Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Sky’s strategy has always been to subsume the brands of the channels it carries beneath its own so people always think they’re watching something “on Sky” even when they’re not. Bidding to fully integrate Disney+ content into their menu structure is consistent with that.
However in this case I’d question the value of what they’re doing. Streaming is big news right now, and the brand names have cachet. People talk about Netflix and Amazon Prime. They’re already talking about Disney+. As long as those brand names can still appear on rival services - or, indeed, as standalone apps on various smart TVs - is there really sufficient value in what Sky is doing? Have they thought this through or are they acting out of habit, and hoping to pretend they have some sort of content exclusive, like they used to in their heyday?
|
Interesting thoughts. I feel Sky has most to lose with Disney+ as its customers have grown up on Fox Content like The Simpsons and Sky Movies Disney. Keeping rhis content prominent for a few years whilst it moves over to promoting more in-house and Universal content seems a logical step.