HBO Max/Discovery+ Merger

[Bruce]

They all rely on production companies. Do you think every network produces everything in house?

Yep, for example, the majority of sitcoms on CBS are produced by Warner Bros., that is why past seasons are not on Paramount+.

 

[Don in CT]

Yep, for example, the majority of sitcoms on CBS are produced by Warner Bros., that is why past seasons are not on Paramount+.

They were paying WB big money for TBBT. They would never get the back end money from it.

 

[Juan]

A very valuable post. Thanks for taking the time to participate... I'm not sure what that means. Do you disagree?

What I am saying is Fox sold off most of their streamable properties( sports, cable channels and movie studios)..so obviously they have no interest in streaming..to call them independent streamers is laughable at best..considering they own a major tv network that has o/o stations in the majority of the top 25 tv markets...calling them independent is like saying the old ma bell telephone system was an independent tellco

 

[Don in CT]

Fox knew that the RSN's were not going to be profitable going forward so they sold off that division. Even Disney had trouble finding a buyer for them at the price they wanted. They sold the cable networks to maximize profit in the deal. Mordoch knew that live sports and news content makes them money. Not streaming services or movie studios. This is why they kept the Fox Sports and news divisions.

 

[Bruce]

What I am saying is Fox sold off most of their streamable properties( sports, cable channels and movie studios)..so obviously they have no interest in streaming..to call them independent streamers is laughable at best..considering they own a major tv network that has o/o stations in the majority of the top 25 tv markets...calling them independent is like saying the old ma bell telephone system was an independent tellco

Why not, there are a lot of corporations that own a lot of the old UHF type stations and those are considered independent ( no studio behind them).

 

[Don in CT]

Why not, there are a lot of corporations that own a lot of the old UHF type stations and those are considered independent ( no studio behind them).

To me independent is a small mom and pop with no ties to a corporation.

 

[Bruce]

To me independent is a small mom and pop with no ties to a corporation.

From wiki-

Stations that are affiliated with networks such as The CW, MyNetworkTV or to a lesser degree, even Fox, may be considered to be quasi-independent stations as these networks mainly provide programming during primetime, with limited to no network-supplied content in other time periods.

Independent station - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Don in CT]

From wiki-

Stations that are affiliated with networks such as The CW, MyNetworkTV or to a lesser degree, even Fox, may be considered to be quasi-independent stations as these networks mainly provide programming during primetime, with limited to no network-supplied content in other time periods.

Independent station - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Are they owned by one of the big 4 networks or another company? Affiliate deals doesn't not make them owned by a big corporation. There are not many stations owned by small independent companies. Most affiliates are owned by someone that owns multiple stations.

 

[SamCdbs]

It is much simpler than that.

In corporate world, nobody really plays for the truly long run.

The original Big Three, are trying to, if not shift people to streaming, at least make streaming a supplement to linear TV.

Meanwhile, Fox is trying to hold the bundle together, at least until the new NFL contract runs out, by which time Murdoch will probably be dead.

Fox is probably right, in this era, but they are going to be left behind in the next.

 

[Don in CT]

It is much simpler than that.

In corporate world, nobody really plays for the truly long run.

The original Big Three, are trying to, if not shift people to streaming, at least make streaming a supplement to linear TV.

Meanwhile, Fox is trying to hold the bundle together, at least until the new NFL contract runs out, by which time Murdoch will probably be dead.

Fox is probably right, in this era, but they are going to be left behind in the next.

The big 3 would love to rid themselves of the affiliates are go direct to the consumer.

 

[Bruce]

It is much simpler than that.

In corporate world, nobody really plays for the truly long run.

The original Big Three, are trying to, if not shift people to streaming, at least make streaming a supplement to linear TV.

Meanwhile, Fox is trying to hold the bundle together, at least until the new NFL contract runs out, by which time Murdoch will probably be dead.

Fox is probably right, in this era, but they are going to be left behind in the next.

The Streaming era started awhile ago and is now in overdrive.

It used to be all of the content on Traditional Providers would be exclusive for months until they were shown on a service like Netflix, now everything is on streaming either before, same day or a day after, combine that with the exclusive programming that is only on streaming means the end of Traditional Service is a lot closer and the studios are pushing for it.

The only thing left is sports, but that gets low ratings ( except for some College Football and of course, the NFL), but it is a devoted audience, but based on how quick things are changing, I expect that all sports will be available to streaming in the next 3-5 years.

 

[Don in CT]

The only thing left is sports, but that gets low ratings ( except for some College Football and of course, the NFL), but it is a devoted audience, but based on how quick things are changing, I expect that all sports will be available to streaming in the next 3-5 years.

This will depend on the league deals and if they want to change how their games are shown. The networks/streamers can't do a thing if the leagues don't agree to changing the model.

 

[Bruce]

This will depend on the league deals and if they want to change how their games are shown. The networks/streamers can't do a thing if the leagues don't agree to changing the model.

It already has started, during Football Season I was able to switch to different games on Paramount+ that were shown on CBS, it really surprised me because I thought I could not do that.

 

[Don in CT]

It already has started, during Football Season I was able to switch to different games on Paramount+ that were shown on CBS, it really surprised me because I thought I could not do that.

Could you watch those games in the clear or do you need a cable subscription verification.

 

[Juan]

Why not, there are a lot of corporations that own a lot of the old UHF type stations and those are considered independent ( no studio behind them).

Fox owns major tv channels not low end metv type stuff

 

[Bruce]

Of the remaining players, Paramount is the most sub-scale. They're not going to make it on their own. And I kinda don't think NBCUniversal (Peacock) will either. Still think the two of those merging, and then selling off either CBS or NBC to Warner Bros. Discovery, looks like the most likely scenario over the next couple of years.

Paramount + actually is the big success story of the streaming services, gained 9 million subs in the 4th quarter, they are up to, global, 56 million already and 32 million in the states, if you average that out at $5 a sub ( some pay more-no commercials), that is $280 million a month, more then $3 billion a year.

Peacock only has 9 million paying subs, so they would be sub-scale, not Paramount.

The only one that did better then Paramount was Disney with 11 million.

HBO gained 4 million, they only have 73.8 million global subscribers, which includes regular HBO subs, that is only 17 million more then Paramount and HBO has been out a lot longer.

Disney+ and HBO Max show streaming strength against Netflix

It was a strong quarter for Disney, HBO Max and Paramount+ as streaming leader Netflix acknowledged competition may be hurting its growth on the margins.

www.cnbc.com

 

[Bruce]

Could you watch those games in the clear or do you need a cable subscription verification.

Clear, CBS All Access/Paramount+ does not need to verify, regular CBS app you do.

Also, the Super Bowl was on Peacock, did not need verification, previous years on other services, do not know if it needed it.

Like I said, things are changing fast.

 

[lakebum431]

They all rely on production companies. Do you think every network produces everything in house?

No, that wasn't what I was saying at all. My point was that Fox no longer has a production house to produce anything for themselves or to sell. The way that most of the broadcast network deals for show are written, the studio retains ownership of the content after it airs on the network. So they don't "own" much of their content which makes it very cost prohibitive to have a streaming service. As already pointed out, a company like Warner that produces content for their own networks as well as other networks ends up with the perpetual rights to a huge amount of programming which gives them a leg up on the others. This is one of the reasons that you have seen Netflix and Amazon move into the production business. By owning their content, they no longer get stuck paying huge fees to the studio.

 

[SamCdbs]

The vast majority of people still have traditional linear TV.

As to NFL games, the same thing happens to me. it is a glitch in my ISP, its geolocation is off and it assigns me a different set of local channels than I am supposed to get, which in turn affects Paramount Plus and Peacock. But it is not supposed to work like that, you should get the same games on those services as your local station has.

 

[Bruce]

The vast majority of people still have traditional linear TV.

Not vast, there are 129.93 million households in the United States, only 68 million of then subscribe to Traditional Pay TV, that number was 100 million in 2013, so 32 million have left Cable/Sat. Service in the last 8 years, predicted to lose another 10 in the next 3 years.

The funny thing is, households increased 6 million in the same time frame Pay TV lost the 32 million, that shows newer younger households are not signing up with Traditional TV Service.

My almost 32 year old son just bought his first house, just Netflix and the like, same for my 26 year old daughter at her Townhouse.

Number of pay TV households in the U.S. 2027 | Statista

The number of U.S. pay-TV households, including cable subscribers, was 65.1 million in 2022. A forecast suggests a drop to 48 million by 2027.

www.statista.com

U.S.: number of households 1960-2023 | Statista

How many households are in the U.S.? In 2023, there were 131.43 million households in the United States.

www.statista.com