They won't be getting any more money from me. I refuse to pay extra. We do watch a lot of discovery network content (discovery, travel, TLC, etc...) and I hope that programs that are currently on those channels won't migrate to streaming only but I will not pay extra for them over and above my Dish subscription!It's a greedy, disgusting new tactic to make us pay twice for Discovery programming. They will keep some content proprietary to steaming that we will now have to pay extra to see. The trend was started by CBS All Access.
I would not doubt "on-line exclusive" programming as that has been the norm for these new services. However, I do resent the value of the content and my subscription through Dish being decreased. How many of these services am I supposed to separately subscribe (that was a rhetorical question)? I've never heard of "cable/sat exclusive" programming considering they are making MORE money from cable/sat. It seems to me that Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, and Disney+ are destined to remain/become real money makers, but I just can't see ANY of these linear channel on-line services making anywhere CLOSE to the money they make with cable/sat re-transmission contracts, and yet, they devalue that pipeline whenever possible, it seems. I like recording my program to my LOCAL at home DVR to see whenever I am ready to see it and not have it removed from the on-line service line-up.I hope we don't lose some TV programs to Discovery+!
Yeah, it can take me a year+ to get to some DVR recordings, but at least I can get to them. OTOH, I have suffered the pain of waiting even just a few MONTHS to watch something--when I would have the TIME--with Netflix and Amzon (Amazon moved some content over to its IMDB service that has non-skipable COMMERCIALS) only to find it had been removed due to rights expiration, and NO OTHER streaming service had the content.Back in the day we had five channels to watch with nothing on them. Now there is so much it's ridiculous.
Because it seems the only way for them to create real value of the service, not just old show and episodes archived for viewing. It seems silly for a service like Peacock to be bragging "The Office Now Streaming" or even Friends. Really? Old shows that those people have already seen. Now, I admit to occasionally stumbling upon Golden Girls on Dish (a linear TV service) and let it play while doing something else or even sitting to watch for a while for all the great jokes in an episode that still make me laugh, but I would NEVER take the time or deliberate choice to STREAM that show at all (and it is available for streaming with NONE of the scenes edited to fit more commercials on Hallmark, and the other 57--hyperbole--channels it also airs) when there are few other shows I've never seen before that I do want to see. And don't some of these new streaming services come with a commercial and non-commercial tier. Now we pay extra for no commercials. I admit I do this for Hulu, but I really would NOT want to pay extra for no commercials for every streaming service. Financial death by a thousand cuts, or the old nickel and dime you to death. After having a VCR for decades and a DVR for decades, I have absolutely no patience for commercials--that are not relevant to me .
The key word in tedb3rd's post is 'options.' It is an option, just maybe not the option you were looking for. Eventually, IMO. satellite will go away and streaming will be the norm.Not really, this is a separate streaming service (with additional charges), not an ala carte channel on the satellite service.
I do understand it is another option (like Hulu, sling, peacock, etc, etc...) but I don't think it really qualifies as ala carte. I also understand that streaming is becoming more the norm every day.The key word in tedb3rd's post is 'options.' It is an option, just maybe not the option you were looking for. Eventually, IMO. satellite will go away and streaming will be the norm.