HBO Max/Discovery+ Merger

[Yespage]

Jason Kilar, former head of WarnerMedia back when HBO Max launched, is saying something similar: a Spotify model for all streaming TV and movies.

Well, that kind of was Netflix. Then everyone and their grandma wanted to start a streaming service and they carved up the rights. And that'd be the biggest problem, companies that are trying to sell their streaming service wouldn't want to help provide content to a service aimed at ending them. It'd only work if they were all involved.

 

[ncted]

Fun Fact: Spotify has never been profitable.

Why is that the model they are chasing?

 

[NashGuy]

Well, that kind of was Netflix. Then everyone and their grandma wanted to start a streaming service and they carved up the rights.

There's some truth in that but I feel like Netflix nostalgia has folks remembering that service as having way more stuff than they ever actually had. It's true that they had a fairly decent selection of older shows and past seasons of certain current broadcast and cable series, stuff from across a range of channels/studios. But at that point there was still a ton of TV that just wasn't available via streaming at all. It's not like Netflix ever had *all* the stuff that's now on Peacock, Paramount+, Disney+ and Max combined. And even back then, Netflix was competing against Amazon Prime Video (or Instant Video or whatever they called it) and Hulu Plus, which each had stuff that Netflix didn't.

And as for recent movies, all Netflix had in its early days of streaming was the Starz library. They had a special deal with them so that pretty much the entire Starz catalog, including originals, was on Netflix. (This was well before Starz itself became available via streaming in, I think, late 2015.) And then around the time they lost the Starz catalog, they struck a deal to get Disney movies. But the vast majority of recent movies were on HBO, Showtime, and/or Epix, not Netflix.

 

[Bruce]

In Warner’s never ending quest of trying to figure out how to get more subscribers ( how about better content?), a new bundle is available-

Hulu, Disney+ and MAX with ads-$17 (rounding off)
without ads-$30

But that is not the 4K version, which is a must have for me.

The good news, it reduces the cost of being a Cord Cutter

to get the majority of content from paid Live TV plus the streaming exclusives, no ads-

Hulu, D+, MAX-$30
Peacock-$14
Paramount+ with Showtime-$12
AMC+-$9

So a total of $65 a month, which is cheaper than even YTTV by $8, which does not include HBO/Showtime at that price.

The New Disney+, Hulu, & Max Bundle Deal Is Now Live Starting at Just $16.99 a Month | Cord Cutters News

Last May Disney and Warner Bros. Discovery announced a new bundle of Disney+, Hulu, and Max that will launch this summer. Not a lot is known about this bundle other than it is happening. Now this bundle is live and starts at just $16.99 a month with savings of up to 38% off the ad-free […]

cordcuttersnews.com

 

[ncted]

In Warner’s never ending quest of trying to figure out how to get more subscribers ( how about better content?), a new bundle is available-

Hulu, Disney+ and MAX with ads-$17 (rounding off)
without ads-$30

But that is not the 4K version, which is a must have for me.

The good news, it reduces the cost of being a Cord Cutter

to get the majority of content from paid Live TV plus the streaming exclusives, no ads-

Hulu, D+, MAX-$30
Peacock-$14
Paramount+ with Showtime-$12
AMC+-$9

So a total of $65 a month, which is cheaper than even YTTV by $8, which does not include HBO/Showtime at that price.

The New Disney+, Hulu, & Max Bundle Deal Is Now Live Starting at Just $16.99 a Month | Cord Cutters News

Last May Disney and Warner Bros. Discovery announced a new bundle of Disney+, Hulu, and Max that will launch this summer. Not a lot is known about this bundle other than it is happening. Now this bundle is live and starts at just $16.99 a month with savings of up to 38% off the ad-free […]

cordcuttersnews.com

If it had the 4K content on HBOMax, I'd go for it. Instead, I will be signing up for an annual plan as soon as my free subscription from AT&T runs out next month.

 

[Bruce]

If it had the 4K content on HBOMax, I'd go for it. Instead, I will be signing up for an annual plan as soon as my free subscription from AT&T runs out next month.

Shortsighted on their part, could have made it a $5 more option.

My 4K $139 year special runs out next May, hopefully they have it worked out by then.

Also, I expect some more bundle options to be available when Venu starts up.

 

[savarese04]

I really hate the money grab for 4K. This is 2024.

 

[navychop]

Why should you not pay more when you’re getting more?

 

[ncted]

I really hate the money grab for 4K. This is 2024.

Honestly, it more about HDR than it is 4K for me. HD with HDR would be fine if that is what I got with the HD plan.

 

[lakebum431]

Honestly, it more about HDR than it is 4K for me. HD with HDR would be fine if that is what I got with the HD plan.

Totally agree. The HDR makes a big impact for me.

 

[NashGuy]

In Warner’s never ending quest of trying to figure out how to get more subscribers ( how about better content?), a new bundle is available-

Hulu, Disney+ and MAX with ads-$17 (rounding off)
without ads-$30

But that is not the 4K version, which is a must have for me.

The good news, it reduces the cost of being a Cord Cutter

to get the majority of content from paid Live TV plus the streaming exclusives, no ads-

Hulu, D+, MAX-$30
Peacock-$14
Paramount+ with Showtime-$12
AMC+-$9

So a total of $65 a month, which is cheaper than even YTTV by $8, which does not include HBO/Showtime at that price.

The New Disney+, Hulu, & Max Bundle Deal Is Now Live Starting at Just $16.99 a Month | Cord Cutters News

Last May Disney and Warner Bros. Discovery announced a new bundle of Disney+, Hulu, and Max that will launch this summer. Not a lot is known about this bundle other than it is happening. Now this bundle is live and starts at just $16.99 a month with savings of up to 38% off the ad-free […]

cordcuttersnews.com

OK, but that bundle of streaming services you've assembled is missing a ton of live sports that YTTV has. So to make it a fairer comparison, you need to add Venu Sports to your list of streamers. And OTOH, you need to add subscriptions to HBO/Max ($17) and Showtime ($11) to YTTV.

YTTV with those two premiums added comes to $101/mo.

We don't know how much Venu Sports will cost but I would bet at least $45/mo. Add that to your $65 DTC bundle and you're at $110/mo. So still more than YTTV.

There's still some good non-sports content you're getting in those DTCs -- Hulu Originals, D+ Originals, Max Originals, Peacock Originals, P+ Originals -- that you're not getting on YTTV. But then, OTOH, YTTV gives you live feeds (with DVR and on-demand) of the two most popular cable news channels, neither of which can be found on those DTCs, along with access to certain other stuff (e.g. fuller access to Hallmark content than Peacock provides, same-day rather than next-day access to new content on most channels, etc.).

The great thing about these DTC services is that they're essentially mini-bundles, so you can pick and choose what you want. But for folks who want pretty much all the stuff in the traditional big cable bundle, you're going to come out better buying it all together rather than through a bunch of different subscriptions. (Not to mention that it's a better user experience to have stuff all in one app with a unified UI rather than scattered across different apps.)

 

[Bruce]

OK, but that bundle of streaming services you've assembled is missing a ton of live sports that YTTV has.

Considering the ratings that sports get (except for Football), not many will be missing it.

And remember, ESPN stand alone starts up first quarter 2025, at a cost of, roughly, $20 a month, Fox is rumored to be wholesaling their Sports content to ESPN, because they are losing so much money on these high rights deals, because of cord cutting and the loss of advertising revenue.

So that will be a option.

If sports were that big of a deal, the numbers of those leaving Paid Live TV would not be so High and continuing to be terrible.

Remember, Cable/Sat TV had 100 Million subs in 2017, when there was about 123 Million Households in the United States.

Today, a tad over 53 Million have Cable/Sat TV, YTTV, Hulu Live, Fubo, etc have about 16 Million, that is out of 131 Million Households in 2024, so about 62 Million Households do not care about that sports content and growing.

 

[savarese04]

And remember, ESPN stand alone starts up first quarter 2025, at a cost of, roughly, $20 a month, Fox is rumored to be wholesaling their Sports content to ESPN, because they are losing so much money on these high rights deals, because of cord cutting and the loss of advertising revenue.

Are you implying that $20/mo for ESPN OTT would include Fox? If so, that might kill Venu before it even gets off the ground, especially with WBD contributing next to nothing after losing NBA rights

 

[Bruce]

Are you implying that $20/mo for ESPN OTT would include Fox?

That is the rumor, they are losing so much on MLB right now.

Remember, Fox is receiving over 30 Million less monthly per sub fees now, because of Cord Cutting, plus Advertising Revenue, 50-70% less then what they took in back in 2019.

If so, that might kill Venu before it even gets off the ground, especially with WBD contributing next to nothing after losing NBA rights

Depending on the price point, Disney ( one of the partners), wanted to keep it around $40, Fox, who is running the show, is thinking $50-up, which would be a disaster.

 

[Teehar]

Why should you not pay more when you’re getting more?

lol I'll give you more ads and you pay me more how about that

 

[NashGuy]

Considering the ratings that sports get (except for Football), not many will be missing it.

LOL. You never concede when called out on something. You're always on this kick about how you can get "everything" from the traditional cable bundle by cobbling together various DTC apps while also spending less that way. All I was doing is pointing out that, no, that's false.

Now you're moving the goalposts by saying "Well, no one much cares about all those sports in the traditional bundle anyhow," implying that that's the reason you failed to include the cost of Venu in your DTC package.

Look, I completely agree with you that there are a lot of us who don't value the broad array of content in the traditional bundle -- including a lot of the sports in it -- enough to pay $73 or more per month for it when we can spend less by buying whatever combination of DTCs we want, with many of those DTCs (e.g. Hulu, Peacock, Max) giving us some portion of the current content from the bundle (should we even care about that stuff).

But I just don't think many cord-cutters or cord-nevers approach it like you do, where they're subscribing to all those DTCs from the studios behind the traditional bundle networks in order to more or less recreate it, i.e. subscribing to Disney+, Hulu, Max, Peacock, Paramount+, and AMC+. A far likelier scenario is to combine Netflix, Prime Video and maybe one or two of those traditional studio DTCs, e.g. the Disney+ Hulu bundle.

My broader point is that there still exists a value rationale for subscribing to the bundle (e.g. YouTube TV). About 50% of US households still find enough value in what it offers to pay what it costs. But it's true that those are generally households who watch enough sports and/or cable news (or who just want to stick with what's familiar) to justify the cost.

It'll be very interesting to see what happens when Venu Sports rolls out. If it's priced at $45 or less and if it does contain full access with cloud DVR to local ABC and Fox stations with their local news and primetime shows (along, of course, with all the live sports aired across the Disney, Fox and WBD nets), then I don't see how that doesn't peel off some more folks from the traditional bundle. Surely it would eat into YTTV and Hulu with Live TV.

 

[NashGuy]

And remember, ESPN stand alone starts up first quarter 2025, at a cost of, roughly, $20 a month, Fox is rumored to be wholesaling their Sports content to ESPN, because they are losing so much money on these high rights deals, because of cord cutting and the loss of advertising revenue.

So that will be a option.

I'll be surprised if the entirety of ESPN can be bought on a standalone basis for $20/mo. I'll be absolutely shocked if all of ESPN *and* Fox Sports can be bought at that price. But we'll see.

This is the first I've heard about Fox Sports doing a wholesale deal with the forthcoming ESPN DTC, but it makes sense, at least for Fox. I had predicted that we might see Fox Sports sold as an optional add-on inside the ESPN app. From Disney's perspective, I'd think they would have to get a really great deal from Fox in order to make their sports a non-optional part of the ESPN DTC. Those costs will have to be passed on to the consumer via a higher price. I have a hard time imagining all of ESPN and Fox Sports being sold together for less than $30/mo.

And as savarese04 suggests above, if Fox Sports gets incorporated into the ESPN DTC, that probably dooms Venu Sports when all it will add to the mix would be WBD's diminished sports roster (plus maybe 24/7 feeds of ABC, Fox, TBS, TNT and TruTV). That really puts WBD in a bad spot.

If I was David Zaslav, there are two deals I'd be working overtime right now to try to make happen. One is to talk to Rupert Murdoch to try to sway him to take the Fox News Media division out of Fox and merge it into his other media company, News Corp., and then merge what's left of Fox (which would be the Fox broadcast net, its O&O locals, the Fox Sports cable channels, Tubi, and the fledgling Fox Entertainment production studio) with WBD. Let him keep full rights to the Fox brand name (which, I would argue, is more synonymous with Fox News than the broadcast network at this point anyhow). Zas could re-christen the Fox broadcast network as The WB. FS 1, FS2, and Big 10 Network could be merged with TNT and TruTV to result in a total of 2-3 all-sports channels. (And the limited amount of sports on TBS, which I think is just some MLB games, would shift over to those all-sports channels too.)

The second deal would be with Paramount, to get them to agree to two joint venture DTC streamers: one containing entertainment and news (i.e. non-sports) and the other containing all their sports. The former would be a direct competitor to Disney+Hulu (which will end up merging sooner or later); the latter would be a direct competitor to the standalone ESPN DTC.

Ideally Comcast would come around to joining the WBD/Paramount JV too. They're not going to keep losing money on Peacock forever and its appeal is clearly limited. But whether or not they fold Peacock and throw in with a JV any time soon, WBD and Paramount need to start moving on NOW from their failed DTC experiments and try something new.

 

[Bruce]

LOL. You never concede when called out on something. You're always on this kick about how you can get "everything" from the traditional cable bundle by cobbling together various DTC apps while also spending less that way. All I was doing is pointing out that, no, that's false.

Not false, since I have never posted everything, I have posted majority .

But you are forgetting , with those apps, along with the majority of content from traditional Live TV, you are getting a bunch of exclusive to only streaming content, movies and shows, in much better quality, for a less expensive price.

That is something you cannot dispute.

Now you're moving the goalposts by saying "Well, no one much cares about all those sports in the traditional bundle anyhow," implying that that's the reason you failed to include the cost of Venu in your DTC package.

How can I include Venu, no one knows the price yet.

Also, a lot of duplicated programing between MAX and Hulu vs Venu , so that makes it harder to include.

If I did, do I get rid of Hulu and Max?

I have written many times before , I only need Big Ten and ESPN during the Football season.

And there are tons of sports in those streaming services I put in my pricing, NFL, NBA, NHL, MLB, March Madness, College Football, etc, etc.

Look, I completely agree with you that there are a lot of us who don't value the broad array of content in the traditional bundle -- including a lot of the sports in it -- enough to pay $73 or more per month for it when we can spend less by buying whatever combination of DTCs we want, with many of those DTCs (e.g. Hulu, Peacock, Max) giving us some portion of the current content from the bundle (should we even care about that stuff).

The value of the Traditional Bundle is less and less every year, since a lot of cable channels no longer produce new content, the Networks are producing less new scripted content every year.

That is why I value the streaming services more.

 

[Bruce]

I'll be surprised if the entirety of ESPN can be bought on a standalone basis for $20/mo. I'll be absolutely shocked if all of ESPN *and* Fox Sports can be bought at that price. But we'll see.

When I was working for them, $15-20 is what is being talked about, per sub fee for Paid Live TV is $11 for both ESPN 1 & 2 together.

Disney knows if they make it too much, not enough will subscribe, they also hope sponsorship deals ( sports betting) with the new service , will help subsidize it.

This is the first I've heard about Fox Sports doing a wholesale deal with the forthcoming ESPN DTC, but it makes sense, at least for Fox.

Those original talks about that is what led to the creation of Venu.

But since then, MLB ratings have totally dropped, last year’s World Series only averaged 4 Million households, a few years before that, it was 11 Million households.

With the loss of per sub fees and advertising revenue, have reopened talks of the possibility of adding it to ESPN streaming service.

The cost of every MLB game to air on Fox ( and FS1), $7-8 Million a game.

I had predicted that we might see Fox Sports sold as an optional add-on inside the ESPN app.

That is what is being talked about.

And as savarese04 suggests above, if Fox Sports gets incorporated into the ESPN DTC, that probably dooms Venu Sports when all it will add to the mix would be WBD's diminished sports roster (plus maybe 24/7 feeds of ABC, Fox, TBS, TNT and TruTV). That really puts WBD in a bad spot.

At the price I have heard, I believe Venu will be a total disaster.

 

[savarese04]

What's interesting to me is Fox is leading the charge on Venu. They are providing the tech and the management team. Yet, they're willing to also throw their content to ESPN as an add-in. Look, I think multiple avenues to sell your thing is better, not worse, but I also think Fox might end up losing a ton of money if they're trying to build a thing from scratch or license in the tech. It always struck me odd that Disney didn't take the charge on Venu, given they already own the BAMTech tech that could easily power the whoe thing.

Sounds like Fox is just hedging their bets. Disney probably doesn't care since they've always been counting on ESPN OTT. Of course, WBD and Zaslav have no idea what's going on, per usual