(09-06-2022 09:24 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(09-03-2022 12:31 PM)Poster Wrote:  

(09-03-2022 12:20 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  decline != gone

Cable probably will be basically dead within 20 years. (Except for a handful of 70+ year olds.)

This exact thing was being tossed out there 20 years ago, too. Dish/satellite never caught on like it was projected/expected. And it took far longer for buy-in with streaming providers.

Not that I disagree...but, you see where streaming falters, too, even if technologically superior. And you see where conferences really do wrong by their fans and alumni sticking content on something really inconvenient or niche.

The irony is that cable still becomes the best "common pot" to access content. Tired of it hurting my wallet, though. But, honestly, again...streaming is not living up to expectations.

Satellite was/is a completely different situation than streaming. Satellite is essentially a copy of cable offered through a different technology. It allowed cable programming to reach areas that are not economically reached by cable wires and provided a competitor to cable on price and services where cable did serve.

Streaming is much more disruptive. While streaming services like Youtube TV and Hulu + Live resemble satellite, providing competition with a similar cable-like product, services like Netflix, Hulu, Prime and HBO Max do not. They are not simply bundles of other carriers programming. They are vertically integrated platforms designed primarily to deliver programming created and owned by their affiliated production companies. Since they do not even try to aggregate programming from other production companies, this industry structure requires customers to buy multiple services to access all popular programming.

This new system will work very well for prerecorded content such as movies and television series. The question is how well will it work for sports. Sports has benefited from the cable model since all customers pay for the networks carrying major sports packages AND the cable package includes all networks offering major sports packages regardless of ownership. Under an exclusively streaming model, it would be necessary for customers to subscribe to multiple services to access all programming. Unlike cable, they will not be forced to accept programming from all major sources unless they choose to.

It will be interesting to watch the slow transition of sporting rights from cable to streaming. Today only Prime and Netflix have the scale to chase major sport rights packages and to date only Prime has done so. Paramount, Peacock, Apple and ESPN+ have all added sports, but do not yet have the scale to compete with traditional networks for major rights. This raises the question of when and whether more services will reach the scale to compete with cable and OTA networks for major rights.

It will also be interesting to see at what point cable bottoms out. How many households will be willing to continue to pay for a traditional cable-like bundle when the dust settles? It's possible that cable will continue to offer a meaningful source of revenues to support sports right packages for another twenty years and beyond.

Last week I had YoutubeTV, HBOMax, Disney+, Apple+, Amazon Prime, and Netflix.

Today- YoutubeTV, Apple+, and Amazon Prime.

Apple+ is part of AppleOne. Amazon Prime is part of, well, Amazon Prime.

All streaming platforms will now be rented/leased for ONE month if I wish.

I may join Alamo Drafthouse's $20/month movie service or Regal Cinema's monthly program.

YoutubeTV gets cut after the NCAA basketball tournament. I may shut it down sooner.

I am not alone. Streaming is very crowded.

(09-06-2022 12:05 PM)chess Wrote:  Last week I had YoutubeTV, HBOMax, Disney+, Apple+, Amazon Prime, and Netflix.

Today- YoutubeTV, Apple+, and Amazon Prime.

Apple+ is part of AppleOne. Amazon Prime is part of, well, Amazon Prime.

All streaming platforms will now be rented/leased for ONE month if I wish.

I may join Alamo Drafthouse's $20/month movie service or Regal Cinema's monthly program.

YoutubeTV gets cut after the NCAA basketball tournament. I may shut it down sooner.

I am not alone. Streaming is very crowded.

About the bolded, FWIW, I have been a member of AMC's "A-List" program for four years now. You pay between $20 and $24 per month, depending on the state you live in or something like that, and you get 3 movies a week at an AMC theater, so about 12 movies a month. There are some restrictions - you can't let someone else use a movie, unused movies do not roll over to the next week, and every once in a while there is a special engagement movie that is not eligible for A-List. But basically, you get to see 3 movies a week at an AMC theater.

As I see two or three movies a week, this is a huge boon to me. Just last week I saw a movie in the IMAX format that would have cost $15, so that paid for 2/3 of my September fee right there. I totally love this program.

Just my experience.

Whether delivered by cable or streaming, “markets” can matter as a base for “brands”. Whether you watch on a cable TV package or a streaming package, conferences with brands popular in big markets (and “Good ‘Ol State U” is popular in most places) will have an advantage over those who don’t.

(09-06-2022 12:25 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-06-2022 12:05 PM)chess Wrote:  Last week I had YoutubeTV, HBOMax, Disney+, Apple+, Amazon Prime, and Netflix.

Today- YoutubeTV, Apple+, and Amazon Prime.

Apple+ is part of AppleOne. Amazon Prime is part of, well, Amazon Prime.

All streaming platforms will now be rented/leased for ONE month if I wish.

I may join Alamo Drafthouse's $20/month movie service or Regal Cinema's monthly program.

YoutubeTV gets cut after the NCAA basketball tournament. I may shut it down sooner.

I am not alone. Streaming is very crowded.

About the bolded, FWIW, I have been a member of AMC's "A-List" program for four years now. You pay between $20 and $24 per month, depending on the state you live in or something like that, and you get 3 movies a week at an AMC theater, so about 12 movies a month. There are some restrictions - you can't let someone else use a movie, unused movies do not roll over to the next week, and every once in a while there is a special engagement movie that is not eligible for A-List. But basically, you get to see 3 movies a week at an AMC theater.

As I see two or three movies a week, this is a huge boon to me. Just last week I saw a movie in the IMAX format that would have cost $15, so that paid for 2/3 of my September fee right there. I totally love this program.

Just my experience.

a friend of mine used to do something like that with AMC, back in the mid to late 90s.

does it still come with a small popcorn and drink?

(09-06-2022 06:41 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(09-06-2022 12:25 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-06-2022 12:05 PM)chess Wrote:  Last week I had YoutubeTV, HBOMax, Disney+, Apple+, Amazon Prime, and Netflix.

Today- YoutubeTV, Apple+, and Amazon Prime.

Apple+ is part of AppleOne. Amazon Prime is part of, well, Amazon Prime.

All streaming platforms will now be rented/leased for ONE month if I wish.

I may join Alamo Drafthouse's $20/month movie service or Regal Cinema's monthly program.

YoutubeTV gets cut after the NCAA basketball tournament. I may shut it down sooner.

I am not alone. Streaming is very crowded.

About the bolded, FWIW, I have been a member of AMC's "A-List" program for four years now. You pay between $20 and $24 per month, depending on the state you live in or something like that, and you get 3 movies a week at an AMC theater, so about 12 movies a month. There are some restrictions - you can't let someone else use a movie, unused movies do not roll over to the next week, and every once in a while there is a special engagement movie that is not eligible for A-List. But basically, you get to see 3 movies a week at an AMC theater.

As I see two or three movies a week, this is a huge boon to me. Just last week I saw a movie in the IMAX format that would have cost $15, so that paid for 2/3 of my September fee right there. I totally love this program.

Just my experience.

a friend of mine used to do something like that with AMC, back in the mid to late 90s.

does it still come with a small popcorn and drink?

IIRC, on my birthday, they give me a coupon for a large popcorn and a soda.

(09-06-2022 06:41 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(09-06-2022 12:25 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-06-2022 12:05 PM)chess Wrote:  Last week I had YoutubeTV, HBOMax, Disney+, Apple+, Amazon Prime, and Netflix.

Today- YoutubeTV, Apple+, and Amazon Prime.

Apple+ is part of AppleOne. Amazon Prime is part of, well, Amazon Prime.

All streaming platforms will now be rented/leased for ONE month if I wish.

I may join Alamo Drafthouse's $20/month movie service or Regal Cinema's monthly program.

YoutubeTV gets cut after the NCAA basketball tournament. I may shut it down sooner.

I am not alone. Streaming is very crowded.

About the bolded, FWIW, I have been a member of AMC's "A-List" program for four years now. You pay between $20 and $24 per month, depending on the state you live in or something like that, and you get 3 movies a week at an AMC theater, so about 12 movies a month. There are some restrictions - you can't let someone else use a movie, unused movies do not roll over to the next week, and every once in a while there is a special engagement movie that is not eligible for A-List. But basically, you get to see 3 movies a week at an AMC theater.

As I see two or three movies a week, this is a huge boon to me. Just last week I saw a movie in the IMAX format that would have cost $15, so that paid for 2/3 of my September fee right there. I totally love this program.

Just my experience.

a friend of mine used to do something like that with AMC, back in the mid to late 90s.

does it still come with a small popcorn and drink?

The current program is called AMC Stubs. When you pay your monthly fee, you get points. Those points can be used for popcorn and drinks.

When I moved, AMC is not very nice in the Raleigh area. Additionally, I canceled the program when COVID started.

(09-03-2022 11:51 AM)Poster Wrote:  https://www.forbes.com/sites/bradadgate/...d0437b2ebf


https://www.axios.com/2022/08/18/streami...rket-share

https://martech.org/cable-tv-subscriptio...ouseholds/


This makes me wonder why people constantly suggest adding teams in big markets that have a questionable at best following in those markets. (Ie Cal, Stanford, Georgia Tech). How long are conferences going to be able to charge people who don't actually watch their conference networks?

It also makes me wonder if the Rutgers/Maryland expansion by the Big Ten was seriously a good, profitable business decision. (At least over the long run.) Conference invites are supposed to be 100 year invitations, not 10 year invitations or something.

A lot of people in this thread don't understand that they're living in a brief transition period between bundling models.

I said it before, I'll say it again... it doesn't matter in the context of sports. Sports are the most "DVR proof" of entities for cable companies, so sports fans probably make up the largest component of clinging to cable.

But more importantly, the same companies own internet service providers. There's like nine companies that own 90% of all telecommunications. \

I'd cut cable completely because it's like $200 bucks. The problem is I bundle cable and internet, so if I kill cable, they're going to charge me $125 for internet and buying streaming services to get the channels I want to watch costs $95, so it's cheaper to stick with cable.

Follow the money, and it's all a cartel you're the outside of. No one who's a player in college sports media rights is losing significant money over cord cutting.

(09-08-2022 04:14 AM)JSchmack Wrote:  I said it before, I'll say it again... it doesn't matter in the context of sports. Sports are the most "DVR proof" of entities for cable companies, so sports fans probably make up the largest component of clinging to cable.

But more importantly, the same companies own internet service providers. There's like nine companies that own 90% of all telecommunications. \

I'd cut cable completely because it's like $200 bucks. The problem is I bundle cable and internet, so if I kill cable, they're going to charge me $125 for internet and buying streaming services to get the channels I want to watch costs $95, so it's cheaper to stick with cable.

Follow the money, and it's all a cartel you're the outside of. No one who's a player in college sports media rights is losing significant money over cord cutting.

What market is charging $125/month for internet?

5G may be a solution for many rural communities. -Download speeds may be enough to support programming.