Discovery +

Discussion in 'Internet Streaming Services' started by b4pjoe, Dec 3, 2020.

  1. jsk

    jsk Icon

    832
    26
    Dec 27, 2006
    Fallston, MD
    I see D+ as a possible antitrust situation because they are utilizing their large market power to promote this service. They are heavily promoting this on all of their platforms, even during their shows. I barely see any promos for any of their non D+ shows. You can’t get away from D+ promotion when you are looking at any of their platforms.
     
  2. b4pjoe

    b4pjoe New Member DBSTalk Club

    2,126
    647
    Nov 19, 2010
    So the new service has launched. I am on the free 7 day trial of the ad free version at the moment. As mentioned previously there are no linear channels. The current shows that are on the linear channels are not up to date on the streaming service. For example Gold Rush on the linear channel has already aired Season 11 Episode 12. The most recent on the streaming service is Season 11 Episode 5. On the non-Discovery shows, for example Alone which is on the History channel, has seasons 1, 4, 5, and 6. Season 7 aired this past year on the History linear channel and ended in August 2020 and is not on the streaming service yet. Not sure why seasons 2 and 3 are not on the streaming service. Contract details most likely.
     
    armchair likes this.
  3. armchair

    armchair Hall Of Fame

    1,295
    12
    Jul 27, 2009
    That's not getting my interest up to subscribe but thanks for sharing and confirming that much.

    Unrealistic to think I'm willing to pay for linear TV service that includes discovery and A&E channels. And then pay for this too. How long before this model fails?

    Sent from my PH-1 using Tapatalk
     
  4. lparsons21

    lparsons21 Hall Of Fame

    5,993
    767
    Mar 4, 2006
    Herrin, IL
    The business model of these “+” channels is one of the possible future models to survive IMO. The current live streamers are kind of a stepping stone away from linear TV.
    Think about this. Hulu does next day ABC, Fox, NBC and some others. CBS:All Access does the same for CBS. Others are coming along too, AMC+, Disney+ for instance. Expect more of that and less of live TV.
     
  5. armchair

    armchair Hall Of Fame

    1,295
    12
    Jul 27, 2009
    I like over the top services but need linear TV for sports. I just wouldn't choose to pay twice for discovery.

    Sent from my PH-1 using Tapatalk
     
  6. lparsons21

    lparsons21 Hall Of Fame

    5,993
    767
    Mar 4, 2006
    Herrin, IL
    Yep, sports is the bugaboo right now. That’s changing going forward. Sinclair is supposedly going to offer a direct to consumer app for their RSN’s. If that works out, expect others to follow suit soon thereafter.

    IMO, blackout rules are going to continue to be a problem. They need to go away.
     
    armchair likes this.
  7. armchair

    armchair Hall Of Fame

    1,295
    12
    Jul 27, 2009
    Sports may be changing going forward. I agree. But Sinclair is such an outlier that personally I wouldn't use it as an example of what others may do. Sinclair is already dabbing with over the top with Tennis Channel+ and I hate that they won't improve the VOD layout. If you look at titles of matches, they're clearly sorted by player and round. What's wrong with that? Catching up leaves nothing to the imagination how the tournament is progressing with the draw elimination. It's like you already know who won before watching a match. And they publish covered TV tournaments as tournaments that will air on TC+. But many of those won't be added to VOD until the tournament is over, by contractual obligations which they don't seem to share with their viewers, particularly when trying to decide to subscribe or not.

    Sinclair is terrible. They don't deserve my patronage with their tc+ plus service and how they've made it difficult to contact with streaming TV services. After months of complaining, they finally sent an email agreeing others have the same complaint; please be patient. Gee, can't they fix anything during the off season? Not yet.

    ESPN and NFL are better examples, IMO. There is some inertia there.

    ESPN+ wasn't a good match for me. I spoke to their customer service a few months back and cancelled ESPN+ based on their feedback; they pretty much agreed I shouldn't be paying for it based on my viewing. I can still use my TV credentials to get replays of what I'm interested in. And rates are increasing but I hear a rumor that Disney is mulling another bundle or integration of services like Hulu on-demand and ESPN. But will we like the outcome?

    The way I prefer to watch out of market NFL games, NFL Gamepass works for me as long as I can avoid spoilers and catch up quickly. It's a cheap alternative to Sunday Ticket. Much like Sinclair, they need to improve the app for TV streaming devices. When I first tried Gamepass, nothing wrong with the app. Then they weren't and added auto play to the TV streaming devices and ruined it. Then they went and moved the highlights to free to everyone with ads. Ruined that too. The app wasn't so annoying until they looked for opportunities; that's the difference between customers and marketing execs. They'll continue making annoying decisions like that until the revenue or subscriber numbers fall. I could just watch on my PC and goto YouTube for highlights to avoid the annoyances.

    So yes, there's some inertia there. But we may not like the outcome. Not just inconvenient but annoying. Some may say we asked for this but we're not the ones making the business decisions. Could be costlier in the end.

    Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk
     
  8. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Gold Club DBSTalk Club

    52,616
    2,794
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Discovery+ is an optional service. While it would be nice to have it included (free) with one's linear subscription it is being sold as a separate package. If one gets enough content with a linear subscription one does not have to subscribe to Discovery+.

    (There are a lot of things that "would be nice". Free access to all content forever "would be nice". That is not the offer the content owners are making.)
     
  9. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Gold Club DBSTalk Club

    52,616
    2,794
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    I believe Sinclair is going to hit a wall that many companies have hit ... separate streaming rights. Sinclair has purchased limited rights from the leagues that may not allow them to do everything they want to do. The good news (for Sinclair) is that OTT is being seen as being the same as traditional MVPD delivery - so that would (in theory) allow Sinclair to start an OTT company to deliver the content they license over their channels within each channel's defined market. The bad news is that licensing likely would not allow for VOD streaming and would not allow for out of market delivery.

    The leagues have reserved out of market delivery of their content -usually for their own out of market packages. No blackouts could lead to worse problems than viewers have today.

    Yes it "would be nice" to have full access to all content without needing to pay a league (out of market) or Sinclair (in market) and figure out who you need to pay for what. It "would be nice" not to have situations where the company who holds the rights for delivery of content to your area can refuse to deliver it. But that is not how the industry makes their money. If the industry isn't making money there isn't a point to them delivering content to anyone.
     
  10. armchair

    armchair Hall Of Fame

    1,295
    12
    Jul 27, 2009
    Curious you imply that I'm looking for something free or inclusive? When I say I choose not to pay for both, I fully realize it's an option. And being that it's nearly redundant of linear channels plus DVR and VOD that I have, I'd prefer to just stick with the linear service since I need it for sports. Based on that, I shared my opinion.

    I thought I implied that with less words. But maybe not clear enough. Not all the skinny bundles in streaming TV services have all the programming and channels. The OTT Discovery+ could be more inclusive but chooses not to compete with linear TV plans that include some or all the channels. Sure Discovery+ offers some original programming and subscribing is optional. However, it's still not compelling enough for me because it's more redundant than a replacement with full library. It's the type of model I wish not to succeed because it's not a replacement of linear TV.

    Simply not offering enough. I also realize execs don't want to mess with deals they get from providers to carry their channels. They never made such promises either. But I recall what they've said and think it's relevant to point out what's missing; I was also agreeing with the OP. I also shared why I'm not interested. And what would interest me. I'd also keep my options open if the model changed to more of a replacement service. But I understand also, business decisions aren't necessarily subscriber friendly. That's what I'm choosing to discuss.

    But I absolutely do look to this thread to hear about subscriber feedback and first impressions. I thanked the OP accordingly; I appreciated the comment. I said in advance what I expected and the rollout appears to be the disappointment I expected. And that's all the negativity I'll say about the service on this thread.

    Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk
     
  11. wmb

    wmb Godfather

    737
    92
    Dec 17, 2008
    That why I came here... learn something about the service. My wife asked about it.

    What makes me curious about it is that the shows are ones that are somewhat entertaining and informative, light fare, but not “must see TV.” Rather, filler material when we don’t want to watch a show or are waiting for something to start at the next hour on a linear channel. Definitely not something I’d DVR, or VOD. I would describe them as targets of opportunity viewing.

    We get these channels through our streaming provider, YTTV. So I guess we have VOD access to the shows along with linear channels. The OTT service isn’t something I find value added given current circumstances.

    Yet, therein lies the rub. I can’t say there isn’t a use case to this type of service, particularly if I am able to move away from YTTV. Let’s face it, at $65 a month, it’s getting pricey and I’d be interested in alternatives that offer interesting content packaged in a way we consume it.

    One of the big issues I have with streaming a la Netflix is choice overload. Linear channels and favorite lists help with that. It would be great if someone would find a way to configure a streaming service in such a way that some equivalent of linear channels. I don’t necessarily want to binge three episodes of a show one evening. Maybe this is just nostalgia for old school prime time viewing.

    Anyhow, on to sports... I thought one of the issues with in-market v. out-of-market is that teams own their games in-market, but leagues control out-of-market. In-market, MLB games are often the most viewed shows in prime time.

    How Popular Is Baseball, Really? (Published 2019)

    MLB Sees Local TV And Streaming Viewership Up Over 4% For 2020

    National prime time MLB games on ESPN or Fox can get over 1 million viewers. I’m not sure how many people subscribe to the out-of-market package. But, I could see a benefit to both the league and someone like ESPN+ to use that as the out-of-market provider, like MLS does.

    Anyhow, I’m curious to see what happens with AT&T and the NFL when it comes to Sunday Ticket. They renew in 2022.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
    B. Shoe likes this.
  12. techguy88

    techguy88 Well-Known Member

    1,391
    658
    Mar 19, 2015
    There isn't an anti-trust issue with the way Discovery, Inc. is promoting discovery+. The way they are promoting it is very similar to how other streaming services are promoted:
    • Hulu, ESPN+ and Disney+ are heavily promoted on ABC-ESPN-FX-Disney channels.
      • Disney actually moved a good chunk of content from DisneyNow (their TV Everywhere app) to Disney+.
      • Comcast (who currently owns a 33% stake in Hulu) used to promote Hulu heavily until they started promoting Peacock.
      • Fox Corporation still promotes Hulu heavily for Fox shows just as they did when they owned a 33% share.
    • NBCUniversal's properties heavily promote Peacock
      • Comcast, who owns the controlling/operating 70% stake of FandangoMedia, has a Peacock Freeview on Vudu. They also have the same Freeview on their TV Everywhere apps. [AT&T/WarnerMedia own the remaining 30% stake of FandangoMedia]
    • AT&T is using the Turner networks and their various services (i.e. DirecTV, Mobility, Internet) to promote HBO Max.
      • Not to mention Comcast & AT&T are using customer's bills as an advertising vehicle for Peacock & HBO Max respectively.
      • AT&T included 30 day free trial codes for new/returning subscribers in new major video games it releases/distributes through WB Games.
        • The most recent instance of this was at Best Buy where Cyberpunk 2077 came with a 30 day trial code.
      • AT&T has been giving 14 day trial codes for HBO Max with physical movie purchases
        • Best Buy was the participating retailer during their holiday sales.
    Disney, NBCUniversal & WarnerMedia are taking back certain windows to their catalog content for their own services instead of allowing third parties to bid on those windows:
    • Disney's eventual plan is to have all Disney & 20th Century Studios content on Disney+ or Hulu.
    • NBCUniversal/Comcast decided to take back the Pay 2 Window for their films starting with 2020 releases for Peacock. (FX Networks used to have this window.) NBCU also took back The Office after Netflix's contract ran out.
      • Comcast has said in a prior earnings call they see Peacock on the level of NBC/USA and most likely will license out the Pay 1 Window to Universal films to a premium service. Currently HBO/HBO Max has this Pay 1 Window for their films released through 2022.
    • WarnerMedia/AT&T is planning on taking back rights for big franchises after current deals expire like Harry Potter and DC. They also took back Friends from Netflix and passed on offers from third party services for The Big Bang Theory so HBO Max could have those shows.
    So if any media companies would face a potential anti-trust situation it would be Disney, Comcast/NBCUniversal and/or AT&T/WarnerMedia.
     
  13. harsh

    harsh Beware the Attack Basset

    23,160
    487
    Jun 14, 2003
    Salem, OR
    There's nothing physical that requires that the streaming release cannot be simultaneous with the first linear showing. HBO Max kinda did it with Wonder Woman 84 on streaming and in theaters. It isn't as if they're capturing the movies from the first airing to make them available for streaming.
     
  14. wmb

    wmb Godfather

    737
    92
    Dec 17, 2008
    Isn’t the limit qualification for the Oscars? They require a film to open in a theatre, and run for 7 consecutive days.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  15. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Gold Club DBSTalk Club

    52,616
    2,794
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    The rules have been modified due to COVID-19
    AWARDS RULES AND CAMPAIGN REGULATIONS APPROVED FOR 93RD OSCARS®

    As far as I can tell there isn't a rule that would prohibit streaming release before or at the same time as theatrical release (even in a normal year). But in a normal year movies must be shown in theaters in LA for multiple screenings over a seven day period. This year (2020 for the ceremony in April 2021) movies can be released through a streaming platform that charges a fee. They can also be shown in alternate cities.
     
  16. harsh

    harsh Beware the Attack Basset

    23,160
    487
    Jun 14, 2003
    Salem, OR
    There was an amendment to the eligibility rules in October but how hard can it be to run a film for a week at three showings a day. I would think they could rent a theater and accomplish that.

    The amendment involves sending a digital copy of the film to the Academy Screening Review site for review.

    I think the idea is that the movie just needs to be available such that a quorum of the members can shuffle their schedules to see it and I'd imagine that schedules in the film business are pretty light these days.
     
  17. billsharpe

    billsharpe Hall Of Fame

    3,213
    161
    Jan 25, 2007
    Southern...
    Film industry is sending out DVD streamers of some of 2020's films this year to Academy members.
     
  18. Delroy E Walleye

    Delroy E Walleye AllStar

    1,385
    167
    Jun 9, 2012
    It seems that Discovery networks are "premiering" all-new episodes of their programming on Discovery+ only.

    If you want to see those new eps on your traditional cable/sat, then you are SOL!

    (Although I haven't personally checked this myself, it looks like that's how they're promoting it on TV.)

    I certainly hope this isn't the way it's gonna be for new eps from now on...
     
  19. b4pjoe

    b4pjoe New Member DBSTalk Club

    2,126
    647
    Nov 19, 2010
    They have some new series that are streaming only such as Freddy Dodge's Mine Rescue but the regular Goldrush show on the linear channel are about 7 episodes ahead of the streaming service. I've seen from the ads on the linear channel there is a lot of the 90 days series content that is only available on the streaming service.
     
  20. techguy88

    techguy88 Well-Known Member

    1,391
    658
    Mar 19, 2015
    Thanks to that god-awful colorized logo in the top-right corner on all their channels my mother wouldn't quit asking me about this service. I had to set up her Roku account with a payment method so she could subscribe to discovery+. Although I do like the content from Science & History lol.
     

Share This Page

spam firewall

Advertisements