DBSTalk Forum banner
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

· Icon
Joined
·
2,263 Posts
The thing is, that of those services in the cartoon, if they didn't "cut the cord" how many would they still have? My assumption is that the $200 scenario would include an OTT service. That's just essentially a cable/Sat replacement (same thing, different delivery method), Let's assume that the OTT costs $80 a month. So when comparing apples to apples, it's a $20 savings. But everyone's situation is different. I would assume that the other 8 streaming services are either A) something they would have paid for anyway (I have Sat, but I also have an AP account, Netflix, Disney+ and a couple of inexpensive add ons I got through various promotions.) or B) Might not be something they continually have, i.e. they play the rotating streaming service game....only pay when there's something to watch.

Sure, I predicted that at some point streaming prices would start to rival cable/sat in price point, and especially OTT services are getting closer to that point. I also think, at some point, they will also follow the model that cable/sat has and sell you packages of channels, or, they will consolidate and start to be owned by just a few companies. I think the TV landscape 5 years from now will look completely different, and 10 years from now, even MORE different.
 

· Icon
Joined
·
2,263 Posts
Not. OTT is generally "skinny" packages. On DirecTV Stream the top package is less channels then on my lowly Preferred Xtra. The comparable priced package is 105 channels vs. 220+ on sat. Also, nobody streams CW and some don't have some other channels like PBS.

I have DirecTV (obviously) [legal / paid, but on steep discounts through the loyalty program]. I also get several streaming OTT & VOD services for free through work [all legal -- except for Netflix which is a family password share lol which may go away next year].

So technically I could drop my DirecTV and pay nothing every month since it's covered by all the other free services.

Even without the nuisance of having to pay for "9 streaming services", I still favor DirecTV and keep it. Muscle memory on the channels & shows I watch + full unified interface under one roof + OTA, etc.

Also, not really worth it to keep any of the services with so called "exclusive content" year round. Last show I legit watched on Netflix was Man vs. Bee and I finished that in a day. Only used Amazon Prime recently to watch a movie. Haven't used it in years other wise. Nothing on there.
While I agree and technically you are correct, most people who subscribe to OTT packages do so as a replacement for cable/sat. So while they may not have all the channels they had previously, they have enough to satisfy their situation (i.e. they made the conscious choice that they could "do without" certain channels to save money). Heck not every Dish or cable system has ALL the channels either (DirecTV is famously missing some HBO channels, DISH is sorely lacking in RSNs for example).

Subbing to DirecTV is your personal decision, and since you get discounts and incentives (which not everyone can or will get) it's worth it to you. If those went away would it still be worth the cost? Only you can determine that. I had DirecTV Stream, and because of the need for CW in my house (my kids watch all the DC stuff), we went back to Satellite. But if the rumors around the CW come to fruition (i.e. they jettison all of their scripted stuff), then it's just not so important for me and I'll probably switch back and save some money (I'm under contract for a bit longer so I'm kind of stuck). We'll see how it goes and what is worth it at that point in time.
 

· Icon
Joined
·
2,263 Posts
I couldn't possibly care less about sports lol. CW I only watch Penn & Teller and Whose Line, my life wouldn't be over if those went away.

If DirecTV stopped giving me promos, and I had to pay full price of like $140ish would I keep it? Hmm... well, depends... if I needed to pay an extra $50/mo to get rid of my Cox data cap to go full streaming, it would be a wash.
But again, that's YOUR situation, everyone is different. So either way OTT services the "traditional cable" purpose for most people not named SledgeHammer. Stream was the only OTT that had both RSNs I watch (and sports IS important to me). As for CW, when we had stream, we also had Locast, so we were able to watch the CW that way. When Locast bit the dust, we tried cable (which sucked) and an antenna in our attic (which was iffy bringing in signals), so we went back. Now it's costing us a LOT of money for TV, so as soon as this contract is over, I'm back in the market and will consider streaming again (we have a LOT of TVs that need a DirecTV box, perhaps this new streaming app that's on ATV that will stream most stations could be a solution for TVs we don't use that much, we'll see).
 

· Icon
Joined
·
2,263 Posts
Didn't you try streaming and didn't like it? If you have a lot of TVs then a per outlet service probably isn't for you.

How many TVs do you have? And do you watch all of them at once? If you don't watch all of them at once and are just one of those people who wants a TV in the bathroom, kitchen, garage, etc. then your other option is to "get creative" with your wiring so you can share boxes among TVs.
I did have Stream and laid out the reasons I went back (no CW for my kids being the primary driver). That's still the case BTW. I got a decent deal to come back to where it cost me about the same as stream, but now it's almost doubled and costing me a lot of money. I have a mini's in 6 rooms, family room, living room and all four bedrooms. My situation is a bit different now since one bedroom is now an office and I don't watch too much TV in there any longer and no longer watch much TV in the living room either, so those are technically two boxes I can return and will probably do that once the apps on Roku or Firestick allow for "streaming" with a SAT account. That'll save me about $14 a month. But once my contract is up, hopefully things will be different. We'll see how it goes.

My point being, everyone's situation and reasons for getting what they get are different. What works for me, doesn't work for you.
 

· Icon
Joined
·
2,263 Posts
And vice versa. As I said above, I could have 7 TVs and still come out ahead/even with DirecTV. If I didn't have a data cap to worry about, the inflection point would be about 3-4 TVs. Sounds like you need to up your promo game ;).

The only advantage I have here is that I'm on Preferred Xtra which has pretty much every non premium channel out there, minus 1 or 2 sports channels AND no RSN fee, which saves me $12/mo in LA. On Stream and OTT, they just bury that fee instead of breaking it out.

And I'm also well aware that if I cancel my service to "try out" streaming, there ain't no going back as I couldn't get this package back, so you and Joe are gonna have to work a lot harder to get me to cancel lol.

P.S. umm.. we're both complaining about the same channel missing on streaming 🤷‍♂️
I do wonder, as someone who left and came back a bit more than a year ago, and, is on contract for at least a half a year more if I'd even be able to get the promo discounts at this point in time? What leverage do I have?
 

· Icon
Joined
·
2,263 Posts
After reading dozens of threads like this, I'm convinced that what works for some, doesn't work for others, and what's cheap for one person isn't cheap for another, depending on your situation. Cord cutting works for some, not for others, Sat or cable work for some not for others This reminds me of the Mac vs. Windows arguments 10-15 years ago, where cord cutters try and convince non-cord cutters why what they do is better and vice versa. Really, at this point, do what works for you and stop trying to convince you, me or someone else that yours is better!!!

That said, the future is going to be streaming, there's no doubt in my mind about it. The media companies are going all in. The quality of what we get on linear services has gone downhill as these companies have ported their best stuff to streaming for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is guaranteed direct payment for what they show and/or produce rather than having to fight with cable and satellite companies tooth and nail for rights fees among other things. If you are CBS, you have full control of what goes on Paramount+ as opposed to fighting with linear affiliates or cable or satellite companies. As long as you get enough subs to pay for it. And sure prices will go up, but they are going up on Cable/Sat too. To me the biggest detriment to streaming is that it's still a wild west and there's no real organized way to watch content in the ways that traditional TV gives us. So it's endless searching and trying to figure out what show is on what streamer and then subbing to whatever that is for however long you need to. It take "work". It's not as easy to do for a lot of people. But anyway, it works for many, and it's a waste of time to try and go "nanananana, I stream and it's better than what you do" or vice versa. People just got to realize that what you do doesn't work for me, and what I do doesn't work for you and leave it at that, instead of spending countless hours and threads trying to convince otherwise. Why?
 

· Icon
Joined
·
2,263 Posts
"ported their best stuff"? Neither streaming or traditional has great content nowadays lol. Most of it is all woke garbage. Streaming tends to be more so.
What is "woke garbage"? My guess is woke garbage is just stuff that you don't like, or doesn't appeal to your particular political bent. The thing is there is SO much content on streaming that it should appeal to everyone, once you can find what you are looking for. That's my biggest issue with streaming is that can be difficult. For all the "woke garbage" on streaming as you put it, unless you like tired old cop shows, reality nonsense, endless reruns, and the occasional sitcom, there's less to choose from on traditional TV than you think. And based on what traditional TV execs have been telling us there's either going to be MORE of that, or, less hours of TV in general.

You went off the rails here again. EVERY single streaming company (except for Netflix) is bleeding heavily. Did you not see Disney's losses last week? Did you not hear the CEO got fired over it? I've told you countless times that video distribution via the streaming/cloud is much more expensive then traditional. I've also mentioned that satellite is probably the cheapest since you just launch a sat and you're done and it scales to infinity (extra outlets don't put strain on the system). Cable/fiber have to tear up streets and scale up infra, streaming has massive hardware and personnel requirements, has to constantly scale up as they give stuff away for below cost to attract viewers. People have no clue how much more effort it takes on the backend of a streaming service vs. traditional. You think you just get a video from somewhere and plop it into the system and its ready in 30 seconds?
Exactly what kind of goldmine has traditional Sat/Cable been? AT&T couldn't wait to dump both DirecTV (still stuck with most of it) and CW/TimeWarner as they've been losing a fortune on all of it. Is streaming any better? Perhaps not. What we've seen is just too much overspending on entertainment in general and with the economy where it is, not enough revenue to make it worth it. So prices are going up and cutting is being done. By studios, by content providers and by streamers AND traditional TV. What has caused this? Too much competition and not enough eyeballs to watch it all. When there was just Netflix and Amazon Prime, it was a cash cow. Now there are WAY too many streamers, and eventually, like everywhere else, there will be a consolidation. Mark my words. It happened with Cable and it's going to happen here too.

That being said, we know unless they launch new sats that DirecTV/Dish will be gone in 10-15 yrs. And yes, we know media companies have gone all in on streaming.

So are media companies going to continue suffering brutal loses? Nope. They're going to raise prices. That's also something that we've seen repeatedly. That they raises prices at a much faster clip. DirecTV Stream is already the same price as DirecTV for half the channels lol.
Of course they will raise prices, so will Sat too. You brag about the deals you get and how you keep calling them for deals. But what happens when the deals go away? Is it still cheaper? Again, that depends on your situation. I'm paying $230 a month for DirecTV. I could pay half of that for streaming, even with the prices inching up. That's too much IMO.
 

· Icon
Joined
·
2,263 Posts
You know that that answer you were being rhetorical. It wont be long when streaming is the only option and you have 6 major players will jack the crap about of it and you will be paying the same or more depending on how much one pays for internet!
You have to take internet out of the equation. Would you have internet if you didn't stream? It's a fixed cost. For some (but not most) you have to boost your internet to faster speeds to make it work, but streaming works fine even at 50 for most people. And most are faster than that! Using internet costs as an argument against streaming is just dumb.
 

· Icon
Joined
·
2,263 Posts
It's not (at least for me). As I've said, my DirecTV bill is $91/mo out the door. A similar package on streaming is about the same. It may be for you or others because they don't own the content and have to pay fees and the content owners jack up the fees. ESPN is the most expensive channel out there by far.

Think about it. You add a cable / fiber box, that puts load on their backend. You add a streaming device, that puts load on their backend. What load does adding a HR54 add to DirecTVs backend?
But again, that works for you. How many "deals" are you getting to get that price? How many TVs do you have? The more TVs the higher the cost. Try getting 6 TVs for $91. You could probably do it with streaming, don't think you could with Sat.
 

· Icon
Joined
·
2,263 Posts
$500M to launch a sat that'll last 10-15 years is certainly cheaper then $1.5B loss per quarter.

That being said, DirecTV seems to be taking it into the future via streaming at this point. Although supposedly they're developing a new sat receiver. It would certainly be more convenient to have streaming apps on the DirecTV box so people don't need multiple remotes / switch inputs, etc. But if you are going streaming, why would you do that through DirecTV?

Btw, the HUGE majority of the market for linear channels is still delivered through traditional means (cable/sat/fiber) vs. streaming. Streaming is the king for VOD though. OTT market is relatively small.

And don't get me wrong... if a content / TV provider said no to streaming today, yeah, they're going to be left in the dust in the future.

The traditional sky isn't falling as hard and fast as you say it is ;).
You keep pointing to Disney's losses? How much of that is attributed to streaming? Is that the whole $1.5B? You have to remember the Disney is not just Streaming, far from it. There are a LOT of reasons they lost that kind of money and a lot of that has to do with the Pandemic. How about mostly empty parks and hotels for more than a year? How about nobody visiting theaters to see their films? Don't think that figured into a LOT of what they lost? How about increases in all kinds of expenses due to the economy? Sure, like many studios they overspent on content and like most studios, they are starting to bean-count more and more, and that includes raising prices...everywhere. WDW tickets for example have gone up at least 2x this past year, and they have cut back on things in the parks too. But you make it sound like streaming is the ONLY reason they are losing money.
 

· Icon
Joined
·
2,263 Posts
Actually, I'm quite middle of the road and take certain things from both sides, but that's off topic for DBSTalk. "woke garbage" is a common phrase that refers to content that is trying too hard to tick every checkbox under the sun to the point of being unrealistic and that every character on the show has to have some kind of physical / mental / emotional issue. At times like these, some lighter, escapist fare would be nice. And while I'm 100% sure there is at least one 5'0" 100lb woman that can single handedly beat up 10 6'5" 300lb men with guns, not very realistic ;).



I do watch one "tired old cop show", but not married to it. I like The Cleaning Lady. Still enjoy Pawn Stars and Gold Rush, but understand they are fake. Not really watching re-runs too much nowadays since I've seen all the episodes of rewatchable stuff too many times and memorized them all lol. I WISH there was a good sitcom on. I also like For All Mankind on AppleTV (but I tend to FF through the more boring on Earth drama portions). I'll give Echo-3 and National Treasure a chance.
Pawn Stars and Gold Rush? That's the kind of crap I'm talking about. It's total mindless crap and that's what we are getting on traditional linear channels. I watch a few like that too. But to say streamers show complete crap is completely not true. They ALL show crap, it's up to the viewer to find what they like. Oh, and wow, you DO watch streaming huh? For All Man Kind on AppleTV. How many streamers do you pay for on top of your $91?


Amazon Prime has always been a throw away service for Amazon. Most people use it for the shipping. If it was a big hit, they'd break it out on a line item and/or charge separately for it.
Perhaps, but the amount of money they spent on it says otherwise.


The consolidator streamers will probably go away at some point and it will be run by the content owners.
I'm not talking about "consolidator streamers" I'm saying that these media companies will consolidate, or at least the streamers will. There's not enough eyeballs for them all, and you are right, people WILL get tired of paying for a dozen different services. They will either consolidate (i.e Apple buys Netflix, Paramount and Comcast merge, things like that), or, someone will come up with a way to sell a bunch of them in one service, you know, like cable/sat does.



Streamers are raising prices at a faster rate to catch up to traditional. I laugh when you defend streaming, because it clearly didn't work for you and you came running back after a month. I'm not bragging about anything. I have no relationship to DirecTV whatsoever. I call in the loyalty program and they give me the discounts and I take them and stay with the service.

If they stopped giving me a $20 discount, I'd still be far ahead vs. paying an extra $50/mo to get rid of my data cap. If they got rid of all my promos and I had to pay full price, I'd probably look for an alternative BEGRUDGINGLY. If you recall, I did look at TVision and that service was trash and quickly folded.

If you're paying $230/mo for DirecTV, that's on you because you got back under contract and have no leverage. Plus, didn't you say you have 6 or 7 TVs? Still doesn't add up to $230/mo unless you are on Ultimate + additional stuff like PP?
I've explained many times why I went back. If my kids moved out of my house (and once my contract is up), I'd go back to streaming in a minute. The CW is the main reason right now, that and no padding option on the Cloud DVR. I have 6 TVs right now, and I'm not kidding, the last bill was $230. I DO have no leverage, you are correct, and the whole contract business needs to go too. It's antiquated. Even Cable doesn't have contracts. I was with streaming for a good part of a year and it worked fine until Locast went belly up and had no way of getting the CW. That caused grief in my house. I also thought I was going to miss a few Yankees games with not having the CW (but as it turned out, they moved those CW games to Amazon!!) As soon as I'm off contract, I'm looking for an alternative again. But like I said, your situation makes it cheaper for you. It's not really cheaper for me. And you even admit, if the discounts go away, you might too.
 

· Icon
Joined
·
2,263 Posts
You can only take base internet out of the equation. If you need to upgrade / remove data caps JUST for streaming, that is definitely a streaming cost.
For me, my ISP has NO data caps and I was only 100 speed until recently which worked well for streaming, even when I left DirecTV Sat. I upped it to 500 because it only was a few dollars more to do so. I get that some folks have datacaps, but I wonder how often the average streamer goes above the data cap, and if paying the overage is STILL cheaper than Sat for some.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top