VOD Netflix/Streaming Services - Page 425

**Hugh** · 17-09-2019, 19:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by muppetman11

Shocking name but at least it will be included as part of my subscription.

It’s their logo.

muppetman11 · 17-09-2019, 20:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh

It’s their logo.

I know but still a poor name for a streaming service in my opinion.

**Paul** · 17-09-2019, 20:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by muppetman11

I know but still a poor name for a streaming service in my opinion.

Yep, its definitely cringeworthy.

pip08456 · 17-09-2019, 20:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfman

Established series have brand awareness that's not possible developing their own originals. Even "hits" like House of Cards nobody is going to go back and watch again.

Ironically, brand awareness is found on large mainstream platforms, not niche platforms with a few hundred thousand homes. Which means the soon to be fragmented world of streaming will struggle to achieve it.

I doubt Disney+ will struggle achieving brand awareness.

denphone · 17-09-2019, 20:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by pip08456

I doubt Disney+ will struggle achieving brand awareness.

They have quite a armory at their disposal compared to others.

Horizon · 17-09-2019, 21:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Media Boy

From RXTV Twitter page:

https://twitter.com/RXTVlog/status/1...rxtvlog.com%2F

Comcast spend on a fortune on a company with a short catchy name which would've been perfect in the streaming world, I'm talking about Sky, then come up with this.

I'm genuinely surprised.

jfman · 17-09-2019, 22:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by pip08456

I doubt Disney+ will struggle achieving brand awareness.

Will their new TV series in the future? Who knows. Given a restricted viewership it's certainly going to be harder than where their content agreements presently gives them their reputation is on the biggest providers in the vast majority of countries.

OLD BOY · 18-09-2019, 11:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by muppetman11

I'm sure someone on here said third party content isn't important to Netflix , yet here they are paying huge amounts for Seinfeld.

https://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2019/09/ne...iller-feature/

I'd prefer it if they diverted that money into even more originals, frankly. Netflix doesn't need all that archive material in my view.

I appreciate that some of these old series are popular, but I think most of these will be reclaimed for different streamers.

Netflix has so much going for it, and they've developed so much 'original' material now, I think they should concentrate their efforts there.

They may not have any other choice!

denphone · 18-09-2019, 11:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I'd prefer it if they diverted that money into even more originals, frankly. Netflix doesn't need all that archive material in my view.

Why? as l am sure they would not have paid the astronomical amounts that they paid for it unless they knew it was was probably going to be one of their most watched shows in the coming years once the contract starts.

---------- Post added at 10:28 ---------- Previous post was at 10:26 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I appreciate that some of these old series are popular, but I think most of these will be reclaimed for different streamers.

What one thinks might happen invariably does not happen as thought you would have learnt that by now.

---------- Post added at 10:31 ---------- Previous post was at 10:28 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Netflix has so much going for it, and they've developed so much 'original' material now, I think they should concentrate their efforts there.

Having Originals does not make a streamer as having a broad and varied library of content does that.

OLD BOY · 18-09-2019, 11:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by denphone

Why? as l am sure they would not have paid the astronomical amounts that they paid for it unless they knew it was was probably going to be one of their most watched shows in the coming years once the contract starts.

---------- Post added at 10:28 ---------- Previous post was at 10:26 ----------

What one thinks might happen invariably does not happen as thought you would have learnt that by now.

---------- Post added at 10:31 ---------- Previous post was at 10:28 ----------

Having Originals does not make a streamer as having a broad and varied library of content does that.

If the archive material is no longer available, they don't have much choice, Den.What else would you have Netflix do?

Personally, I only get Netflix for the originals.

oliver1948uk · 18-09-2019, 11:38

Before retirement, many of us lived very busy lives which prevented us from watching the latest productions on TV.

Now with more spare time, I greatly enjoy what I consider to be excellently produced series that I have not previously viewed even though the picture quality may fall below modern standards. Once such series is Kavanagh QC.

Thus, some people appreciate series repeated whether on the conventional channels or on the streaming services.

denphone · 18-09-2019, 11:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

If the archive material is no longer available, they don't have much choice, Den.What else would you have Netflix do?

Personally, I only get Netflix for the originals.

Its no good Netflix just concentrating on originals as there is still plenty of archived content Netflix will be able to lay their hands on at the right price of course.

---------- Post added at 10:46 ---------- Previous post was at 10:42 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by oliver1948uk

Before retirement, many of us lived very busy lives which prevented us from watching the latest productions on TV.

Now with more spare time, I greatly enjoy what I consider to be excellently produced series that I have not previously viewed even though the picture quality may fall below modern standards. Once such series is Kavanagh QC.

Thus, some people appreciate series repeated whether on the conventional channels or on the streaming services.

OB seems to have the attitude of one size fits all wherever one needs broad and varied content to please everybody... Just like the BBC of course...

1andrew1 · 18-09-2019, 14:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Horizon

Comcast spend on a fortune on a company with a short catchy name which would've been perfect in the streaming world, I'm talking about Sky, then come up with this.

I'm genuinely surprised.

Does Comcast have the rights to the name internationally though? In many territories it's licensed out to the other companies eg
https://www.tatasky.com/wps/portal
https://www.sky.co.nz/
https://www.sky.com.mx/

OLD BOY · 18-09-2019, 18:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by denphone

Its no good Netflix just concentrating on originals as there is still plenty of archived content Netflix will be able to lay their hands on at the right price of course.

In which case, there won't be a problem. I was responding to the observation that archive material would in future occupy other sites.

---------- Post added at 17:03 ---------- Previous post was at 17:00 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by denphone

OB seems to have the attitude of one size fits all wherever one needs broad and varied content to please everybody... Just like the BBC of course...

No, I don't think that. Everyone has different likes/dislikes. What I find funny is posts which say the UKTV channels and archive material are extremely popular and the next minute that Britbox will fail because there will be too much archive material on it.

Now, that is what I call contradictory!

pip08456 · 18-09-2019, 18:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfman

Will their new TV series in the future? Who knows. Given a restricted viewership it's certainly going to be harder than where their content agreements presently gives them their reputation is on the biggest providers in the vast majority of countries.

I don't think so as Disney is the brand awareness name. You however will disagree as usual.