Disney/Hulu News

[Bruce]

Yeah. Charge more and spend less is a good recipe for profitability, even if you lose some customers along the way.

Yep, same thing Traditional TV is doing, cut way back on scripted originals ( specially on Cable Channels), more cheaper programming and reruns, keep raising that per sub fee.

My price for the bundle stayed at $20, so no complaints from me.

One of the best bargains, curious at how much the bundle price will be, when ESPN goes streaming.

 

[Joe The Dragon]

Yep, same thing Traditional TV is doing, cut way back on scripted originals ( specially on Cable Channels), more cheaper programming and reruns, keep raising that per sub fee.


One of the best bargains, curious at how much the bundle price will be, when ESPN goes streaming.

and who will be the 1st system to pull ESPN when that happens?

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

A lot of people are doing like I am doing. They are not finding enough origional content to warrant paying monthly, and are subscribing for a month, watching what they wanted to see then canceling. Waiting another 6 months or so for more more new content and then subscribing for a month and canceling again.

Disney needs to add more content not less.

 

[Jimbo]

A lot of people are doing like I am doing. They are not finding enough origional content to warrant paying monthly, and are subscribing for a month, watching what they wanted to see then canceling. Waiting another 6 months or so for more more new content and then subscribing for a month and canceling again.

Disney needs to add more content not less.

That was the whole concept behind Streaming originally (Ala Carte) ... until pricing got way out of hand, which was expected.
It will continue to get worse ....

 

[Bruce]

and who will be the 1st system to pull ESPN when that happens?

That will never happen, DirecTV learned that lesson when they had the contract dispute with Disney in September 2023, they lost so many subscribers, DirecTV caved to what Disney offered them.

 

[ncted]

Of the streaming services we subscribe to continuously, one or another or both of us are typically always watching something. There are some we only subscribe to for a month when we want to watch a particular thing. I'd actually argue that one of the problems streaming has is how it green-lights too many shows and then doesn't renew enough of them for subsequent seasons. This is the Netflix model, and it has resulted in too many quality shows being cancelled after a season or two. Then they get popular too late and no one is happy. I think the traditional media companies are starting to learn this lesson when it comes to streaming. Make just enough good shows to keep people around every month and don't overspend on things that aren't likely to be successful. Also, not everything needs to be a big-budget CGI spectacular. What matters is the fundamental story, the writing, and the directing. Look at what an expensive disaster The Acolyte was for Disney. The effects were spectacular, but the rest was mediocre at best. I don't blame the actors. They weren't given anything good to work with other than the sets and props. Tell good stories and people will want to watch.

 

[Bruce]

That was the whole concept behind Streaming originally (Ala Carte) ... until pricing got way out of hand, which was expected.
It will continue to get worse ....

Streaming pricing is out of hand?

What if you compare it to Traditional Live TV Providers, less and less scripted programming, more and more channels with nothing but rerun content that you could receive for free, for price increases, that has greatly exceeded inflation.

When I can get Paramount, Peacock, Hulu, AMC, Disney, Netflix, HBO/MAX, Showtime, etc, all commercial free/4K, for about $80 a month.

Compare that to your DirecTV, which went up about $10 in 2024, two price increases in 2023, I am betting it is about double what I pay for streaming.

 

[Jimbo]

Of the streaming services we subscribe to continuously, one or another or both of us are typically always watching something. There are some we only subscribe to for a month when we want to watch a particular thing. I'd actually argue that one of the problems streaming has is how it green-lights too many shows and then doesn't renew enough of them for subsequent seasons. This is the Netflix model, and it has resulted in too many quality shows being cancelled after a season or two. Then they get popular too late and no one is happy. I think the traditional media companies are starting to learn this lesson when it comes to streaming. Make just enough good shows to keep people around every month and don't overspend on things that aren't likely to be successful. Also, not everything needs to be a big-budget CGI spectacular. What matters is the fundamental story, the writing, and the directing. Look at what an expensive disaster The Acolyte was for Disney. The effects were spectacular, but the rest was mediocre at best. I don't blame the actors. They weren't given anything good to work with other than the sets and props. Tell good stories and people will want to watch.

I'm also getting annoyed with the way Streaming has determined that it's ok to take 2 or 3 years off of a story and come back years later and expect people to just pick right up with it.

What ever happened to having a Season per year ?
We use to get 20-24 episodes a year, some say most was filler, but you at least got your show.
Now your lucky to get 8, occasionally 10, 1 was only 6 episodes .... thats ridiculous ... and then a 2 year wait for the next season, that might get axed because no one is interested anymore.

I was into Stranger Things and Wednesday .... now they have been gone for a long time ...

Is this the way for the Streaming people to get you to Watch it again as they make the time frame so long you have to watch the show again to remember whats going on ?

 

[Jimbo]

I'm also getting annoyed with the way Streaming has determined that it's ok to take 2 or 3 years off of a story and come back years later and expect people to just pick right up with it.

What ever happened to having a Season per year ?
We use to get 20-24 episodes a year, some say most was filler, but you at least got your show.
Now your lucky to get 8, occasionally 10, 1 was only 6 episodes .... thats ridiculous ... and then a 2 year wait for the next season, that might get axed because no one is interested anymore.

I was into Stranger Things and Wednesday .... now they have been gone for a long time ...

Is this the way for the Streaming people to get you to Watch it again as they make the time frame so long you have to watch the show again to remember whats going on ?

Not sure what happened above.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Not sure what happened above.

Probably due to the server work going on in the background. Hopefully back to normal soon.

 

[Bruce]

I'm also getting annoyed with the way Streaming has determined that it's ok to take 2 or 3 years off of a story and come back years later and expect people to just pick right up with it.

What ever happened to having a Season per year ?
We use to get 20-24 episodes a year, some say most was filler, but you at least got your show.
Now your lucky to get 8, occasionally 10, 1 was only 6 episodes .... thats ridiculous ... and then a 2 year wait for the next season, that might get axed because no one is interested anymore.

I was into Stranger Things and Wednesday .... now they have been gone for a long time ...

Is this the way for the Streaming people to get you to Watch it again as they make the time frame so long you have to watch the show again to remember whats going on ?

Covid and then the strike has messed up productions.

But Network shows are now cutting back also, for one example, ABC’s new hit, High Potential, will only have 13 Episodes this season.

Or NCIS will have only 20, Origins will have 18, The Rookie 18, the FBI spin offs, only 18 each, the main show, 20, etc, etc.

Economical issues, cord cutting and less advertising, are hitting them also.

Look at channels that used to have new scripted content like TNT and USA, now no longer due to less revenue coming in.

Or AMC, which produces 50% less new content than a few years ago.

 

[ncted]

I'm also getting annoyed with the way Streaming has determined that it's ok to take 2 or 3 years off of a story and come back years later and expect people to just pick right up with it.

What ever happened to having a Season per year ?
We use to get 20-24 episodes a year, some say most was filler, but you at least got your show.
Now your lucky to get 8, occasionally 10, 1 was only 6 episodes .... thats ridiculous ... and then a 2 year wait for the next season, that might get axed because no one is interested anymore.

I was into Stranger Things and Wednesday .... now they have been gone for a long time ...

Is this the way for the Streaming people to get you to Watch it again as they make the time frame so long you have to watch the show again to remember whats going on ?

In addition to Bruce 's comments: Production used to run much tighter timelines. Now development and post-production take much longer due to how shows are written and how much special effects almost everything needs these days. This drives up costs, so fewer episodes per season. Then they wait until after the season has aired in a lot of cases before deciding whether to renew. This is starting to swing back the other way a little though, with Apple ordering seasons 3-4 of Silo at the same time. As long as the execs think people would rather have 8-12 episodes per season of "prestige" shows, that is what they are going to do.

 

[Bruce]

In addition to Bruce 's comments: Production used to run much tighter timelines. Now development and post-production take much longer due to how shows are written and how much special effects almost everything needs these days. This drives up costs, so fewer episodes per season.

Star Trek:Strange New Worlds is the biggest example of this, those movie quality effects takes a year to complete, with different teams working on a set amount of episodes.

When the strike ended, for some shows, they had to wait for actor availability, Stranger Things had to wait for Millie Brown, because she was due to make a movie after filming of the last season, then the strike happen, once that was settled, it was time for her to film the movie, so Stranger Things had to wait.

I assume there was availability issues with other actors.

 

[Jimbo]

In addition to Bruce 's comments: Production used to run much tighter timelines. Now development and post-production take much longer due to how shows are written and how much special effects almost everything needs these days. This drives up costs, so fewer episodes per season. Then they wait until after the season has aired in a lot of cases before deciding whether to renew. This is starting to swing back the other way a little though, with Apple ordering seasons 3-4 of Silo at the same time. As long as the execs think people would rather have 8-12 episodes per season of "prestige" shows, that is what they are going to do.

Except, they never ASKED those that are waiting.

They are pushing things out as far as they can because they CAN get away with it.

They use to actually make 24 episodes, now they are SOOOOOO much better that they can only make 8 ???????

Someone mentioned High Potential ... and that it has 13 episodes, IF thats so .... they took 2 months off ... finally came back, no one remembers whats going on ... has 3 episodes and they are done ????

They use to fill a Season, from September thru MAY (part of May actually) ....

They need to make more episodes ...
If you can't keep the story interesting enough, don't start it.


Very good shows should NOT have over a Year to get the next Season out ...

Can't wait till the Next Platform to come out ....
Then we'll get 3-4 episodes and they will just call it a Movie and be done with it.

Fwiw, Covid was 5 years ago and the Strike has been over for quite some time now.

 

[osu1991]

13 episodes is plenty for a season. I'd rather see them do 2 separate shows with 13 episode seasons and skip the breaks.
52 weeks a year. 13 weeks of originals 13 weeks of a repeat for each of 2 shows.

Time for some new ideas and shows too. 30 seasons of NCIS, Law and Order, The Simpsons etc is plenty. Do something new

 

[AZ.]

13 episodes is plenty for a season. I'd rather see them do 2 separate shows with 13 episode seasons and skip the breaks.
52 weeks a year. 13 weeks of originals 13 weeks of a repeat for each of 2 shows.

Time for some new ideas and shows too. 30 seasons of NCIS, Law and Order, The Simpsons etc is plenty. Do something new

Gosh knows plenty of good ideas in LA!
Yea, not sure if its lazy or EZ money with all the spinoffs?
But I hate game shows, and so called "reality TV"

 

[ncted]

Except, they never ASKED those that are waiting.

I suspect they inferred it from the data, or more accurately, they all wanted to be like HBO and Netflix, so they assumed that was what the data was telling them.

 

[savarese04]

certain titles and types of content include ads, even in our 'no ads' or 'ad free' subscription tiers.

this has always been a thing on Hulu, which is why it is in the new Terms (they merged all their Terms into one). there were a couple shows like this that I watched that had ads run at the beginning and end but never in the middle, even if you were on an ad-free tier (agents of shield was one, IIRC). I don't know why but they definitely ran a trailer that said "due to content-holder restrictions...."

I'd actually argue that one of the problems streaming has is how it green-lights too many shows and then doesn't renew enough of them for subsequent seasons.

another problem is they bury these things in such a way that it's hard to know when new content has arrived, unless it hits - in the case of netflix - the top 10 or new shows carousel. once it's gone from the most popular lists, forget ever finding it again.

13 episodes is plenty for a season. I'd rather see them do 2 separate shows with 13 episode seasons and skip the breaks.

I agree. i do not need 24 episodes of a sitcom wherein the same plot is rehashed 20 different ways. or a procedural where the secondary storyline is dragged out over 15 episodes and gets frustratingly convoluted. Give me 13 original plots and tighter, more believable storytelling and I am much happier.

This is why the "HBO model" always worked vs the network model. Quality vs quantity. I also think often about how the BBC does one series and that's it. Go out on a high note. It's quite American to beat something to death for about 5 seasons past its expiration date and then (lately) try to resurrect it 20 years down the road.