VOD : Streaming services news, offers and general chit chat

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by jfman

DAZN have sent a survey to users in the UK to measure their likelihood of purchasing a hypothetical boxing event between Dillian Whyte and Andy Ruiz Jr. for £29.99.

None of them hold a world title.

Another nail in the coffin of the low cost streaming future if they are wanting £30 every other month for mediocre boxing on top of a sub.

Will that survey generate intel they might use to drive down the value of BT Sport in negotiations?

[Raider999]

Originally Posted by jfman

DAZN have sent a survey to users in the UK to measure their likelihood of purchasing a hypothetical boxing event between Dillian Whyte and Andy Ruiz Jr. for £29.99.

None of them hold a world title.

Another nail in the coffin of the low cost streaming future if they are wanting £30 every other month for mediocre boxing on top of a sub.

That is what will happen, if OB is correct and streamers end up ruling the world.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Raider999

That is what will happen, if OB is correct and streamers end up ruling the world.

Pay per view boxing is not a streaming phenomenon- it’s been with us for years. I don’t think sport will ever be sold cheaply, whether by way of conventional broadcasting or by streaming. However, if you only watch one kind of sport (eg football) I believe that this will end up cheaper than Sky.

The cheaper TV via streaming I have been on about has really been all about drama, news and documentaries rather than sport and I acknowledge that it is a lot less clear how prices will turn out there. I think that those who like watching a range of different sports may be the ones to lose out, but it all depends on which providers pick up the most sports rights.

---------- Post added at 11:39 ---------- Previous post was at 11:38 ----------

I see even streaming providers such as Roku are vulnerable to channel disputes.

https://www.broadbandtvnews.com/2021...roku-platform/

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Pay per view boxing is not a streaming phenomenon- it’s been with us for years. I don’t think sport will ever be sold cheaply, whether by way of conventional broadcasting or by streaming. However, if you only watch one kind of sport (eg football) I believe that this will end up cheaper than Sky.

The cheaper TV via streaming I have been on about has really been all about drama, news and documentaries rather than sport and I acknowledge that it is a lot less clear how prices will turn out there. I think that those who like watching a range of different sports may be the ones to lose out, but it all depends on which providers pick up the most sports rights.

---------- Post added at 11:39 ---------- Previous post was at 11:38 ----------

I see even streaming providers such as Roku are vulnerable to channel disputes.

https://www.broadbandtvnews.com/2021...roku-platform/

In other words you’re only likely to “win” if you want to subscribe to a single supplier and only consume the limited content you can get there.

For those of us who have become accustomed to rich and diverse range of content from a range of content makers we will lose out in the long run.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

In other words you’re only likely to “win” if you want to subscribe to a single supplier and only consume the limited content you can get there.

For those of us who have become accustomed to rich and diverse range of content from a range of content makers we will lose out in the long run.

I think it’s only sports lovers who like to have a variety of content who may lose out, but that could well change. Free or lower subscription streamers with advertising could be the answer, which is what people have now on the conventional channels.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I think it’s only sports lovers who like to have a variety of content who may lose out, but that could well change. Free or lower subscription streamers with advertising could be the answer, which is what people have now on the conventional channels.

Disney and Discovery are pulling minority interest general entertainment and documentary content in different directions, so it isn’t true to state that viewers of non-sport content will be unaffected by higher costs.

[Legendkiller2k]

Word in office is Netflix planning another price rise on all packages.

[ScottishSteve]

Originally Posted by Legendkiller2k

Word in office is Netflix planning another price rise on all packages.

The last rise was hard to swallow but I stuck with them, don’t think I would be keen to pay any more considering the amount of other services to choose from.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

Disney and Discovery are pulling minority interest general entertainment and documentary content in different directions, so it isn’t true to state that viewers of non-sport content will be unaffected by higher costs.

Higher costs are inevitable. All I have said is that streamers of scripted content will provide better value for money than conventional channels, which to my mind is pretty obvious. The flexibility subscribers have to change providers without hassle is an added bonus.

The problem with sport is that the limited number of sports that attract a large percentage of viewers encourages those with big pockets to scrape up all the goodies for themselves. That inevitably puts up the price because the bids are so high. Sky and BT have as much as said they have had enough, so they are both likely to pull out of the market altogether before long.

Where dramas and documentaries are concerned, there is no limit to the amount of content that can be produced as originals, and so the price of all that is relatively low. Competition helps the consumer in that area.

---------- Post added at 20:02 ---------- Previous post was at 19:54 ----------

Originally Posted by ScottishSteve

The last rise was hard to swallow but I stuck with them, don’t think I would be keen to pay any more considering the amount of other services to choose from.

You won’t get us much choice that is free within the subscription with any other provider, although it’s fair to say that you’d never get around to watching more than a small fraction of the choice on Netflix.

Prime is second best, although there is also a lot of content on there that you need to pay an additional charge for. However, if you stick with the Prime originals, there’s loads to choose from, and there’s quite a lot more under the ‘Prime’ banner that is free also.

Apple TV and StarzPlay have some good stuff, but choice is much more limited. You can move on when you’ve seen enough anyway.

Acorn has some good stuff although they are still building their library - many of their programmes are archive content. Britbox may come into its own eventually, but I think there are only three originals on there so far, one of which is ‘Spitting Image’! If you like revisiting the old stuff, that might be worth a try.

[Legendkiller2k]

Originally Posted by ScottishSteve

The last rise was hard to swallow but I stuck with them, don’t think I would be keen to pay any more considering the amount of other services to choose from.

They've made it very difficult to sub from other regions too unless you have a debit/credit card for that reason you have to use gift vouchers in that regions currency.
For me when they started blocking vpns (i use my to protect my connection) put them on thin ice, i'm paid up until Feb 2022 i won't be renewing.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Higher costs are inevitable. All I have said is that streamers of scripted content will provide better value for money than conventional channels, which to my mind is pretty obvious. The flexibility subscribers have to change providers without hassle is an added bonus.

The problem with sport is that the limited number of sports that attract a large percentage of viewers encourages those with big pockets to scrape up all the goodies for themselves. That inevitably puts up the price because the bids are so high. Sky and BT have as much as said they have had enough, so they are both likely to pull out of the market altogether before long.

Where dramas and documentaries are concerned, there is no limit to the amount of content that can be produced as originals, and so the price of all that is relatively low. Competition helps the consumer in that area.

Does competition help the end user? All of these middlemen outbidding each other for content drives up costs, not reduces them. With fewer consumers to absorb the costs from. The end user loses the economies of scale that legacy platforms had in driving down prices from studios and third parties, who generally didn’t have many places to go.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

Does competition help the end user? All of these middlemen outbidding each other for content drives up costs, not reduces them. With fewer consumers to absorb the costs from. The end user loses the economies of scale that legacy platforms had in driving down prices from studios and third parties, who generally didn’t have many places to go.

Yes, it does, where choice is plentiful. I think scripted content will always be cheaper on streamers.

Where choice is more restricted (ie sport), it's a different scenario. However, there's a limit to what people will be prepared to pay.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

The problem with sport is that the limited number of sports that attract a large percentage of viewers encourages those with big pockets to scrape up all the goodies for themselves. That inevitably puts up the price because the bids are so high. Sky and BT have as much as said they have had enough, so they are both likely to pull out of the market altogether before long.

BT have said they're exploring options and were last reported to be in talks with DAZN. But I don't believe Sky have stated any intentions of withdrawing from the market and indeed, just reported record viewing figures for Sky Sports.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

BT have said they're exploring options and were last reported to be in talks with DAZN. But I don't believe Sky have stated any intentions of withdrawing from the market and indeed, just reported record viewing figures for Sky Sports.

What Sky said last time was that they were being more circumspect about the bidding process and that there was a limit on how much they were prepared to bid.

Of course, that might just have been a ploy to convince competitors to keep their bids lower than they might otherwise have done!

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

What Sky said last time was that they were being more circumspect about the bidding process and that there was a limit on how much they were prepared to bid.

Of course, that might just have been a ploy to convince competitors to keep their bids lower than they might otherwise have done!

Absolutely agree - but don't think this means "they are both likely to pull out of the market altogether before long."