HBO to Netflix: We’re taking our ball & going home(venturebeat.com)
venturebeat.com
HBO to Netflix: We’re taking our ball & going home
http://venturebeat.com/2012/01/05/time-to-torrent-more-boardwalk-empire
20 comments
Everyone I know who wanted to watch Game of thrones has torrented it. Many of them after checking iTunes first. DVDs are out for those who no longer have DVD Players (all the macbook Air types). Streaming is out for those who want to watch stuff remotely. Cable Format has to be the most useless delivery format I can conceive of - you have to: (A) Purchase Digital Cable, and then (B) Subscribe to HBO on top of that, and finally (C) Go through the hassle of tracking/converting all those shows into a watchable format.
For the first time in my life, I can say with almost complete assurance, that the reason the majority of the people I know are torrenting, is because the rights owner isn't willing to sell in format that they want to watch it in.
Don't call him out of Touch though - The reality, though, is that the CEO of HBO is a highly informed profit maximizing individual and the reason we don't get Game of Thrones on DVD/iTunes, is because of the huge revenue stream represented by the other 95% (99%?) of the population who is more than happy to Tivo GameOfThrones. He'll forego the 5% of us who won't purchase it on Cable, in order to make money on the other 95% The Reality is, that some percentage of that 5% would have Torrented it rather than paying the $50 for an iTunes season.
They know how much they can make through iTunes, DVD Sales, and, most importantly, their Cable Customers (Comcast, etc...).
And, if SOPA goes through, it will provide a platform for attacking the Torrents. First the entertainment industry will DNS blackhole "piratebay.org", then, when people avoiding that in numbers enough to matter, they will pass SOPA Part II, and start blackholing IP addresses. SOPA Part III will come out once people figure some way of connecting to dynamically assigned IP addresses.
It will be a legislative game of Cat-and-Mouse driven by the massive $$$ that the entertainment industry is paying the lobbyists.
For the first time in my life, I can say with almost complete assurance, that the reason the majority of the people I know are torrenting, is because the rights owner isn't willing to sell in format that they want to watch it in.
Don't call him out of Touch though - The reality, though, is that the CEO of HBO is a highly informed profit maximizing individual and the reason we don't get Game of Thrones on DVD/iTunes, is because of the huge revenue stream represented by the other 95% (99%?) of the population who is more than happy to Tivo GameOfThrones. He'll forego the 5% of us who won't purchase it on Cable, in order to make money on the other 95% The Reality is, that some percentage of that 5% would have Torrented it rather than paying the $50 for an iTunes season.
They know how much they can make through iTunes, DVD Sales, and, most importantly, their Cable Customers (Comcast, etc...).
And, if SOPA goes through, it will provide a platform for attacking the Torrents. First the entertainment industry will DNS blackhole "piratebay.org", then, when people avoiding that in numbers enough to matter, they will pass SOPA Part II, and start blackholing IP addresses. SOPA Part III will come out once people figure some way of connecting to dynamically assigned IP addresses.
It will be a legislative game of Cat-and-Mouse driven by the massive $$$ that the entertainment industry is paying the lobbyists.
What in the world do they stand to lose by offering Game of Thrones through iTunes or Amazon in a reasonable amount of time? iTunes is already selling it even though it will not actually be available until March. None of us who are waiting for it are going to subscribe to cable in the meantime.
I moved this summer. I still haven't resumed cable service. Netflix, iTunes, Amazon Prime, and Hulu are more than enough for me.
The only reason I'd resume cable service, incidentally, would be for Game of Thrones season 2. Since I travel so much its likely I would just wait for other options. I don't download torrents.
HBO is a golden goose. Its an exception. They produce exceptionally high quality shows. The things that will work for HBO won't work for the other guys. HBO may be able to sell subscriptions directly to users. Their HBO Go app is exceptional, better than Netflix's to a degree.
When I travel and sit in a hotel room I wonder why any of us ever paid for this garbage. The amount of advertising sandwiched in to amateur level programming is akin to a 1998 porn site full of pop ups. Its not pretty.
Golden geese can become arrogant. If I owned a cable company, any exec who blamed the economy on a drop in subscriptions would be immediately fired.
Home Box Office, Inc is owned by Time Warner. Because of that, I have a feeling the golden goose will ultimately end up going down with the ship it is caged in.
The only reason I'd resume cable service, incidentally, would be for Game of Thrones season 2. Since I travel so much its likely I would just wait for other options. I don't download torrents.
HBO is a golden goose. Its an exception. They produce exceptionally high quality shows. The things that will work for HBO won't work for the other guys. HBO may be able to sell subscriptions directly to users. Their HBO Go app is exceptional, better than Netflix's to a degree.
When I travel and sit in a hotel room I wonder why any of us ever paid for this garbage. The amount of advertising sandwiched in to amateur level programming is akin to a 1998 porn site full of pop ups. Its not pretty.
Golden geese can become arrogant. If I owned a cable company, any exec who blamed the economy on a drop in subscriptions would be immediately fired.
Home Box Office, Inc is owned by Time Warner. Because of that, I have a feeling the golden goose will ultimately end up going down with the ship it is caged in.
they are afraid that people will cancel their HBO subscriptions and buy just the shows they watch
It's half this and half that they want to convert DVD buyers to subscribers so they come out with the DVDs a month before the new season starts.
The market for the DVDs is still good (True Blood S3 was the #1 TV show DVD for 2011) and I'm sure they're research tells them they get more from conversions then they lose in DVD sales by opening it up 2 months earlier. And if they started selling DVDs 6 months earlier they'd lose current subscribers like you say.
The market for the DVDs is still good (True Blood S3 was the #1 TV show DVD for 2011) and I'm sure they're research tells them they get more from conversions then they lose in DVD sales by opening it up 2 months earlier. And if they started selling DVDs 6 months earlier they'd lose current subscribers like you say.
> None of us who are waiting for it are going to subscribe to cable in the meantime.
I did, and I just finished watching all 10 season one episodes of Game of Thrones in HD.
And you know what? It was worth it. I love that show. :)
I did, and I just finished watching all 10 season one episodes of Game of Thrones in HD.
And you know what? It was worth it. I love that show. :)
Isn't the strong case against SOPA that it would strangle sites like Reddit in the crib, by creating a cloud of uncertainty and subjecting them to disruption without due process? That case seems straightforward.
The fact that Game of Thrones is available on BitTorrent though... that is itself a problem. HBO is within its rights to prevent its content from being published for free to anonymous Internet users.
The fact that Game of Thrones is available on BitTorrent though... that is itself a problem. HBO is within its rights to prevent its content from being published for free to anonymous Internet users.
SOPA is an attempted transfer of wealth from the Internet Industry to the Entertainment Industry. The entertainment industry has out-lobbied the Internet industry.
SOPA will be incredibly destructive to a _vast_ range of internet properties, and it's not clear how effective it will be long term in protecting the entertainment industry.
Re: Game of Thrones on BItTorrent - Everything is available on Bit Torrent. People with money are typically honest, and turn to Torrenting only because they have no other avenues to purchase these things honestly.
[edit]: I used to think that Torrenting was unethical/immoral in addition to being illegal. Now that I pay for pretty much 100% of everything I watch - I think Torrenting plays an important role in motivating rights holders to make their material both competitive and broadly available. $50/Season for GameOfThrones is fine, as long as it's available (a) in a format I can download onto my MacBook Air, and (b) on a timely basis. HBO would have close to zero motivation to make this content available in downloadable format on a timely basis if there weren't alternatives.
SOPA will be incredibly destructive to a _vast_ range of internet properties, and it's not clear how effective it will be long term in protecting the entertainment industry.
Re: Game of Thrones on BItTorrent - Everything is available on Bit Torrent. People with money are typically honest, and turn to Torrenting only because they have no other avenues to purchase these things honestly.
[edit]: I used to think that Torrenting was unethical/immoral in addition to being illegal. Now that I pay for pretty much 100% of everything I watch - I think Torrenting plays an important role in motivating rights holders to make their material both competitive and broadly available. $50/Season for GameOfThrones is fine, as long as it's available (a) in a format I can download onto my MacBook Air, and (b) on a timely basis. HBO would have close to zero motivation to make this content available in downloadable format on a timely basis if there weren't alternatives.
Sure, delis would have zero incentive to pay protection money to the mob, if there weren't alternatives, like a busted kneecap.
I think you are misrepresenting the power structure here. If it weren't for people downloading music for free off the internet, we would never have managed to get $0.99/tracks on iTunes in DRM free format - no motivation for the Music Industry to do so.
Remember - Consumers are _customers_ - all we really want is to be able to read/play/listen/purchase the content that is created in a format compatible with the tools/systems that we use.
Remember - Consumers are _customers_ - all we really want is to be able to read/play/listen/purchase the content that is created in a format compatible with the tools/systems that we use.
[deleted]
piratebay.org, btjunkie.org and other websites like those are already url-banned here in Italy. That didn't stop the downloads at all, afaik
I pirated it, but I also preordered the blu rays yesterday. i am willingto pay, but i want the flexibility of streaming or disks.
One of, if not the main feature that I associate with Netflix is its large library of content. I pay the monthly fee as I can assume to a certain degree that the majority of the things I want to watch will be available. I'm sure I'm not alone in this.
Fragmenting the content like this over numerous streaming solutions each with their own charges and workings is, in my eyes, a huge step backwards for online content. I can't see users being happy to pay more parties for the same content on numerous services. This to me reeks of networks killing the golden goose.
Fragmenting the content like this over numerous streaming solutions each with their own charges and workings is, in my eyes, a huge step backwards for online content. I can't see users being happy to pay more parties for the same content on numerous services. This to me reeks of networks killing the golden goose.
OR...
having one large company on the internet be the "distribution" company for a bunch of media creators sounds a lot like cable TV doesn't it? I think we actually DO want the media fragmented across multiple providers. We should look at it as a Good Thing that media creators distribute their own media, no matter how big they are.
having one large company on the internet be the "distribution" company for a bunch of media creators sounds a lot like cable TV doesn't it? I think we actually DO want the media fragmented across multiple providers. We should look at it as a Good Thing that media creators distribute their own media, no matter how big they are.
Except HBO won't do this. If HBO wanted to charge some pittance for HBO Go, I'd pay it. Instead they want me to sign up for cable, which I don't want, so they don't get my money at all. (And I don't see how refusing to negotiate a DVD rental deal helps that goal at all.)
"(And I don't see how refusing to negotiate a DVD rental deal helps that goal at all.)"
If Netflix hemorrhages subscribers and loses it's value proposition vs cable that's clearly good for HBO/Time Warner/Turner.
Giving your competition a discount is what doesn't make sense and that's why HBO decided to stop doing it.
If Netflix hemorrhages subscribers and loses it's value proposition vs cable that's clearly good for HBO/Time Warner/Turner.
Giving your competition a discount is what doesn't make sense and that's why HBO decided to stop doing it.
>If Netflix hemorrhages subscribers and loses it's value proposition vs cable that's clearly good for HBO/Time Warner/Turner.
Is it? How much money will they make from all the torrents?
Is it? How much money will they make from all the torrents?
As long as there are no exclusivity agreements, there is no problem--the problem with cable, aatellite, et. al. are the barriers to entry, which don't exist in the streaming space. (The closest Netflix has is its device presence).
[deleted]
And with internet-connected TVs, Bluray players, and devices like the Roku, I can just add a new source of content. No big deal.
I agree with your point about fragmenting content, but not about Netflix. The only reason I still pay $8/month for Netflix is their amazing mass of children's programming.
I could do without the decade old movies.
I could do without the decade old movies.
Funny because I care not for the children's programming but for the ability to watch the classics as well as more recent releases. A large library can cater to many different tastes.
That's why the cable companies like Comcast want to take over. "Free" streaming with your existing subscription. It's already out there in their Xfinity app.
I haven't paid for cable in my life and I don't plan on starting. The on-demand functionality that streaming services offer and their multiple-device support is way too useful to give up in place of cable services.
Xfinity costs extra money and I don't get nearly enough in return for it to be useful to me. Not only that, but content streamed over their Xfinity is still counted against my bandwidth cap with them so basically I am paying them extra money to kick me a little bit harder.
On the other hand, if it didn't count against your bandwidth cap, then we'd all be calling it abuse of a monopoly power to muscle out Netflix (b/c Netflix does count towards the bandwidth cap).
If the content is being streamed from within their network then I don't think it should cost me part of my BW cap, it is almost free to deliver at that point.
I think the same is true for Akaimai and other CDN's that host servers with ISP's to provide local caches to content. This would certainly also mean that bandwidth caps become more generous because so much of the content that most people are using is on CDN's.
I think the same is true for Akaimai and other CDN's that host servers with ISP's to provide local caches to content. This would certainly also mean that bandwidth caps become more generous because so much of the content that most people are using is on CDN's.
I think if there is enough demand for their content they can try to go it alone with their own streaming service. I suppose it is an experiment that has yet to play out for many content providers.
If HBO wasn't hopelessly compromised by their dependence on cable networks, the smart move would be for them to use their proprietary content as the lure for a full-fledged competitor to Netflix streaming, similar to the way that Valve used their own games to get people using Steam. I'd be willing to pay the $8/month I give Netflix just for access the HBO back-catalog, assuming it didn't require a cable TV subscription that I'm never going to pay for again.
Curiously, Time Warner Cable customers do not have access to their streaming service HBO Go. I have a feeling they might be working on a little trick to pull the carpet out from underneath their competitors.
HBO and TWC patched up their differences on Dec 16 and announced that TWC customers would soon be able to use the HBO Go app.
Interesting. It's easy to pattern match this against the old "media company wants control and doesn't get the modern world" chestnut.
On the other hand, try pattern matching this against the "band decides to put work directly on internet rather than going through a label" or "writer decides to self-publish rather than go through a publisher" story. Why wouldn't a direct-sales model work for them?
Admittedly, they aren't quite doing the direct-sales model, since they only grant access to HBO GO through some sort of premium TV subscription. But if they offered direct subscriptions to HBO GO...
On the other hand, try pattern matching this against the "band decides to put work directly on internet rather than going through a label" or "writer decides to self-publish rather than go through a publisher" story. Why wouldn't a direct-sales model work for them?
Admittedly, they aren't quite doing the direct-sales model, since they only grant access to HBO GO through some sort of premium TV subscription. But if they offered direct subscriptions to HBO GO...
But if they offered direct subscriptions to HBO GO...
Unfortunately, that's exactly what they won't do- they've stated as much themselves. The cable companies essentially promote HBO for free right now, so HBO is unwilling to rock the boat with them. Selling subscriptions online would most definitely rock the boat.
I don't know if I blame them or not. I don't think there is any doubt that this kind of online subscription is the future, but I'm not sure it would reach as many people as a premium cable subscription would right now, so they'd stand to lose a lot of money and subscribers. Of course, setting up HBO GO means that they have the system set up and ready to go whenever the market changes.
Unfortunately, that's exactly what they won't do- they've stated as much themselves. The cable companies essentially promote HBO for free right now, so HBO is unwilling to rock the boat with them. Selling subscriptions online would most definitely rock the boat.
I don't know if I blame them or not. I don't think there is any doubt that this kind of online subscription is the future, but I'm not sure it would reach as many people as a premium cable subscription would right now, so they'd stand to lose a lot of money and subscribers. Of course, setting up HBO GO means that they have the system set up and ready to go whenever the market changes.
I think they can afford to be slightly ballsier than they're being. But not by much. And that matter of degrees is what makes the situation with "rocking the cable providers' boats" so fraught. Fact is, HBO is not in a power position against its cable providers. HBO doesn't drive cable subscriptions en masse the way sports packages do. HBO still -- for the time being, at least -- needs Comcast, Time Warner, et al., a lot more than they need HBO.
That said, I don't think there is a major cable provider out there right now who'd dare drop HBO from all of its offerings if push came to shove. And I think HBO is, in many ways, the perfect content brand for on-demand subscriptions or a la carte episode sales on digital ecosystems. Its content is top-notch, and the potential audience for that content is theoretically a large multiple of the current HBO subscriber base. The quality of a typical HBO scripted series is lightyears beyond that of almost any other network show, and consumers would eat it up.
I agree with you that HBO seems well-positioned for either world right now: the world in which it currently lives, or the world in which it could find itself a few years from now. HBO GO is a great app with what I imagine is a large install base. It seems relatively future-ready, if not wholly future-proof.
That said, I don't think there is a major cable provider out there right now who'd dare drop HBO from all of its offerings if push came to shove. And I think HBO is, in many ways, the perfect content brand for on-demand subscriptions or a la carte episode sales on digital ecosystems. Its content is top-notch, and the potential audience for that content is theoretically a large multiple of the current HBO subscriber base. The quality of a typical HBO scripted series is lightyears beyond that of almost any other network show, and consumers would eat it up.
I agree with you that HBO seems well-positioned for either world right now: the world in which it currently lives, or the world in which it could find itself a few years from now. HBO GO is a great app with what I imagine is a large install base. It seems relatively future-ready, if not wholly future-proof.
"At that time, Kessler also said his company sees cable-cutting as no more than a temporary austerity measure that will cease as soon as the economy takes a turn for the better."
To steal a page from John Gruber, this sounds like one to keep for claim chowder.
To steal a page from John Gruber, this sounds like one to keep for claim chowder.
HBO has strong content, an amazing brand, and a mobile app. They can turn around tomorrow and sell a streaming service for $10 that will get tons of subscribers.
But right up until that point, they will say cable is great and will never go down.
Thinking this is "claim chowder" is just thinking too small and literally.
But right up until that point, they will say cable is great and will never go down.
Thinking this is "claim chowder" is just thinking too small and literally.
This is what I was thinking. I almost wrote a rant about how it's unfortunate that HBO, a network that makes some pretty awesome shows, isn't getting with the times etc etc. Then, I thought I should probably just hold my tongue and watch what happens.
I suspect the scenario you describe is correct, they'll defend cable up until they launch their own service.
I suspect the scenario you describe is correct, they'll defend cable up until they launch their own service.
With stories like this, I always wonder: do the executives have kids? What are those kids watching? Do they own Rokus? What about their friends, classmates, roommates, etc.?
Do the executives really just keep the blinders on all the time?
Do the executives really just keep the blinders on all the time?
[deleted]
Here's what I do when I want to watch a show:
1) Check out Netflix Instant.
2) Hit up Amazon VOD.
3) Check out iTunes
IFF those fail, then I go to the bay.
I prefer to use legitimate services to get content. But I'm not moving away from my keyboard to do it, and I'm not paying for HBO/Showtime/etc just for the one or two shows I want to watch.
1) Check out Netflix Instant.
2) Hit up Amazon VOD.
3) Check out iTunes
IFF those fail, then I go to the bay.
I prefer to use legitimate services to get content. But I'm not moving away from my keyboard to do it, and I'm not paying for HBO/Showtime/etc just for the one or two shows I want to watch.
You should check out hulu first. It has the biggest selection for tv shows
Hulu has horribly obnoxious ads - repeated multiple times per episode of the show. Voting "not relevant" on an ad doesn't prevent it from appearing. There was an ad my wife found quite disturbing (about exorcism), and it played almost every ad segment. I had to mute and tab away.
And this is on a free trial of the Hulu Plus paid subscription service.
I just can't see paying a subscription fee for that user experience. In contrast, with Netflix, every time the program hits one of the advertisement breaks, you get the little psychological reward: "Hurray! No ads!"
And this is on a free trial of the Hulu Plus paid subscription service.
I just can't see paying a subscription fee for that user experience. In contrast, with Netflix, every time the program hits one of the advertisement breaks, you get the little psychological reward: "Hurray! No ads!"
Agreed. 3 ads in a row every 5-7 minutes Hulu? To the Bay!
What you really mean is - you are willing to infringe copyright law, deny a lot of creative technical people and performers income and reduce funding for future shows.
You describe yourself as a software entrepeneur - I'm assuming you want to get paid for that in some way shape or form - how would you feel if people stole / infringed what you developed and denied you revenue?
I just do not get the prevailing attitude amongst a lot of people here on HN.
You describe yourself as a software entrepeneur - I'm assuming you want to get paid for that in some way shape or form - how would you feel if people stole / infringed what you developed and denied you revenue?
I just do not get the prevailing attitude amongst a lot of people here on HN.
"how would you feel if people stole / infringed what you developed and denied you revenue"
Say I'm the lead engineer for Angry Birds.
But instead of releasing it for iOS, Android, and Chrome, Roxio built a shitty little handheld device that cost more than an iPhone but only played the handful of games they'd created.
Apple, Google, and even HP approached them about building versions of the game for their platform, but Roxio told them to eff off. They weren't going to give up a percentage of the potential revenue.
Then the community, in love with the game, cracked the sorry little handheld and ported the game to iOS/Android/webOS. Sales of the sorry little device plummet.
So how would I "feel"? I'd feel like lynching the PHBs that refused to concede a minority percentage of a massive revenue stream in favor of a 100% share of a tiny/no-existent one. I'd think they were arrogant fools for trying to maintain a white-knuckled grasp on distribution when that clearly belonged to Apple and Google, and I would curse their greed.
Say I'm the lead engineer for Angry Birds.
But instead of releasing it for iOS, Android, and Chrome, Roxio built a shitty little handheld device that cost more than an iPhone but only played the handful of games they'd created.
Apple, Google, and even HP approached them about building versions of the game for their platform, but Roxio told them to eff off. They weren't going to give up a percentage of the potential revenue.
Then the community, in love with the game, cracked the sorry little handheld and ported the game to iOS/Android/webOS. Sales of the sorry little device plummet.
So how would I "feel"? I'd feel like lynching the PHBs that refused to concede a minority percentage of a massive revenue stream in favor of a 100% share of a tiny/no-existent one. I'd think they were arrogant fools for trying to maintain a white-knuckled grasp on distribution when that clearly belonged to Apple and Google, and I would curse their greed.
It sounds like they're trying to roll their own streaming solution, instead of trying to rely on Netflix.
And hell, it might even work. Isn't this what we've been asking for? A la carte cable channel selection?
And hell, it might even work. Isn't this what we've been asking for? A la carte cable channel selection?
If I didn't have to pay for cable and the regular HBO rate, yes, it would be good.
Ah, I didn't realize you had to have a cable subscription for this. I thought it was just streaming.
Trying to? HBO GO has been around for a while.
It's not great though.
It's not great though.
What don't you like about it? Other than requiring a subscription to a cable provider i have found it to be pretty amazing.
> Other than requiring a subscription to a cable provider...
I was not aware of this. Anything I've said about HBO Go that sounded positive may be redacted and ignored.
I was not aware of this. Anything I've said about HBO Go that sounded positive may be redacted and ignored.
If you look at the situation I don't really blame HBO for that. HBO sells content to the cable companies, and the cable companies have to deal with the end users. So HBO might get a little less money than they could if they avoided the middleman, but on the other hand, they don't need to deal with sensitive customer data and huge customer support call centers.
I guess I don't really blame them for valuing profit over customer satisfaction, per se.
I occasionally watch things with my friend who has access to HBO Go in our office. It's horrible. Adaptive bitrate streaming is slow to switch or nonexistent, buffer times are too long, aspect ratios are often handled incorrectly in their player, and even figuring out how to log into the damned thing is an absolute nightmare. The Netflix user experience is vastly superior.
edit: typo
edit: typo
This is basically my answer to ndvivedi. In addition, I would add that I've had better quality from the Xfinity player, which also lets me view HBO content.
I've found HBO Go quality to be a bit too poor, even on a great connection.
Neither are nearly as good as Netflix, which I can force the bitrate using CTRL-ALT-SHIFT-S, let it buffer for a little while, then watch it straight through without issue. (Granted the secret hotkey is a little unfair, and HBO Go may very well have one too. That's the least important part, though)
I've found HBO Go quality to be a bit too poor, even on a great connection.
Neither are nearly as good as Netflix, which I can force the bitrate using CTRL-ALT-SHIFT-S, let it buffer for a little while, then watch it straight through without issue. (Granted the secret hotkey is a little unfair, and HBO Go may very well have one too. That's the least important part, though)
I'd buy an HBO subscription today if it didn't mean I had to have $60 of cable company shit on top of it.
Relevant:
In December, Netflix CEO Reed Hastings told an investors conference that HBO's online viewing service, HBO GO, was "the competitor we fear the most."
In December, Netflix CEO Reed Hastings told an investors conference that HBO's online viewing service, HBO GO, was "the competitor we fear the most."
As long as HBO GO still requires a cableTV subscription (and HBO subscription), Netflix has nothing to fear about.
I'm sure Amazon, Apple, Google and others are ready and willing to pay HBO for an option that bypasses the cable requirement, and at some point it may be lucrative enough for HBO.
On the other hand, Comcast probably has HBO over a barrel, given they also own the last-mile for millions of internet users as well.
I'm sure Amazon, Apple, Google and others are ready and willing to pay HBO for an option that bypasses the cable requirement, and at some point it may be lucrative enough for HBO.
On the other hand, Comcast probably has HBO over a barrel, given they also own the last-mile for millions of internet users as well.
As long as HBO GO still requires a cableTV subscription (and HBO subscription), Netflix has nothing to fear about.
While this is true, I have to think HBO has already built a payment system and is literally a flip the switch away from charging customers directly for streaming. Netflixs CEO is future looking if nothing else, and I'm sure he's come to the same conclusion.
While this is true, I have to think HBO has already built a payment system and is literally a flip the switch away from charging customers directly for streaming. Netflixs CEO is future looking if nothing else, and I'm sure he's come to the same conclusion.
[deleted]
"...Eric Kessler stated to industry leaders that HBO shows would not ever be available to non-HBO subscribers on digital platforms"
This is idiotic on HBO's part.
Look, it's pretty simple: I want to watch "True Blood", which is currently in Season 5. Netflix doesn't even have S4 yet. I'm willing to pay good money, say $20 for a season, but am not so crazy as to pay $$ for crappy supreme-whatever package from Comcast. The reason is not that I hate Comcast (I do) but I'm not interested in other channels (sports etc.) in the package, i.e. I want HBO only.
This is idiotic on HBO's part.
Look, it's pretty simple: I want to watch "True Blood", which is currently in Season 5. Netflix doesn't even have S4 yet. I'm willing to pay good money, say $20 for a season, but am not so crazy as to pay $$ for crappy supreme-whatever package from Comcast. The reason is not that I hate Comcast (I do) but I'm not interested in other channels (sports etc.) in the package, i.e. I want HBO only.
This is the sort of thing that encourages piracy, too. It's not that I'm unwilling to pay for HBO programming, it's that I'm unwilling to pay for the things I do not want, or need, just to be able to pay HBO for their programming.
I just went to Amazon, though, to check the price of a Bored to Death DVD to add to my point (a show I enjoy, but I don't really want to own on DVD and would pay to stream) and it came up as available for streaming through Amazon Instant Video. Odd since that seems like a non-hbo subscriber being able to watch on a digital platform. I assume having Amazon Prime grants access to the show, too.
I just went to Amazon, though, to check the price of a Bored to Death DVD to add to my point (a show I enjoy, but I don't really want to own on DVD and would pay to stream) and it came up as available for streaming through Amazon Instant Video. Odd since that seems like a non-hbo subscriber being able to watch on a digital platform. I assume having Amazon Prime grants access to the show, too.
"Ford will only sell cars to people that own horses" would have been a great idea.
They're available to non-HBO subscribers on digital platforms 30 minutes after they air.
HBO can get paid for it or not, it's their choice. Looks like they're making the stupid choice.
HBO can get paid for it or not, it's their choice. Looks like they're making the stupid choice.
I love HBO, but this is really dumb. they have to understand that the fact that people have to pay $60 bucks for the privilege to pay $15 for HBO is going to shaft them in the long run. They've cast their lot with the cable co's, which is fine, I respect you taking a stand, but it will be a full business cycle before people stop cutting the cord, and by then between Netflix, Hulu, iTunes, and whoever else arrives, there will be alternatives. . .
[deleted]
Are the traditional cable premium channels like HBO & Showtime even relevant anymore? I would hate to be them.
I'm sure many (most?) will disagree, but I see these services as on their way out. Quickly. They could have lived longer had they brought out more flexible subscription plans. For example, no way would I have a monthly subscription, but there have been many times I would have paid some fee for a shorter block just to catch a movie or event.
I'm sure many (most?) will disagree, but I see these services as on their way out. Quickly. They could have lived longer had they brought out more flexible subscription plans. For example, no way would I have a monthly subscription, but there have been many times I would have paid some fee for a shorter block just to catch a movie or event.
Yes. Very much so. Between HBO and Showtime, that's pretty much why I subscribe to TV. Their original programming is top notch, and well done.
They need to learn from Kodak. Once the public begins to transition en masse to another medium, it's very fast.
TV has a certain "lemming" following: people want particular content because other people want that content. When enough people expect the bulk of their content via Netflix (or wherever) the social pressure to stick to "cable" will evaporate.
Now if somebody could just replicate the "here we are now, entertain us" brain-dead delivery system that cable/OTA provides.
TV has a certain "lemming" following: people want particular content because other people want that content. When enough people expect the bulk of their content via Netflix (or wherever) the social pressure to stick to "cable" will evaporate.
Now if somebody could just replicate the "here we are now, entertain us" brain-dead delivery system that cable/OTA provides.
> Once the public begins to transition en masse to
> another medium, it's very fast.
HBO and live sports are the only two reasons I subscribe to cable anymore.
I'd say HBO is one of the most relevant forces in TV these days.
I'd say HBO is one of the most relevant forces in TV these days.
HBO and Showtime are my favorite channels; too bad I can't get them because I don't want cable.
I'd hate to be a cable intermediary a lot more, at least HBO and Showtime have a lot of original content to play with.
"Are the traditional cable premium channels like HBO & Showtime even relevant anymore? I would hate to be them."
Seeing as how their original content is widely torrented, yes.
Seeing as how their original content is widely torrented, yes.
Netflix is going to suffer death by 1000 cuts.
The problem with making money off streaming is it's easy to overcome all the technical problems of streaming these days - all they are doing is using Amazon's CDN.
So the content owners can just DIY when they want to squeeze every penny of profit out of it.
The problem with making money off streaming is it's easy to overcome all the technical problems of streaming these days - all they are doing is using Amazon's CDN.
So the content owners can just DIY when they want to squeeze every penny of profit out of it.
We are only going backwards. I've spent hours (x2 after having to re-do with de-interlace) ripping my HBO boxsets only to have to spend more time hunting down SRT files. Give me direct downloads already.
It sounds like HBO is ditching Netflix to do their own streaming. Bummer. While I wish Netflix had a larger selection, the bigger appeal to me is how many platforms they support. I can watch it from Windows, my Boxee Box, my Wii, my iPhone or my Kindle Fire (Linux support is sourly missing, though). If HBO strikes out on their own, there is no way they are going to have that kind of breadth.
What I really want is a streaming service that lets me choose what sources I subscribe to in an a la cart manner. If Netflix wants to survive losing these content providers I think that's the direction they should go in: become a platform. And if they don't, it's a great idea for a startup.
What I really want is a streaming service that lets me choose what sources I subscribe to in an a la cart manner. If Netflix wants to survive losing these content providers I think that's the direction they should go in: become a platform. And if they don't, it's a great idea for a startup.
To be crystal clear, HBO content has never been on Netflix streaming. This story is about HBO making it harder for Netflix to lend out the DVDs by not selling them to them at a discount.
[deleted]
I just gave a try to their HBO GO Android App. I thought I could pay a subsccription directly to HBO but no... you need to have a cable subscription to use this app. Nevermind!!!!
I have some small hope someone will just buy HBO and put us out of their misery.
HBO was created in 1972 and was wholly incorporated into Time-Life in 1973. Time-Life is now Time Warner [1], i.e. one of the world's largest media conglomerates.
I would be surprised if Time Warner put HBO up for sale any time soon if ever.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HBO#Development_and_launch
I would be surprised if Time Warner put HBO up for sale any time soon if ever.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HBO#Development_and_launch
Whenever a company like HBO cuts off direct DVD sales to rentals, the message is simply "we don't want to make life easier for you", which makes sense since NetFlix is a direct HBO Go competitor.
All the people talking about whether HBO wants to "piss off the cable companies": you do know that HBO is owned by Time Warner, a cable company, right?
Actually, Time Warner Cable is an independent company. It was spun out of the Time Warner mothership a couple of years ago.
Perfect picture of an out of touch media executive.