Search results for query: *

Wrong thread. This is the savings account interest thread. ;) I think I read an article about that issue with Netflix. Though, I agree that Prime seems oddly hard to find where the Prime stuff even is. But all of these services suffer from a difficulty with browsing content. Heck, Netflix could...

Man, I love the spin for making parole. :D Yeah, probably reword that a little to avoid that being "Exhibit B". ;)

I misspoke with Gen X, I meant the generations past Gen X. I feel my generation (tail end Gen X) was the last one that had things as they were. Kind of affordable college, jobs awaiting downstream, housing that was affordable enough. Post Gen X, the rules of the game changed quite a bit. I feel...

Yes, real estate, the stuff that has had three-ish booms in my adult lifetime (the first which led to a catastrophic economic collapse), but I was the benefactor of ridiculously low interest rates and buying before the first boom got too crazy. Gen X has to manage interest rates and inflated...

NO!!!! There is no fix. This is a change in distribution. It is already set in stone. Why do you think Ergen tried to shift Dish into a completely new direction starting several years ago? Younger people that grew up with Napster have a much different worldview on media than people who grew...

You mean returning.

I venture to guess that 2029 is too far away to guess any of this. At that point, we might have just two competing streaming options Global Megacorp (Google's service) and Mega Global Corp (Disney's service) after all the merging is completed. We can safely assume the cable distribution is...

My question was asking about "programming churn" not subs. What is the sweet spot for Netflix regarding consistent content or the type of consistent content. A company like Disney+ has low churn due to them concentrating on their own material. Netflix is about showing mostly other people's work.

The question is going to be what is the consumer preferred programming churn on services like Netflix. Disney+ will have little to no churn, Netflix will have considerable churn. What is the legacy programming people will pay to keep as a comfort option? There will likely be some saturation...

It is bizarre that a discussiom on cable/sat sat numbers as a long term future trend can even become personal in the first place.

So no one is seeing the play on the word Venue?

Back to the bundle in just 10 years! Funny, I want access to the WEC events on Max, but don't want to pay for the other stuff. We'll be back to square 1 in about two years, just without the expensive equipment in the home, and everyone will be whining about how they want a la carte back.

...I smell insolvency and vultures picking the bones.

I'd say the big contributor at this point will be the transition of broadcasting content away from cable/sat. Some sports programming was shown only on cable/sat channels or you need a subscription to sat/cable to gain access to the sports online. With this transitioning to flat out simulcast...

$515 million in interest for one quarter, and they have $300ish million in hand? I smell a merger.

Of course, this is household to household thing. My point is a la carte will be problematic regarding come and go and comeback and go again churn due to the lack of newer content. Personally, I get weary of nickel and diming with all of the services, and prioritization becomes a thing.

Did what in 5 years? You listed two companies and the basis for them saying they made profit is open to less interpretation. What does Disney+ being profitable actually represent in a non-accounting gimmick sort of way? They bought it because they were smart and debt was nearly at no...

The profitability of (or lack there of) these services always seemed like a shell game. I don't see how ESPN+ makes "money" in any sense of the word that is credible, other than the cost to distribute the signal is less than the revenue from distribution. My problem is where is the cost of the...

I'm not trying to imply it is a Great Wall, Bruce was however making it sound like it'd be just flipping a switch. I do think it is a bigger deal that others consider. This will involve a transition to "how things will be done". The leagues could do it on their own, might need to, or they can...

Yes, but the game coverage will still need to be produced. If it isn't Bally, it can be someone else, but there would need to be a someone else.

The games don't exist via magic for broadcast. If Bally isn't producing the game coverage, the game coverage would need to be produced by others.

It is about value. Cable/Sat providers pay the channel owners money to be able to provide the channel. If the channel owner is providing the channel(s) themselves, that liquidates the value of the channel(s). The pressure for cable/sat to provide the channel(s) is greatly reduced, as their...

If it isn't sports related, I almost never watch Peacock, but I do watch enough sports on it.

Not like Pittsburgh has. But some portions have changed notably. The Flats are nicer, for certain. I was in the Tremont area and it was redeveloped housing wise in the few years since I was there, I hardly recognized that I had been there. Other areas have been getting redeveloped for housing...

Funny how Ergan was first to this party of shoving the RSNs off as a must carry. Browns owner wants a new stadium, and want $1 billion or so in public dollars. The Haslam's have effectively doomed the long-term future of the team with a short-term gamble with Watson, that hasn't paid off well...