Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
TV
Byrne Robotics > TV Page of 2 Next >>
Topic: Disney leaves Netflix Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
Anthony J Lombardi
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 January 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 9411
Posted: 10 August 2017 at 1:44am | IP Logged | 1 post reply

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/08/disney-will-pull-its-movies- from-netflix-and-start-its-own-streaming-services.html

Thankfully the Marvel series will remain on Netflix.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 7349
Posted: 10 August 2017 at 5:06am | IP Logged | 2 post reply

I am concerned with the "direction of traffic".

As a Brit, I have to pay 145+ a year for a TV licence. I pay for Netflix. I pay for Amazon Prime. Am I going to have to have another subscription for a Disney channel?

What happens if other studios do the same? Will I be paying a dozen subscriptions to access content? I'm not tight, but I have a limited disposable income. 

Just thinking "thin end of the wedge".
Back to Top profile | search
 
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 9870
Posted: 10 August 2017 at 6:29am | IP Logged | 3 post reply

First, consider that Disney content has only been on Netflix since last year and that it will continue to be on it until at least 2019.

Naturally, Netflix controls its original shows, so they aren't going anywhere.

Also bear in mind that Bob Iger, CEO of Disney, said it's possible Disney will continue to license Star Wars and Marvel movies to a pay service like Netflix.


Edited by Peter Martin on 10 August 2017 at 6:30am
Back to Top profile | search
 
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 9870
Posted: 10 August 2017 at 6:42am | IP Logged | 4 post reply

The strict details they've announced is that, in the US, new Walt Disney animated films and Pixar animated films from 2019 onward will be streaming exclusively via this new service, along with new, original content that Disney will produce for this service (that presumably would never have been made if they continued with the same deal with Netflix).

The films that this specifically affects are Toy Story 4, Frozen 2 and The Lion King remake.

When I've logged into Netflix in the UK the last couple of times I've been back, The Force Awakens has not been there. As I understand it, this announcement pertains to the US distribution deal with Netflix.
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Popa
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 March 2008
Posts: 2722
Posted: 10 August 2017 at 6:47am | IP Logged | 5 post reply

This can't be surprising.

I think back to all the time people spent saying they wanted to pick and choose what cable channels they got instead of getting bundled packages.

Well, this is what we're getting - people convinced themselves if would be cheaper, though, which is rarely the reality.

Be careful what you wish for and such.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 9870
Posted: 10 August 2017 at 6:58am | IP Logged | 6 post reply

Digging into Iger's exact words a bit deeper, he said this:

"This doesn't represent a change except on the Disney/Pixar side and as I cited earlier, possibly on the output deal for Marvel and Star Wars films, which we're still discussing and debating."

The really interesting thing will be whether Disney decides to leverage the Marvel and Star Wars IP and produce new, exclusive content with these properties for the streaming service. Imagine a Star Wars mini series that never goes to the theatres and the only way to see it is by signing up to Disney?
Back to Top profile | search
 
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 7349
Posted: 10 August 2017 at 6:59am | IP Logged | 7 post reply

I agree, John.

It's not just about Netflix. It's about many things. I know access to TV shows/films isn't a human right. And maybe the idea of this sort of thing irks me because Brits have to pay 145+ a year for a TV licence, but exclusivity is a worrying thing. It's the whole "thin end of the wedge" thing.

I don't mind subscribing to Netflix. I don't mind subscribing to Amazon Prime. But look down the road (not on about Disney now). What happens when a third streaming service starts? Or a fourth? Or fifth? And what happens when they start having exclusivity to a particular show or franchise? Even the most ardent TV watcher won't necessarily want to subscribe to numerous streaming services.

A friend of mine (a Brit who also pays a TV licence) also has a Sky subscription. He subscribed to Netflix in order to watch the various Marvel shows. He says he would have waited for DAREDEVIL and the like to show up on terrestrial or satellite TV, but has it? Am I right in thinking that DAREDEVIL has remained exclusive to Netflix?

I subscribed to Amazon Prime (I may not keep it) because RIPPER STREET became exclusive to it.

I'm conflating many things here, I know, but my thoughts are akin to what John Popa has posted. Be careful what you wish for indeed.

Incidentally, I'd love to be able to follow BLUE BLOODS regularly, but I can't afford a Sky Atlantic subscription in addition to TV licence, Netflix and Amazon Prime. It's not a human right, but I do yearn for the days of bundles.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Michael Casselman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 January 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 886
Posted: 10 August 2017 at 11:12am | IP Logged | 8 post reply

Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu, The WWE Network, CBS All Access, Disney's upcoming service... The death of traditional cable television service by a thousand cuts!
Back to Top profile | search
 
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 7349
Posted: 10 August 2017 at 12:59pm | IP Logged | 9 post reply

Someone did once tell me to "stump up the cash" if I want to watch things.

I'm fine with that. To a point. Accessing my favourite TV shows isn't a God-given right, it's a luxury. I get that. But human nature being what it is, I'm sure none of us want to be paying for many, many subscriptions.

I didn't mind paying a subscription to Sky (early 90s). For that, I got access to movies, WWF, THE SIMPSONS, various sci-fi shows, etc. Sky showed all the modern STAR TREK shows back in the day. The BBC showed TOS and some of the later ones. Channel 4 showed ENTERPRISE. Via a Sky subscription, and paying the TV licence, I got to access all of the above. For a monthly fee.

Imagine if things had been different back then. Imagine if all these streaming services had been around then. Imagine if Netflix had exclusivity for THE SIMPSONS, Amazon Prime had exclusivity for the STAR TREK shows, etc, etc. 

Again, it's not a human right for me to access my favourite shows, but I sure miss the days when it was simpler. Ideally, I'd love the current season of RIPPER STREET to be on one of numerous channels that my TV licence/Sky subscription covers. Instead, I pay those and I pay for Netflix. To see RIPPER STREET, I pay for Amazon Prime, too. I can't afford yet another subscription if more and more streaming services pop up.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 9870
Posted: 10 August 2017 at 2:03pm | IP Logged | 10 post reply

I don't think you're comparing like with like. Content has proliferated and if you want to watch it all, you are choosing to watch far more than was available in the early 90s. If you want to consume more, it's going to cost more. A significant chunk of Netflix's content is original programming and that proportion is only going to increase. Why do they produce this content? To differentiate themselves in a competitive space. Their model is subscription based and nothing is more compelling than exclusivity.

To go back to Ripper Street, the seasons that are exclusive to Amazon Prime only exist because Amazon Prime chose to make them to try and get subscribers. You take away the subscription model whereby a segment of the market select which provider carries (or produces) the shows they want and Ripper Street would simply have been dropped for not providing large enough viewing figures and that would have been that.

Just because you subscribe to Netflix or Amazon Prime does not means you have to stay with them all year round. Hop on for a month, consume all you want and return in half a year. What you can't do is have your cake and eat it.

I find there is too much for me to consumer just having Netflix and a cable bundle. I have watched less than half the Marvel shows on Netflix and haven't bothered to watch the Star Wars movies there after having paid to consumer them in the theatre. Here in Canada I can also get Crackle for free, but haven't bothered because I have more than enough on my plate. Not remotely tempted to get Amazon Prime. However, the strength of Game of Thrones means I add HBO to my bundle when that show airs. HBO has produced a quality product for the purposes of increasing subscriptions. I think it's fair enough to stump up if I want to consume it. If I don't think it's worth it, no one is holding a gun to my head.


Edited by Peter Martin on 10 August 2017 at 2:04pm
Back to Top profile | search
 
Dave Kopperman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 27 December 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1584
Posted: 10 August 2017 at 2:27pm | IP Logged | 11 post reply

As a huge Disney animation fan, I remember being totally pumped when they announced the Disney Channel back in 198-.  When it launched, the depressing reality kicked in pretty soon: none of the really good stuff from the vault ever made it to the air, since they were keeping that for the increasingly lucrative home video market.  Instead, they started off with pretty dire original programming.  I suspect the streaming service will be the same way - so long as they can leverage the Disney brand for a subscription service AND sell the stuff people really want on another platform, they'll continue to do so.

Lord knows what I'm going to do if CBS moves all of their Star Trek stuff off of Netflix and on to All Access.  That'll be a tough one.
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 7349
Posted: 10 August 2017 at 2:32pm | IP Logged | 12 post reply

Peter, I suppose I should be asking Netflix and Prime this (I do appreciate your response), but will they allow someone to sign up/sign off/vary the months, etc. It'd be ideal. To be honest, I'm only really on Netflix now for the Marvel shows; and only really on Amazon Prime for RIPPER STREET.

I'd just hope that they wouldn't reach a point where they tell me I can't keep signing up/signing off. Obviously, I would not need, expect or want special offers every time I sign up, but I suppose "payment vacations" or whatever would be ideal. I mean, I can go three months without looking at Netflix or Prime if I'm catching up with DVDs/Blu-rays.
Back to Top profile | search
 
James Woodcock
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 21 September 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 3984
Posted: 11 August 2017 at 1:49am | IP Logged | 13 post reply

I have Sky and my daughter pays for Netflix. Sky has a number of Disney channels such as:
a dedicated Disney cinema channel
Disney XD
Disney Junior

I imagine these will stay but will be interesting if not.
Netflix only gets the Marvel movies once Sky seems to have finished their run (similar to when terrestrial used to get them - around two years after release), or at least, that is the impression I get.

Interesting and potentially expensive times we are moving in to
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Tim O'Neill
Byrne Robotics Security


Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 9278
Posted: 11 August 2017 at 8:21am | IP Logged | 14 post reply



More and more networks and studios will want their own streaming service.  It's possible we are moving towards paying for premium streaming services like we pay for premium cable channels, like the cable TV model that streaming is supposed to supplant.


Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Jack Bohn
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 13 July 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 533
Posted: 11 August 2017 at 10:58am | IP Logged | 15 post reply

I wonder if the Disney company has an institutional memory of exclusivity. Back when other studios' cartoons were packaged for TV stations to run, Disney's were exclusive to The Mickey Mouse Club, or his Wonderful World of. There was also the practice of shutting things away in The Vault to build up demand.

On the other hand there were the Disney Stores. I don't know that they ever tried selling videotapes exclusively through them.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Michael Roberts
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 11208
Posted: 11 August 2017 at 12:15pm | IP Logged | 16 post reply

I only subscribe to Netflix when a new show comes out, and often if there are bunch of shows coming out within a month or two of each other, I'll hold off to maximize what I get out of that month. If I can pay $16 for a two-hour movie, I can pay $10 for a 10 episode Netflix show. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Brian Rhodes
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 19 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2647
Posted: 11 August 2017 at 1:15pm | IP Logged | 17 post reply

Lord knows what I'm going to do if CBS moves all of their Star Trek stuff off of Netflix and on to All Access.  That'll be a tough one.

I have all of TOS on Blu-ray, and a few seasons of TNG. All of TAS on DVD. Most of the DS9, VOYAGER, and ENTERPRISE episodes I'd want I also have on DVD. And all the Trek movies I think are worth having, I own on Blu-ray.

All Access can get bent.


Edited by Brian Rhodes on 11 August 2017 at 1:16pm
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 7349
Posted: 11 August 2017 at 3:39pm | IP Logged | 18 post reply

Serious question: is there anyone out there with the money AND inclination to subscribe to numerous streaming services?


Back to Top profile | search
 
Michael Roberts
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 11208
Posted: 11 August 2017 at 5:28pm | IP Logged | 19 post reply

I know multiple households who subscribe to the top-tier cable package AND at least Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 7349
Posted: 11 August 2017 at 5:57pm | IP Logged | 20 post reply

True. Same here, but how many are doing that out of necessity (i.e. to keep up with a show they like)? 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Matt Reed
Byrne Robotics Security
Avatar
Robotmod

Joined: 16 April 2004
Posts: 31817
Posted: 12 August 2017 at 1:06am | IP Logged | 21 post reply

 John Popa wrote:
This can't be surprising.

I think back to all the time people spent saying they wanted to pick and choose what cable channels they got instead of getting bundled packages.

Well, this is what we're getting - people convinced themselves if would be cheaper, though, which is rarely the reality. 

Be careful what you wish for and such.

This.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Matt Reed
Byrne Robotics Security
Avatar
Robotmod

Joined: 16 April 2004
Posts: 31817
Posted: 12 August 2017 at 1:10am | IP Logged | 22 post reply

 Robbie Perry wrote:
...Brits have to pay 145+ a year for a TV licence

I've never understood this.  What, exactly, are you paying for?  It sounds like if PBS (Public Broadcasting Station here here in the US) forced you to pay a set amount just to access your television!  That sounds ludicrous to me.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Matt Reed
Byrne Robotics Security
Avatar
Robotmod

Joined: 16 April 2004
Posts: 31817
Posted: 12 August 2017 at 1:24am | IP Logged | 23 post reply

 Brian Rhodes wrote:
All Access can get bent.

That sounds like it's coming from a place of anger, as if the content provider doesn't have the right to pick and choose where they allow you to watch what they've paid to produce.  They do.  They have every right to limit where you can watch their product and charge you to watch it if that's what you choose to do.  That CBS (along with every other analog station) has been tied to the free TV model where you got to watch every iteration of Star Trek for free doesn't mean that it will always be that way nor does it mean that it's the only way you can find their product, right?  

I mean, you just wrote that you own a number of ST series, so good on you!  But CBS/Paramount shouldn't be chided if they decide to pull distribution from everywhere but their own app thus monetizing their investment and drawing viewers, right?  If you don't like it, fine.  Purchase all the DVD sets and never subscribe ever.  But that's a choice.  Others may not make that choice particularly in the digital space.  And that's fine too.  Doesn't mean CBS All Access has to "get bent" just because you don't like it.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Matt Reed
Byrne Robotics Security
Avatar
Robotmod

Joined: 16 April 2004
Posts: 31817
Posted: 12 August 2017 at 1:33am | IP Logged | 24 post reply

 Robbie Parry wrote:
Serious question: is there anyone out there with the money AND inclination to subscribe to numerous streaming services?

Serious answer: I subscribe to Netflix, Hulu, CBS All Access, and (by default because of other subscriptions) Amazon Prime, HBO Go and Showtime Anytime. That's in addition to paying for DirecTV on a monthly basis to get hundreds of channels I never watch. Of the three VOD (video on demand) apps that I pay for, Showtime Anytime would be the only one to get the boot should I drop traditional cable.  But I get the digital access to both HBO and Showtime because I subscribe to their channel via another outlet.  Amazon, to me, is an anomaly.  We pay the price for Prime for their speedy shipping and, as a bonus, get their Prime content for free so I don't really consider that a choice. It's really a bonus. But to answer your initial question, yes, I'll subscribe to a network, station, or app if the content is compelling and constantly evolving.  No problem with that at all.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 7349
Posted: 12 August 2017 at 3:31am | IP Logged | 25 post reply

That's a lot, Matt. :)

But, yes, thanks for the answer. World seems changing and I guess I'm just worried I'll miss out. I mean, it's not a problem in some cases. The WWE Network is a great investment - never short of anything to watch - but others, such as Netflix, well I'm only really on them for the Marvel shows. Of course, those Marvel shows will get a DVD release soon, but I get a tad frustrated at times, i.e. I can't afford a Sky Atlantic subscription just to keep up with BLUE BLOODS.

The world has changed. I do miss the days, certainly here in the UK, when we just had a few channels - and everything showed up on each channel eventually. ;-)
Back to Top profile | search
 

Page of 2 Next >>
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login