably cheaper than the average cable bill, with at least 10 times as much quality content as just a basic cable subscription (probably more, considering Hulu includes FX and other cable TV shows).
     
  20. Steveknj

    Steveknj Lost in New Joisey TCF Club

    51,766
    2,965
    Mar 10, 2003
    New Jersey
    I think you are missing MY point. Yes, I agree with you, the more great content the better. What I'm saying is that with all that great content, the desire to swap between these services diminishes, and once that happens, than your cost savings will diminish as well. In this case I'm talking about the strategy of swapping between services when there's something good on one and not on others. If there's 12 months of great content, you won't be swapping. Sure that's great in that you get all that great content, but it's not so great for your wallet, in that instead of paying for 3 months, you're paying permanently (well as long at there's great content). Hence, the "streaming is about to get very expensive" title of this thread. Instead of paying fore 2-3 services a month, you're now paying for 5-6 of them. For some, that might still be cheaper than cable, for others, perhaps not.
     

Share This Page