Directv Now raising prices again

Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by slice1900, Oct 18, 2019.

  1. espaeth

    espaeth AllStar

    209
    91
    Oct 13, 2003
    Just look at Philo’s primary backers: https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/philo/investors/investors_list#section-investors

    It’s Discovery/Scripps, A&E Networks, and Viacom pooling together for a direct to the consumer service.

    Part of the problem Netflix has is content - distribution platforms are rapidly becoming a commodity, so it’s coming down to more of a battle over content. The existing producers of content are taking note of the changing landscape and building their own exclusive distribution islands. Netflix must invest to keep producing their own content or they’re dead.

    If $15bn of debt is concerning, how do you feel about the $158bn in debt that ATT reported last quarter? (most indebted public company in the US right now)

    Money is cheap at current interest rates, but that’s a ton of debt.
     
  2. SledgeHammer

    SledgeHammer Icon

    2,929
    370
    Dec 28, 2007
    I watch a few shows on Discovery, but they aren't repeatable shows. Are you really going to re-watch Gold Rush? Viacom is all garbage channels like MTV, Nick, Comedy Central. Really, the only valuable channel it has is TV Land I would think where people re-watch the content. The latest Philio sub count from 2018 is 50k users lol. Let's even say they're up to 200k. They won't be around much longer with that low of a sub count.

    I wouldn't invest in T either. I was actually a Netflix shareholder and made 130% return on it in maybe 2 yrs. My second best stock ever behind Roku 210% in 6 months lol.

    Yup... Hasting was an idiot to let Disney go. He opened the flood gates to others. He also missed the boat on live TV.

    The majority of Netflix content isn't home grown now, its bought from indy / foreign markets and a lot of people that I talk to say its mostly garbage. They aren't investing in hit shows like they used to. Management has flat out said they are focusing on the foreign markets going forward.

    Like I said, I don't believe AT&T Now or whatever its called this week will be successful since their other attempts have failed and there isn't a point in going to streaming if you aren't going to save money.

    Plus, really, its a tiny market. There's probably 3M unique live tv streamers among all the big services.
     
  3. DR2420

    DR2420 New Member

    248
    30
    Jun 12, 2012
    Michigan
    I know this is about Directv Now/streaming, but it won't be long and we will be getting a notification about DIRECTV satellite service increasing the price in February or whenever it usually is. Not looking forward to that, makes me wonder how big that increase will be after the new carriage deals recently.
     
  4. compnurd

    compnurd Hall Of Fame

    2,923
    307
    Apr 23, 2007
    Evans City PA
    And Dish/Comcast/Altice all of them will do the same thing
     
  5. SledgeHammer

    SledgeHammer Icon

    2,929
    370
    Dec 28, 2007
    It'll probably be $5 to $7 as usual. It won't be 30%.
     
  6. SledgeHammer

    SledgeHammer Icon

    2,929
    370
    Dec 28, 2007
    Verizon just announced that they'll give out Disney+ for FREE for 1 yr. Yeah, so Disney+ is $4.95 for most and now a bunch of free loaders. Disney has very deep pockets, but they've already spent $2-3B (again a big fat B) on standing up the service. Of course, Netflix tanked on the news.
     
  7. slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,500
    1,475
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    Perhaps Disney felt they needed to match Apple's freebie deal since they are both starting up at around the same time? Though Disney would have had a ton of customers without that, so I don't think it was necessary. Maybe Verizon is paying them enough they figured they couldn't lose.

    For Apple it makes sense, they are not licensing other people's content like Netflix does nor do they have a century long back catalog they already own like Disney so they kind of need to do this since there won't be a whole lot to watch at first.
     
  8. inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    24,559
    1,417
    Nov 13, 2006
    I’m guessing this is Verizon driven to drive their sales and not really Disney driven...
     
  9. crkeehn

    crkeehn Godfather

    438
    21
    Apr 22, 2002
    We have to remember that Google's primary product is not the programming, but data. They are keeping track of what we are watching and are most likely recouping some of their expenses by selling viewing data to business.

    I have noticed that when a show that I watch regularly is being broadcast, I am now getting notices on my phone that the program is being broadcast, live.
     
    NashGuy likes this.
  10. NashGuy

    NashGuy Active Member

    726
    153
    Jan 30, 2014
    Nashville, TN
    What a mish-mash of thoughts.

    You perpetually seem to lump together very different things, direct-to-consumer (DTC) services and multichannel vMVPDs, as one monolithic category, "streaming". They're not. vMVPDs are just a different way to deliver the same thing that cable and satellite always have. The future belongs to those companies that OWN content and deliver it directly to the consumer: Netflix, AT&T, Comcast, Disney, Apple, Amazon, etc.

    You also have a fixation with prices. You seem to think that streaming is only about lower prices. I've never made that claim. If that's a debate you want to have, don't direct it at me. There are some efficiencies to be had to going direct-to-consumer (and therefore cutting out the middle-man) and some portion of those efficiencies should reach the consumer in the form of overall lower average prices per hour of video consumed, but I'm under no illusions that consumers will -- years down the road, when the dust has settled and the transition from TV 2.0 to TV 3.0 is largely complete -- spend far less money on TV than they do now, assuming they access the same types and amounts of content.

    I just don't know where you're getting this idea that consumers will decide, "Hey, you know what? The old cable channel bundle was superior to streaming after all!" The trend is clear that consumers are spending an increasing percentage of their viewing time watching DTC services and less watching traditional linear channel TV. That trend will only accelerate in 2020 as major media powers really begin fighting back against Netflix. More and more of the content that folks want to watch will reside exclusively on DTC streaming services, including HBO Max, Disney+ and Apple TV+ in addition to the existing Netflix, Hulu and Prime Video (as well as Showtime, Starz and Epix, which are DTC services that distribute both via streaming as well as via traditional linear channels).

    Just look at the most recent Emmys. How many of the nominated shows originated on broadcast or basic cable channels versus DTC services like HBO, Netflix, Prime Video, etc? That trend will only continue. Linear channel TV is rapidly becoming a place where only sports and news are the standouts. For just about everything else, DTC services are the preferred destination. What happens when all the major sports begin offering access outside of linear channels?

    In the end, it's not mainly about the technology that delivers the content. It's about the content, and consumers will follow it. But the technology is important too in that streaming allows consumers to choose from a huge menu of on-demand choices and watch any time, anywhere, on any internet-connect device. Especially for young people who have always known that paradigm, going back to exclusively linear-channel video is just unthinkable.
     
    Rich and espaeth like this.
  11. SledgeHammer

    SledgeHammer Icon

    2,929
    370
    Dec 28, 2007
    I mention price because it seems like the few DirecTV subs that seem to create accounts on here just for the purpose of telling people they've cancelled their service seem to harp on it.

    I'll grant you that there has been a lull in hit TV shows over the past 3 - 5 yrs. For you to say there will never be another hit show like TBBT or Seinfeld or 2.5 Men is insane. Of course there will be. If every show churned out was a hit...

    It's also insane to think that anybody would prefer to have their show exclusively on streaming or cable when they could have it on a network. That's just ludicrous. Everybody wants to have a hit show on a major network, that's where the money is.

    Please don't tell me you think Philio or another provider is EVER going to pay somebody $2M an ep to star in a show exclusive to them (if they ever do that). A network will.

    Has any streaming service won an Emmy? Netflix got nominated for a few things, they haven't won (yet). And no, I don't count winning for "Best Key Grip In a Foreign Film" type categories as winning emmys. I'm talking about best film / best actor categories.

    So you don't think streaming will continue to fragment? Disney already has 3 or 4 completely separate services. AT&T has like 17 different streaming products, etc.

    So, yeah, at some point, when a person needs 10 different providers to get all their channels, people will start to get annoyed. Would you be all gung ho about streaming if you needed 10 different providers, 10 different bills, 10 different apps, had to remember which channels are in which app, etc? Sounds like a poor user experience to me.
     
  12. TV_Guy

    TV_Guy New Member

    130
    44
    Nov 16, 2007
    HBO topped all networks with nine wins at Sunday night’s 71st annual Primetime Emmy Awards, Amazon Prime Video surged to a second-place finish with seven. The streaming service was paced a several surprise wins for its Fleabag, which won a leading four Emmys as it dominated the comedy categories — leaving lame-duck ex-champ Veep empty-handed.

    Fleabag‘s haul including Outstanding Comedy Series and pair of wins for its lead actress and writer Phoebe Waller-Bridge. Its director Harry Bradbeer also picked up a statuette

    Emmy Scorecard: Wins By Program & Network: HBO, Fleabag, Game Of Thrones – Deadline
     
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2019
    NashGuy likes this.
  13. NashGuy

    NashGuy Active Member

    726
    153
    Jan 30, 2014
    Nashville, TN
    Yes. And while the majority of HBO subscribers do get it as part of, or an add-on to, a traditional linear cable channel package, HBO is also easily available as a standalone streaming service in the form of HBO Now, which debuted in mid-2015. All of the HBO viewing I've done for the past few years has been via streaming. (And I would bet that a fair amount of the HBO viewing done by HBO cable subscribers actually comes in the form of streaming through the HBO Go app.) The same can be said for Showtime, Starz, and Epix. So are those services "traditional cable TV"? Or are they "direct-to-consumer streaming services"? They're both, and they exemplify the way that the lines are going to increasingly blur as traditional media players move into streaming.

    It's going to be very interesting to see how HBO Max pans out. AT&T is saying that their customers who already get HBO directly from them -- presumably via DirecTV, Uverse TV, AT&T TV, AT&T TV Now, as a perk with AT&T Wireless -- will get HBO Max "for free". I take this to mean that they'll give those customers HBO Max for no additional up-charge; basically, they're just going to swap out HBO Max in place of regular HBO for all those distribution avenues that they control. (Won't this mean that they'll just shut down HBO Now and replace it with HBO Max? I've been saying that's what will happen at some point in the months following HBO Max's debut next year.)

    As this Reuters article states, AT&T wants to convert all 35 million of their current HBO subscribers in the US into HBO Max subscribers. (And they said in their 3Q earnings call today that they'll grow that to 50 million HBO Max subs by 2025, which doesn't sound overly ambitious -- just 3 million more per year, on average.) And doing so requires them to renegotiate their current carriage deals with MVPDs like Comcast, Charter, Verizon, etc. AT&T is going to want those distributors to do the same thing that they're doing with their own customers: replace HBO with HBO Max. In most cases, I think it will probably happen. Because if AT&T sells HBO Max as a standalone streaming service for about the same $15/mo price that cable operators typically charge for HBO, and HBO Max contains everything in HBO plus a whole lot more content, then those cable operators will be at risk of their customers dropping HBO through them and going direct to AT&T for HBO Max as a standalone service. This will give AT&T leverage to demand that cable operators get a smaller cut of what each customer pays for HBO Max than has historically been the case for HBO. Instead of cable operators forking over to AT&T an average of $7.65 for each HBO subscriber they sign up, they might have to pay $11 for each HBO Max sub. But if the operator charges $16 for HBO Max, that still gives leaves them with a 31.25% cut (i.e. $5). I guarantee you that's a bigger cut than Netflix pays out to any of their distribution partners. But if something like this does transpire in their renegotiated deals with the cable operators, I would look for HBO/HBO Max to become unbundled from cable channel packages and begin to be sold only a la carte at the full price. Probably also means the end of cable operators being able to afford giving away HBO for months on end, or at a steep promotion discount, to reward loyal customers or keep you from dropping cable TV.
     

Share This Page

spam firewall