Comments
clrmoney
10/5/2016 11:17:31 AM
User Rank Platinum
Skinny TV
This is great for customers that Skinny TV can offer something different and better that the others out there.
Ariella
10/5/2016 11:48:53 AM
User Rank Author
Re: Skinny TV
$5.99 per month for Hulu does sound like very attractive pricing. So long as it has the shows people really do want to watch, I can see that they'd be willing to pay that.
Adi
10/5/2016 12:40:08 PM
User Rank Author
Re: Skinny TV
@Ariella - Its interesting - Hulu's decision to drop its price is obviously aimed at trying to ratchet up its subscriber base. Given the pace of adoption for Netflix and Amazon, Hulu needs to do something. I think the lowering of its ad-inclusive fees, the winding up of its free service and the upcoming launch of its skinny TV service are all aimed at revitalizing the service.
Viacom
The addition of Viacom is pretty big, especially for famlies with kids. At one point I knew every SpongeBob episode. I agree about Hulu trying to mix things up to increase its subscriber base. But there are so many options now, I'm not sure that's enough.
Adi
10/5/2016 12:57:26 PM
User Rank Author
Re: Viacom
@Mike - Not sure what's huge in the world of kids TV at the moment, but Nickelodeon used to have the most watched shows on cable (overall) for absolutely ages. I suspect those ratings are sliding though, Viacom networks have taken some prety big ratings hits this year. Viacom was usually the toughest of the big six to negotiate with for any new service, but now I think they're going to be a lot more amenable.
vnewman
10/5/2016 2:03:19 PM
User Rank Platinum
Re: Viacom
@Adi - Nickelodeon and Nick Jr are definitely still big players and what they may have lost in ratings, they are surely making up in merchandising and advertising revenue. The sheer amount of consumables available is staggering.
Re: Viacom
@Adi: That's kind of what happens when you sell out artistically. In the '80s, Nickelodeon's big draw (one that was hyped by cable salespeople at the time) was that it was the only channel that was approved by some hotshot national teachers' association or other.
Then, at some point during the '90s, Nickelodeon switched from being child-friendly to being about cool kids doing cool stuff and teens and tweens and so on and so forth. The Nickelodeon of today bears nearly zero resemblance to the Nickelodeon of 30 years ago.
But this is now becoming a "back in my day" rant, so I'll stop here.
Re: Viacom
> The addition of Viacom is pretty big, especially for famlies with kids. At one point I knew every SpongeBob episode.
Not sure that's limited to kids and their parents. I too was up on every SpongeBob episode at one point in my life. When the (original) SpongeBob SquarePants movie came out years ago, my brother and I -- both adults -- went to see it. We laughed louder, harder, and longer at the humor than anyone else in the family-packed theater.
afwriter
10/5/2016 3:59:59 PM
User Rank Platinum
Re: Viacom
My kids are a big fan of Nick Jr. but they are bigger fans of Disney Jr. which gives Sling an advantage in my eyes right now.
Ariella
10/5/2016 4:10:59 PM
User Rank Author
Re: Viacom
@Afwriter Is Sling the best deal for a package that includes Disney?
afwriter
10/5/2016 4:19:58 PM
User Rank Platinum
Re: Viacom
As far as I know. It's $20 a month for the base package and another $5 a month for thier kids package that includes Disney and Disney Junior.
Ariella
10/5/2016 4:23:52 PM
User Rank Author
Re: Viacom
@Afwriter I see, not too bad as far as these things go.
dcawrey
10/10/2016 3:35:40 PM
User Rank Platinum
Re: Viacom
I expect there to be massive competition for customers in the skinny bundle segment. The cost savings and less hassle of these packages makes a lot of sense. What we're going to see is a number of deals put out there to attract subscribers.
elizabethv
10/14/2016 8:23:39 AM
User Rank Platinum
Re: Viacom
@dcawrey - you make a great point. The skinny bundles are likely where the market is headed and where success will be made. There is also a real ability for companies to get competitive where this is concerned, in a mix between pricing and channels available in various packages. It will probably be great for the consumer too.
elizabethv
10/5/2016 7:22:50 PM
User Rank Platinum
Re: Viacom
@afwriter - I think that's most kids. Disney has a lot more to offer to keep kids entertained that Nick does. Not that Nick does a bad job at all, I just in think in general, Disney seems to do a better job. So any package that includes Disney, is going to be more appealing to parents as a whole. They could always try to copy the Sling model, giving parents access to a "Kids" or "Family" bundle that offers both, and then make all parents happy. That's why I added that bundle to my Sling subscription.
afwriter
10/5/2016 4:02:59 PM
User Rank Platinum
Re: Skinny TV
I was just thinking the other day that with Netflix's shrinking library and growing price may be threatened by a Hulu that is doing many of the right things right now.
a la carte, please
Skinny bundles are definitely a step in the right direction, but I agree that a la carte pricing would be my ideal way to pay for TV. I watch so few channels, but they are different than the channels my husband watches. A skinny bundle centered on just sports or kids or reality TV wouldn't work for our entire household, so being able to pick and choose would be the only way a skinnier bundle would work for us.
That said, I bet a lot of viewers prefer the simplicity of an all-inclusive plan and don't want to think about it beyond that. I would too if my cable bill weren't so expensive every month...
Re: a la carte, please
I still have my doubts about a la carte. Once viewers start picking and choosing channels, they may find them,selves with new bundles that cost more and offer less than the old fat bundles. ButI agrree that the old pay-TV business model is broken for at least the time being Will be interesting to see what, if naything, replaces it.
Re: a la carte, please
That's a good point. If it's the cable companies offering the packages, they will find a way to make a la carte more expensive and/or more confusing than the all-inclusive plans!
dlr5288
10/31/2016 9:22:19 PM
User Rank Platinum
Re: a la carte, please
I agree! I wish there was a package that included everything, but I know that's a crazy thing to ask for..
a la carte, and the death of channels
Skinny bundles are attractive for obvious reasons. A la carte sounds attractive, but as Alan Breznick points out below, if you are likely to choose more than a small handful of channels, the full bundle might still be the better deal.
I'm wondering what will happen if skinny bundles really are what the vast majority of viewers wants (or a la carte)? Under those circumstances, I would expect that scads of channels that are less frequently viewed will die of neglect.
YouTube is already making the notion of what constitutes a "channel" somewhat fluid. If there is a large set of cable channels that will no longer be sustainable, I wonder if these -- what are they? Ad hoc channels? I wonder if ad hoc channels change the TV viewing dynamic.
Why get Nick at Nite if you can build your own classic-TV lineup, replacing "Full House" and "Friends" with "The Courtship of Eddie's Father" and "Love American Style"?
-- Brian Santo
elizabethv
10/5/2016 7:24:23 PM
User Rank Platinum
Re: a la carte, and the death of channels
@inkstainedwretch - I've noted the appeal of a la carte before, but I do agree that bundles might be more appealing. And if you could select from a few appealing skinny bundles, and still end up paying even just a tad less than the typical subscription price, even I might consider going back to cable. And to date I seriously consider cord cutting one of the best decisions I've ever made in my entire life.
mhhf1ve
10/6/2016 1:04:43 PM
User Rank Platinum
Re: a la carte, and the death of channels
I don't think a la carte is the utopia people think it is. It nearly exists with downloadable content from iTunes/Google Play/Amazon -- but it's not exactly "cheap".. and it's far less convenient than the streaming options (on purpose).
Ariella
10/6/2016 5:10:05 PM
User Rank Author
Re: a la carte, and the death of channels
In an interesting twist of streaming and viewing, Netflix is now going to release its movies to be shown in theaters. See http://www.techradar.com/news/home-cinema/now-playing-netflix-movies-are-heading-to-theaters-1329999?utm_content=buffer805c0&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer_trtw
Netflix has just signed a deal with iPic Entertainment, allowing Netflix to play original movies in iPic's chain of luxury theaters the same day they go online, according to a report in The Wall Street Journal.
The deal covers 10 films starting October 7 with the true-story drama The Siege of Jadotville, followed by the Christopher Guest comedy Mascots next week.
Both films, as well as Netflix's future motion picture projects, are planned to release on the streaming service the same day as their iPic debut.
Netflix attempted to have its own films out in theaters before, but was met with opposition from larger theaters like AMC, Regal, Cinemark and Carmike Cinemas.
vnewman
10/6/2016 5:42:12 PM
User Rank Platinum
Re: a la carte, and the death of channels
Didn't they try this with Beasts of No Nation back in 2015?
Ariella
10/6/2016 5:47:09 PM
User Rank Author
Re: a la carte, and the death of channels
@vnewman yes, it was mentioned in the article. It says:
The major chains boycotted showing Netflix's Beasts of No Nation last year because there was no delay between the film's cinema and home release - often considered to poison for a theater's business because a customer could just choose to just stay inside and stream it instead of paying for a ticket.
In the end, Beasts of No Nation was able to get some theater time, albeit in a select number of smaller venues. Netflix's deal with iPic, however, marks the first long-term contract allowing the streaming service to show its films at a nationwide movie theater franchise.
vnewman
10/7/2016 1:10:34 PM
User Rank Platinum
Re: a la carte, and the death of channels
@Ariella - It's strange in that the motivation doesn't appear to be the obvious as it is to be considered a legitimate "movie" company. According to Wired magazine it is to attract desirable and marketable talent and possibly become eligible to be included in the award circles. It's surely an interesting strategy and I'll be curious to see how it plays out in the end.
Ariella
10/7/2016 2:14:27 PM
User Rank Author
Re: a la carte, and the death of channels
@vnewman yes, it will be interesting to watch, especially in light of the other streaming services that are offering their own original content. Amazon also offers its original lines: https://studios.amazon.com/amazon-originals/series
elizabethv
10/14/2016 8:21:41 AM
User Rank Platinum
Re: a la carte, and the death of channels
@Ariella - I have to wonder if there's a market the big theaters just don't belive exist. In reality, just about any person with access to a computer can watch any movie that has been released to the theaters at home. Most people know the good streaming sites and are willing to do so. But if you want to see a movie in a theater, that option isn't going to deter you. There is an experience you get from seeing something in a theater you don't get from seeing it at home. That's why people go and see movies they've seen countless times, potentially even own at home, at the theater when they are re-released. There is magic in the theater.
mhhf1ve
10/6/2016 12:38:06 PM
User Rank Platinum
Competition...
> "we are finally seeing an all-out assault on the traditional TV bundle..."
Indeed. Hopefully, the FCC's efforts to open up set top boxes will also contribute to this trend. And then we might get Apple and Google more involved in the TV disruption game.
|
|
Italy's 5G auction could exceed a government target of raising €2.5 billion ($2.9 billion) after attracting interest from companies outside the mobile market.
The emerging-markets operator is focusing on the humdrum business of connectivity and keeping quiet about some of its ill-fated 'digitalization' efforts.
Three UK has picked Huawei over existing radio access network suppliers Nokia and Samsung to build its 5G network.
Vendor says that it's its biggest 5G deal to date.
Verizon skates where the puck is going by waiting for standards-based 5G devices to launch its mobile service in 2019.
Orange has been one of the leading proponents of SDN and NFV. In this Telco Transformation radio show, Orange's John Isch provides some perspective on his company's NFV/SDN journey.
10/16/2017
Huawei Network Transformation Seminar
The adoption of virtualization technology and cloud architectures by telecom network operators is now well underway but there is still a long way to go before the transition to an era of Network Functions Cloudification (NFC) is complete.
The Small Cell Forum's CEO Sue Monahan says that small cells will be crucial for indoor 5G coverage, but challenges around business models, siting ...
People, strategy, a strong technology roadmap and new business processes are the key underpinnings of Telstra's digital transformation, COO Robyn ...
Eric Bozich, vice president of products and marketing at CenturyLink, talks about the challenges and opportunities of integrating Level 3 into ...
Epsilon's Mark Daley, director of digital strategy and business development, talks about digital transformation from a wholesale service provider ...
Bill Walker, CenturyLink's director of network architecture, shares his insights on why training isn't enough for IT employees and traditional ...
All Videos
|
On-the-Air Thursdays Digital Audio
Special Huawei Video
Tweet This