Looks like Netflix/Warner Bros. is happening. (or maybe not.)

[Juan]

I'm sure eventually there will be a super bundle or they will go the Disney+-Hulu route where P+ is one price and then HBO Max is an add-on (or something)

Oh you mean like cable?

 

[Yespage]

I'm sure eventually there will be a super bundle or they will go the Disney+-Hulu route where P+ is one price and then HBO Max is an add-on (or something)

And HBO Max to join together with Paramount+. (paywall)

Paramount Skydance will combine Paramount+ and HBO Max into one streaming service, David Ellison, the company's CEO, said on a Monday call with investors.

"As we said, we do plan to put the two services together, which today gives us a little over 200 million direct-to-consumer subscribers," Ellison said. "We think that really positions us to compete with the leaders in the space."

A la carte is dead! It was killed by corporate bundling.

 

[comfortably_numb]

A la carte is dead! It was killed by corporate bundling.

Imagine that.

 

[meStevo]

And HBO Max to join together with Paramount+. (paywall)

unpaywalled: https://archive.is/M0FA0

I'd say this could send me back to using torrents and stuff for the first time in more than a decade, but I'll probably just skip this content altogether.

 

[klang]

I think they would be better off marketing HBO as the premium service and app it once was.

But I will one way or another watch the content that interests me.

 

[meStevo]

Head of HBO Max seen having lunch w/ a Netflix boss.

Planning his next move?

Exclusive | Netflix boss Ted Sarandos seen lunching with HBO CEO Casey Bloys, sparking Hollywood speculation

The execs were spotted breaking bread at Superba in Hollywood, sparking a whole lot of questions.

pagesix.com

View: https://youtu.be/kvgVRGmWUfE

 

[zippyfrog]

Paramount Sued by States in Bid to Block $111 Billion Warner Bros. Merger

A victory for the states could stop the David Ellison-led studio’s effort to become a theatrical giant in a case that will define entertainment and media for years to come.

www.hollywoodreporter.com

I don't get this - not the argument, but the timing.

Why wouldn't the states have sued earlier if this is a concern?

The big thing talked about is that if there is a combination, there would 4 companies releasing 85% of the movies. (I assume that is Paramount, Disney, Sony, and Universal) That wouldn't have changed since this was announced back in February, the shareholders voted in April, and the DOJ approved it last month. It seems like there was a lot of time to slow this down instead of a couple of weeks before the deal closes.

 

[meStevo]

Paramount Sued by States in Bid to Block $111 Billion Warner Bros. Merger

A victory for the states could stop the David Ellison-led studio’s effort to become a theatrical giant in a case that will define entertainment and media for years to come.

www.hollywoodreporter.com

I don't get this - not the argument, but the timing.

Why wouldn't the states have sued earlier if this is a concern?

The big thing talked about is that if there is a combination, there would 4 companies releasing 85% of the movies. (I assume that is Paramount, Disney, Sony, and Universal) That wouldn't have changed since this was announced back in February, the shareholders voted in April, and the DOJ approved it last month. It seems like there was a lot of time to slow this down instead of a couple of weeks before the deal closes.

They only moved to sue once it was clear the feds weren't going to stop it and the DOJ finished it's work. The same process that was followed for Nexstar / Tegna, which was successfully held up pending trial.

This is probably a harder case to prove than one of local market overlap.

 

[comfortably_numb]

Judge Orders Paramount To Temporarily Pause Warner Bros Acquisition

California and 11 states sued on July 13, arguing the deal would create a media behemoth with the power to raise prices in film and television.

www.huffpost.com

 

[MikeD-C05]

Judge Orders Paramount To Temporarily Pause Warner Bros Acquisition

California and 11 states sued on July 13, arguing the deal would create a media behemoth with the power to raise prices in film and television.

www.huffpost.com

Paramount will have to pay Warner Bothers/ Discovery $650 million "ticking fee"for every quarter, or $7 million per day, if they go past the original merger assured date they put in their contract, which is in September 30th.

Paramount is also on the hook for $7 billion reverse termination fee paid to Warner Brothers/Discovery if the merger doesn't go through period. This could make the merger not worth their money or especially their time. Especially since I heard that Warner Brothers /Discovery is losing billions each month. They have till June 4, 2027 to fight out the deal with regulators and lawyers before the deal completely expires.

So the longer they stretch this out in Court the better for killing the merger. The A.G.s of 12 blue states are using the 1913 bill passed and signed in to law in 1914 - Clayton Antitrust Act - to stop the merger. I would love to see someone in D.C. not get what he wants in the merger in the first place, which was the destruction of CNN and the firing of the anchors he personally doesn't like.

 

[Jimbo]

And HBO Max to join together with Paramount+. (paywall)

A la carte is dead! It was killed by corporate bundling.

Hmmm ... Isn't that WHY we started Streaming in the first place ?
(People cried for Ala Carte)

 

[meStevo]

Not I. I started streaming for better control of what programming I chose to pay for and because of the $40-50 in extra fees on my bill that I haven't had to pay for more than 10 years now.

 

[ncted]

I started streaming because that is where the content was, specifically content that didn't come with a bunch of franchise fees, equipment fees, and a bunch of expensive sports that I didn't think was worth the cost.

 

[Jimbo]

I started streaming because that is where the content was, specifically content that didn't come with a bunch of franchise fees, equipment fees, and a bunch of expensive sports that I didn't think was worth the cost.

I don't think the Sports is worth the cost, but I still buy the NFL and MLB.

When I say, not worth the cost ... I mean they could cut the cost in half and they would get more people watching.

MLB is actually pretty decent price, for the Out of Market ... the Home team they charge to much.

 

[Bruce]

I don't think the Sports is worth the cost, but I still buy the NFL and MLB.

And with streaming, you get that choice, you also no longer have to pay that RSN fee for sports you do not watch, like the NBA/NHL.

I would assume they you paying for YTTV, MLB and the NFL ST, is still a lot cheaper than DirecTV and MLB/NFL and of course, the RSN fee.

 

[ncted]

I don't think the Sports is worth the cost, but I still buy the NFL and MLB.

When I say, not worth the cost ... I mean they could cut the cost in half and they would get more people watching.

MLB is actually pretty decent price, for the Out of Market ... the Home team they charge to much.

Yeah, if the sports were half the cost, I wouldn't have minded so much, but the media companies were so willing to throw ungodly amounts of money at it, they had not choice but to pass it along to cable/satellite customers. Unfortunately, streaming is doing the same thing, but at least you can cancel if you don't like the price of a service without losing access to everything else... at least for now anyway.

 

[Yespage]

And with streaming, you get that choice, you also no longer have to pay that RSN fee for sports you do not watch, like the NBA/NHL.

I would assume they you paying for YTTV, MLB and the NFL ST, is still a lot cheaper than DirecTV and MLB/NFL and of course, the RSN fee.

Amazon is paying a mint for Thursday football.Sports are on most of the major streaming services.

 

[AZ.]

Amazon is paying a mint for Thursday football.Sports are on most of the major streaming services.

Yep, then Peacock has tons of sports, Netflix, Paramount.....Your not getting away from sports or kids programming. Your only fooling yourself if one believes it....The prices will rise and we will be right back to square one soon enough. And it will be more inconvenient if you have to flip back and forth from programming!

 

[ncted]

Yep, then Peacock has tons of sports, Netflix, Paramount.....Your not getting away from sports or kids programming. Your only fooling yourself if one believes it....The prices will rise and we will be right back to square one soon enough. And it will be more inconvenient if you have to flip back and forth from programming!

I don't really have a big issue with flipping between apps. Most apps don't have to restart any more when you exit and then relaunch them, so it really doesn't take that long to switch. Plus, the only time when it matters how quickly the flipping happens is when there is a live event on, such as sports, which I tend not to watch live unless I just want something on in the background.

Most of my watching is one show at a time, for 25-60 minutes, and then watching another one. If I have to switch apps in between, no big deal.

 

[comfortably_numb]

I don't really have a big issue with flipping between apps

What I find irritating is the multiple services sports use to broadcast games. They're not always easy to find, you have to start/cancel subscriptions and/or free trials to see them all.