Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Skinsguy

Streaming Video/TV Services

Recommended Posts

Do you guys realize that there's a huge amount of streaming video services out there now? How many of these do you guys subscribe to?

 

Netflix

Hulu

Amazon Prime Video

Sling TV

CBS Access App

Playstation Vue

Hulu & Hulu Live TV

YoutTube Live TV (and also Red)

HBO GO

DirecTV Now

ShowTime App

 

Coming in a couple years, Disney App.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only have Netflix right now,I am waiting for a sports streaming service,yeah I know don't hold my breath,but then I could cut the cable for good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only have Netflix right now,I am waiting for a sports streaming service,yeah I know don't hold my breath,but then I could cut the cable for good.

 

That might be a real possiblity once ATSC 3.0 becomes the standard. It's supposed to be coupled with the internet. Without going through all the details, subscription based programming would be offered to cordcutters, and I'm thinking once this happens, you'll see more sports being offered this way. Of course, it might also mean that all sports become subscription based, which would be a sad day, but if I could get NFL Sunday Ticket as a cordcutter, than I would be willing to pay for that. DirecTV has held ransom to that for way too long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cut the cord 2.5 years ago.  Subscribe to Sling TV & Netflix.  I absolutely do not miss Comcast or Direct TV. 

 

The single and only downfall for me is the lack of live NFL football, but it is getting better.  I have all the intention to watch more games, but my hobbies tend to keep me outside.  So for when I want to catch a game, I rely on friends houses and sports bars.  I admit that i have just been too sorry to put up an antenna to get them free OTA.  I do have it on my never ending list of home projects though.......:>)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The OTA option is hit or miss,depending on where you live.When it's rainy and windy,I can't watch it and I have a expensive roof antenna.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm always bothered by the term "cutting the cord" when people refer to opting for streaming services. You're not cutting anything, you're just changing the delivery method. It still comes in from a "cord" whether it's from the phone company or the cable company. Only the OTA purists (no internet - unless by satellite maybe) can claim they've actually cut the cord.

 

I've been waiting for YouTube Live TV to include our area since last year. I finally signed up last week by using a zip code in one of their service areas. Now when I go to it and it realizes I'm not from the area I've claimed, it doesn't let me watch ABC or NBC live, but it does let me record them and watch them immediately when they are over. I can put up with this until they include our area.

 

Riggins - here's what the have:

 

All major broadcast networks

Big Ten Network

CBS Sports Network

CRSN

ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNews, ESPNU

Fox Regional Sports Networks

FS1, FS2

Golf Channel

NBCSN

SEC Network

Tennis Channel

YES Network

AMC

BBC America

Bravo

Chiller

E!

Esquire

Freeform, FX, FXM, FXX, IFC, Nat Geo, Nat Geo Wild, Oxygen, Sundance, SyFy, Universal HD, USA, WE tv, YouTube Red Originals, BBC World News, CNBC, Fox Business, Fox News, MSNBC, Newsy, Disney Channel, Disney Jr, Disney xD, Sprout, Telemundo, and Universo.

 

$35 a month and you get unlimited DVR in the cloud for six devices / accounts.

 

I'm putting up an antenna for local OTA network, cutting Comcast down to internet only, and keeping Youtube TV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I move into our new house,I am going internet only with comcast and some sort of satellite service or maybe what you suscribe with youtube.I am through with comcast TV service,it sucks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I move into our new house,I am going internet only with comcast and some sort of satellite service or maybe what you suscribe with youtube.I am through with comcast TV service,it sucks.

 

 

You have done this before haven't you? The thing I'm concerned about is how much internet with comcast will cost if you don't have TV. Seems like we discussed this before and they made it so internet only was about the same price as internet with the lowest tier tv. Maybe I'm mistaken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

When I move into our new house,I am going internet only with comcast and some sort of satellite service or maybe what you suscribe with youtube.I am through with comcast TV service,it sucks.

 

 

You have done this before haven't you? The thing I'm concerned about is how much internet with comcast will cost if you don't have TV. Seems like we discussed this before and they made it so internet only was about the same price as internet with the lowest tier tv. Maybe I'm mistaken.

 

No it used to be like that but I am looking at prices on their site and you can get fast internet only for less than 75 bucks,I can get a satellite TV service for around 50 bucks and it is far superior to comcast.That's less than I pay now for what I have.I have been dealing with terrible reception over here with their HD channels....and it's only some of them not all are washing out like their is a glitch.I know it's something on their end.I am just tired of it.I'll deal with it for another coupe weeks and we are moving anyway.I'll make the change then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Youtube is giving a free chromecast with a new account. Right now that's the only way to watch it on TV. Here's a pretty good explanation of Youtube TV and how it compares with the other stuff out there.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you guys realize that there's a huge amount of streaming video services out there now? ...

 

...Coming in a couple years, Disney App.

 

 

 

I only have Netflix right now,I am waiting for a sports streaming service,yeah I know don't hold my breath,but then I could cut the cable for good.

 

 

There are already "too many" streaming services to realistically subscribe to all of them unless you just have a ridiculous amount of free time and a ridiculous amount of disposable income. I foresee many of these services either combining their content such as Hulu does (Fox, NBC) or having to cut their prices in order to maintain/gain subscribers. I feel like we will see many models offer a tiered system where you can get a package that is less than 10 dollars a month, but will require you to watch ads every so often. Conversely, one could pay a premium price to view content without any interruptions.

 

As per the sports streaming service, Disney indicated that their standalone ESPN streaming service will debut around the same time frame as their Disney service. I remember the article stating that there would be over 10,000 sporting events streamed live during the first calendar year from its debut.

 

A couple of interesting notes:

 

It has been estimated that Disney will need 32 million subscribers for its service just to break even for the revenue that it will lose from the licensing deals that it currently has in place as they will not renew any of those contracts being that their service will be the exclusive home for their own content. Just to put that into perspective, Netflix has the market crushed with 50 million subscribers. HBO GO has ... 3 million. At launch, Disney will make available over 500 movie titles and 7,000 episodes of various television programs.

 

Speaking of HBO, their 3 million subscribers are said to account for 5-6% of their total revenue, about 100 million dollars for the quarter. HBO says that this has basically replaced any losses accrued from the downward trend of their other revenue sources. Just to give you an idea of the insane amount of money these corporations are bringing in, that 100 million dollar number accounts for ONE PERCENT of (HBO parent company) Time Warner's quarterly revenue.

 

Here's a link with a little more info about how many subscribers these new services actually have and just how much of an impact "cord cutters" are or are not making on industry as a whole.

 

http://www.darkhorizons.com/standalone-streaming-apps-still-small-fry/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm always bothered by the term "cutting the cord" when people refer to opting for streaming services. You're not cutting anything, you're just changing the delivery method. It still comes in from a "cord" whether it's from the phone company or the cable company. Only the OTA purists (no internet - unless by satellite maybe) can claim they've actually cut the cord.

 

 

I'm not quite sure I agree. The term "Cord-cutting" was originally born out of the idea that an individual disconnected from pay TV, whether that be cable TV or satellite TV. The idea was that a cord cutter realized that for the amount he or she was spending on paid TV, they were not watching enough TV or enough of a variety of those provided channels to justify the expense. So, the cord-cutter decides that he/she can invest three or four months worth of cable bills toward a high quality OTA setup and get all the local channels, plus some you don't even get on cable or satellite TV, for free. The investment pays for itself in a few months, and the cord cutter saves hundreds of dollars a year.

 

I see internet access in a totally different frame of mind. For me, it's a requirement for my profession. It isn't a luxury. And since I can't just put up a tower or an antenna and get my internet for free (sure wish I could though), then I have no choice but to pay for that service. Again, I see internet as a need up there with running water and electricity.

 

For these live TV services, I think people aren't going to use them to their advantage. For me, this is what I'd do. set aside about $600 to invest in a top notch OTA system. A very high quality roof top antenna, high quality pre-amp if needed, distribution amp, and coaxial cable. That right there will cost you about $200 - $300 if you don't skimp on antenna. The other half of the money will go toward the DVR. You can either get a Tivo, but for $300, you're probably going to have to go the TiVo route that comes with the monthly subscription. I'd go the Channel Master DVR route, buy the external 1TB hard drive, and then you're set. The service is free. Once you've done this, you're invested about six months worth of cable or satellite cost to the project, but once those six months are up, your upfront cost is paid for and the rest of the time, you're getting free content and able to time shift with the DVR. As Riggins said, there is the issue with the weather messing up antenna reception, but I had this same issue with DirecTV during really bad rain storms. My satellite always went out during a bad rain storm at either house I've lived in, so I'm used to these interruptions. Anyway, you'll probably wind up getting 30-40 channels this way, and then if you still want HBO, maybe do the add-on through Amazon Prime (I think it's like $15/month) or get the lowest Sling TV package if you want a handful of cable channels with ESPN. Couple this with Netflix, and that's pretty solid amount of entertainment for a relatively low amount.

 

Of course with us, we were even skimpier on what we paid for. We do Neftlix, used a homemade antenna, bought a used TiVo with lifetime membership for $100 from eBay, and our family shares our Amazon prime, so we pay about $25/year for it. On average, We spent about $140 on TV entertainment, per year, for the past three years. That's compared to $1,200/year we were spending. Of course, unfortunately now, our TiVo went out on us. We still have the homemade antenna, though, but I had thought about getting a better one that is mounted on the roof for better reception.

 

My wife and I did buy her parents a Roku stick for their anniversary. We went the SlingTV route and signed up for two months service so we could get the stick for free lol! I had tried out SlingTV before. I've still used it very sparingly in the week we've had it. You can't watch live local TV which sucks. You can watch that programming on demand, but no live sports unless it's through ESPN. I'm not sure if it's worth it. I tried watching Duck Dynasty on demand through the app, and the video was so choppy that I cut it off. My router is right underneath the TV, so I know it wasn't the internet. I'll probably cancel it after the two months. I've just found that for us, we have gotten out of the idea of live TV unless it's sports. We watch everything the next day or after it had recorded (when our TiVo was alive.) Most of the time, we watched stuff the next day after it aired. We see no reason why that will change anytime soon. Maybe when our kid is old enough to put himself to bed that we might get back into watching live programming again, but an on-demand service where we can watch broadcast programming a day later is more valuable to us than the live TV. Sports is the ONLY hang up, but that's my hang up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Youtube is giving a free chromecast with a new account. Right now that's the only way to watch it on TV. Here's a pretty good explanation of Youtube TV and how it compares with the other stuff out there.

 

 

 

My TV has chromecast on it,may have to check into this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are already "too many" streaming services to realistically subscribe to all of them unless you just have a ridiculous amount of free time and a ridiculous amount of disposable income. I foresee many of these services either combining their content such as Hulu does (Fox, NBC) or having to cut their prices in order to maintain/gain subscribers. I feel like we will see many models offer a tiered system where you can get a package that is less than 10 dollars a month, but will require you to watch ads every so often. Conversely, one could pay a premium price to view content without any interruptions.

 

As per the sports streaming service, Disney indicated that their standalone ESPN streaming service will debut around the same time frame as their Disney service. I remember the article stating that there would be over 10,000 sporting events streamed live during the first calendar year from its debut.

 

A couple of interesting notes:

 

It has been estimated that Disney will need 32 million subscribers for its service just to break even for the revenue that it will lose from the licensing deals that it currently has in place as they will not renew any of those contracts being that their service will be the exclusive home for their own content. Just to put that into perspective, Netflix has the market crushed with 50 million subscribers. HBO GO has ... 3 million. At launch, Disney will make available over 500 movie titles and 7,000 episodes of various television programs.

 

Speaking of HBO, their 3 million subscribers are said to account for 5-6% of their total revenue, about 100 million dollars for the quarter. HBO says that this has basically replaced any losses accrued from the downward trend of their other revenue sources. Just to give you an idea of the insane amount of money these corporations are bringing in, that 100 million dollar number accounts for ONE PERCENT of (HBO parent company) Time Warner's quarterly revenue.

 

Here's a link with a little more info about how many subscribers these new services actually have and just how much of an impact "cord cutters" are or are not making on industry as a whole.

 

http://www.darkhorizons.com/standalone-streaming-apps-still-small-fry/

 

 

We were talking about the Emmys this morning on the Coffee Break. Never heard anyone thank ABC, NBC, or CBS. All the accolades went to Hulu, Netflix, and HBO. No question - all the award winning shows for TV are coming from streaming services.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There are already "too many" streaming services to realistically subscribe to all of them unless you just have a ridiculous amount of free time and a ridiculous amount of disposable income. I foresee many of these services either combining their content such as Hulu does (Fox, NBC) or having to cut their prices in order to maintain/gain subscribers. I feel like we will see many models offer a tiered system where you can get a package that is less than 10 dollars a month, but will require you to watch ads every so often. Conversely, one could pay a premium price to view content without any interruptions.

 

As per the sports streaming service, Disney indicated that their standalone ESPN streaming service will debut around the same time frame as their Disney service. I remember the article stating that there would be over 10,000 sporting events streamed live during the first calendar year from its debut.

 

A couple of interesting notes:

 

It has been estimated that Disney will need 32 million subscribers for its service just to break even for the revenue that it will lose from the licensing deals that it currently has in place as they will not renew any of those contracts being that their service will be the exclusive home for their own content. Just to put that into perspective, Netflix has the market crushed with 50 million subscribers. HBO GO has ... 3 million. At launch, Disney will make available over 500 movie titles and 7,000 episodes of various television programs.

 

Speaking of HBO, their 3 million subscribers are said to account for 5-6% of their total revenue, about 100 million dollars for the quarter. HBO says that this has basically replaced any losses accrued from the downward trend of their other revenue sources. Just to give you an idea of the insane amount of money these corporations are bringing in, that 100 million dollar number accounts for ONE PERCENT of (HBO parent company) Time Warner's quarterly revenue.

 

Here's a link with a little more info about how many subscribers these new services actually have and just how much of an impact "cord cutters" are or are not making on industry as a whole.

 

http://www.darkhorizons.com/standalone-streaming-apps-still-small-fry/

 

 

We were talking about the Emmys this morning on the Coffee Break. Never heard anyone thank ABC, NBC, or CBS. All the accolades went to Hulu, Netflix, and HBO. No question - all the award winning shows for TV are coming from streaming services.

 

 

IMO, there's several factors involved:

 

1. Viewers can binge on entire season in a weekend on Netflix. Not quite the case with HBO, but you know when it's released on Netflix, you're getting the entire season all at once, and people love this concept.

2. Shorter seasons means more quality content in each episode. Also makes it easier to binge watch on the weekend.

3. Less content restrictions, so the streaming services can get away with more. Put it to you this way; Big Bang Theory is still a super huge hit show for CBS. If they showed an episode where Penny (the hot blondie on there) was nude, viewership would go through the roof! I'm just sayin, lol!

4. The seasons on Netflix aren't so quick to comeback. They tend to be released on an annual basis, except for some programming. I think Voltron is released on a semi-annual phase, but Voltron is a cartoon and I don't think their seasons are very long to begin with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×