Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Atlantic Wire)   HBO executives: "We just had a thought: what if HBO GO was available for non-HBO subscribers and even people without cable?"   (theatlanticwire.com) divider line 141
    More: Obvious, HBO, executive directors, quality television, subscribers  
•       •       •

8408 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 21 Mar 2013 at 9:24 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



141 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-03-21 07:39:19 PM  
So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"
 
2013-03-21 07:40:33 PM  

naughtyrev: So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"


They will be the richest company on the planet if they do.
 
2013-03-21 07:44:28 PM  

naughtyrev: So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"


Not per episode, they're looking at a monthly subscription model.  All in all it's not a bad idea.  $15 per month or so could net them a lot of subscribers, and it might encourage them to make sure they always have a hit series running instead of the current situation where there are sometimes several month droughts between when one ends and a new one begins.
 
2013-03-21 07:49:21 PM  
So they finally actually are considering this. About time.
 
2013-03-21 07:53:38 PM  
Timely. We've just begun the process of cutting back.
Baby steps.
 
2013-03-21 07:57:44 PM  

TuteTibiImperes: naughtyrev: So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"

Not per episode, they're looking at a monthly subscription model.  All in all it's not a bad idea.  $15 per month or so could net them a lot of subscribers, and it might encourage them to make sure they always have a hit series running instead of the current situation where there are sometimes several month droughts between when one ends and a new one begins.


I steal HBO GO right now. I'd gladly pay them for it because I think people should be paid for creating content. I just really don't want to pay AT&T $100 a month and have to surf through 5,000 channels of Spanish and Jesus programming to see Game of Thrones.
 
2013-03-21 07:58:52 PM  

Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: Spanish and Jesus


But you repeat yourself.
 
2013-03-21 08:04:26 PM  
affordablehousinginstitute.org
 
2013-03-21 08:05:23 PM  
So HBO is going to be the premium channel that brings us ala carte TV.

I can respect that.
 
2013-03-21 08:14:34 PM  

Summoner101: So HBO is going to be the premium channel that brings us ala carte TV.

I can respect that.


It's an ideal post-cable role for them.  As long as the quality remains, they'll have no shortage of subscribers.
 
2013-03-21 08:22:49 PM  
Ok, so I'm going to cancel cable the second this happens.
 
2013-03-21 08:36:18 PM  
So it's like an HBO-only version of Netflix?  I'd probably check it out.
 
2013-03-21 08:37:56 PM  

kevinboehm: So it's like an HBO-only version of Netflix?  I'd probably check it out.


I believe HBO sort of owns Cinemax as well, so perhaps that content would come along for the ride.
 
2013-03-21 08:55:08 PM  

TuteTibiImperes: kevinboehm: So it's like an HBO-only version of Netflix?  I'd probably check it out.

I believe HBO sort of owns Cinemax as well, so perhaps that content would come along for the ride.


I would rather have Showtime, because I am so far behind on Dexter, but... beggars can't be choosers.
 
2013-03-21 08:56:38 PM  
I didn't read the article but I'm sure this will piss off the cable companies.
 
2013-03-21 08:57:55 PM  
They should sell season packages to a show or individual episodes.  HBO has some crap that I won't pay for.
 
2013-03-21 09:27:08 PM  

Nadie_AZ: So they finally actually are considering this. About time.


They've always been considering it.  They're using this model in some areas internationally (where they don't already have rebroadcasting agreements).  It's always been that the cable companies are standing in the way, so if HBO can figure out a way to work with them, it might actually happen.
 
2013-03-21 09:29:46 PM  
HBO could make a shiatton of money and people wouldn't steal Game of Thrones as much?
 
2013-03-21 09:31:33 PM  

L.D. Ablo: They should sell season packages to a show or individual episodes.  HBO has some crap that I won't pay for.


And this is why a la carte models are always such a struggle.  Some people can never be satisfied.

Networks offered a la carte - "We want individual shows"
Individual shows offered a la carte - "We want individual seasons"
Individual seasons offered a la carte - "We want individual episodes"
Individual episodes offered a la carte - "It's too expensive to buy individual episodes.  Give us cheaper seasons"

Also:  http://www.amazon.com/Game-Thrones-Destinations-Season-2/dp/B00AN0K5K W /ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1363915694&sr=8-4&keywords=game+of+thrones
 
2013-03-21 09:32:19 PM  

rugman11: Nadie_AZ: So they finally actually are considering this. About time.

They've always been considering it.  They're using this model in some areas internationally (where they don't already have rebroadcasting agreements).  It's always been that the cable companies are standing in the way, so if HBO can figure out a way to work with them, it might actually happen.


Sorry to disappoint everyone but this won't ever, EVER actually happen.  Guess who owns HBO?  Time Farking Warner
 
2013-03-21 09:38:48 PM  
I am intrigued by what VICE will do on HBO now when that series starts. I imagine they'll leave their goofy, hit-or-miss counterculture stuff on their own site and focus on their news-doc, "let's send Shane Smith to some godforsaken place and hope he doesn't get killed" content.
 
2013-03-21 09:39:39 PM  

kevinboehm: So it's like an HBO-only version of Netflix?  I'd probably check it out.


I think HBO wants to become Netflix before Netflix becomes HBO.
 
2013-03-21 09:42:54 PM  
FTFA: "But that $10-$15 per month figure thrown out by HBO is awful low. "

Low?  No its not.  That's about right.  Netflix streaming is only about $8/month.  Why would I pay more than twice that for a single channel's worth of programing?  $10/month sounds pretty reasonable to me.  Maybe $15/month if they start making more good shows, rather than just running movies.
 
2013-03-21 09:42:55 PM  

Cymbal: rugman11: Nadie_AZ: So they finally actually are considering this. About time.

They've always been considering it.  They're using this model in some areas internationally (where they don't already have rebroadcasting agreements).  It's always been that the cable companies are standing in the way, so if HBO can figure out a way to work with them, it might actually happen.

Sorry to disappoint everyone but this won't ever, EVER actually happen.  Guess who owns HBO?  Time Farking Warner


True, but cable companies are already suffering.  I have limited basic cable because we need the local channels and can't pick up the local channels even with an antenna (if its not the mountains killing our signal then its out apartment building), and have 10 meg internet service.  Don't need a DVR thanks to Hulu.  Netflix and Amazon provide enough movies to keep us satisfied.  Time Warner could look at this as a way to make some extra money for those who don't want to spend a fortune getting a couple of hundred channels they don't want just to get HBO.
 
2013-03-21 09:45:29 PM  

JasonOfOrillia: kevinboehm: So it's like an HBO-only version of Netflix?  I'd probably check it out.

I think HBO wants to become Netflix before Netflix becomes HBO.


True - can't wait for Game of Thrones to begin again BUT REALLY enjoyed House of Cards while I waited...
 
2013-03-21 09:47:51 PM  

TuteTibiImperes: naughtyrev: So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"

Not per episode, they're looking at a monthly subscription model.  All in all it's not a bad idea.  $15 per month or so could net them a lot of subscribers, and it might encourage them to make sure they always have a hit series running instead of the current situation where there are sometimes several month droughts between when one ends and a new one begins.


That would actually be a bit much.  NetFlix is less, has it's own original content AND tons of movies.  Same with HuLu.  Price needs to be less than $10/month, probably around the $5/month range if they only offer HBO Content.
 
2013-03-21 09:48:59 PM  
I've already decided to get rid of cable when I move, to just go with Netflix.  However, I'd add this to my monthly budget if it comes through.
 
2013-03-21 09:51:28 PM  
How about if DirecTV stops blocking HBOGo on Roku?
 
2013-03-21 09:56:03 PM  

Telos: TuteTibiImperes: naughtyrev: So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"

Not per episode, they're looking at a monthly subscription model.  All in all it's not a bad idea.  $15 per month or so could net them a lot of subscribers, and it might encourage them to make sure they always have a hit series running instead of the current situation where there are sometimes several month droughts between when one ends and a new one begins.

That would actually be a bit much.  NetFlix is less, has it's own original content AND tons of movies.  Same with HuLu.  Price needs to be less than $10/month, probably around the $5/month range if they only offer HBO Content.




Not likely. Cable subscribers are already paying $15 or more a month.

A la carte tv programming is a much more complicated business model than most think. That's why I think we'll never get it, at least not in the form people usually think of when mentioning the topic.
 
2013-03-21 09:57:00 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: I didn't read the article but I'm sure this will piss off the cable companies.


I can't see why they'd go for this. Virtually everyone with an HBO subscription would ditch it for a plan like this, and many would probably ditch cable altogether. The cable companies would lose their shirts.
/That's not to say they don't deserve it, of course.
 
2013-03-21 10:05:21 PM  

zobear: HBO could make a shiatton of money and people wouldn't steal Game of Thrones as much?


The first two seasons of Game of Thrones are already available right now as part of my Netflix DVD plan.  Season Three will be out soon.  Since I've got a couple hundred titles in my queue, I don't have a problem waiting a bit to watch it.
 
2013-03-21 10:06:27 PM  

timujin: I've already decided to get rid of cable when I move, to just go with Netflix.  However, I'd add this to my monthly budget if it comes through.


Yeah, I did that.
I lasted about 4 months before running out of things to watch.
They need to get more stuff on faster.
 
2013-03-21 10:07:09 PM  
Or you could have a shiatty ghetto cable provider like me and can't get HBO Go, even with your HBO subscription.
 
2013-03-21 10:09:10 PM  

Cymbal: rugman11: Nadie_AZ: So they finally actually are considering this. About time.

They've always been considering it.  They're using this model in some areas internationally (where they don't already have rebroadcasting agreements).  It's always been that the cable companies are standing in the way, so if HBO can figure out a way to work with them, it might actually happen.

Sorry to disappoint everyone but this won't ever, EVER actually happen.  Guess who owns HBO?  Time Farking Warner


Time Warner Cable is no longer part of Time Warner.
 
2013-03-21 10:13:01 PM  

rugman11: L.D. Ablo: They should sell season packages to a show or individual episodes.  HBO has some crap that I won't pay for.

And this is why a la carte models are always such a struggle.  Some people can never be satisfied.

Networks offered a la carte - "We want individual shows"
Individual shows offered a la carte - "We want individual seasons"
Individual seasons offered a la carte - "We want individual episodes"
Individual episodes offered a la carte - "It's too expensive to buy individual episodes.  Give us cheaper seasons"

Also:  http://www.amazon.com/Game-Thrones-Destinations-Season-2/dp/B00AN0K5K W /ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1363915694&sr=8-4&keywords=game+of+thrones


That's so passe. We want individual scenes. Damnit, I have 1st amendment rights!
 
2013-03-21 10:15:49 PM  
Bottom line is HBO wants paid subscribers.  How they subscribe won't matter.
 
2013-03-21 10:19:02 PM  

TuteTibiImperes: naughtyrev: So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"

Not per episode, they're looking at a monthly subscription model.  All in all it's not a bad idea.  $15 per month or so could net them a lot of subscribers, and it might encourage them to make sure they always have a hit series running instead of the current situation where there are sometimes several month droughts between when one ends and a new one begins.


If the service is the same as HBO GO -- all episodes of old shows and all movies in rotation available -- that's a huge amount of content outside of the new shows. It's also going to be years until Netflix offers the same number of original shows.
 
2013-03-21 10:21:06 PM  
Even if they want to set up this sort of subscription model, they'll have to wait a few years until their current deals with the cable television providers are up before they can change the terms.
 
2013-03-21 10:24:24 PM  

thornhill: TuteTibiImperes: naughtyrev: So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"

Not per episode, they're looking at a monthly subscription model.  All in all it's not a bad idea.  $15 per month or so could net them a lot of subscribers, and it might encourage them to make sure they always have a hit series running instead of the current situation where there are sometimes several month droughts between when one ends and a new one begins.

If the service is the same as HBO GO -- all episodes of old shows and all movies in rotation available -- that's a huge amount of content outside of the new shows. It's also going to be years until Netflix offers the same number of original shows.


And it'll take HBO years before they can offer this kind of service. At which point, Netflix's exclusive first run deal with Disney would've kicked into high gear.
 
2013-03-21 10:27:25 PM  
I bet they could charge $10-15/mo per show and people would still subscribe to it. Maybe go with group rates too, or discounts for subscribing in 6 month blocks, 12 month blocks, etc. $14/mo gets you 1 show for that month(your choice), $22 for 2 shows, and $26 for unlimited shows. I think the people who only have cable for HBO shows would drop $26 in a heartbeat.
 
2013-03-21 10:28:00 PM  

stewbert: rugman11: L.D. Ablo: They should sell season packages to a show or individual episodes.  HBO has some crap that I won't pay for.

And this is why a la carte models are always such a struggle.  Some people can never be satisfied.

Networks offered a la carte - "We want individual shows"
Individual shows offered a la carte - "We want individual seasons"
Individual seasons offered a la carte - "We want individual episodes"
Individual episodes offered a la carte - "It's too expensive to buy individual episodes.  Give us cheaper seasons"

Also:  http://www.amazon.com/Game-Thrones-Destinations-Season-2/dp/B00AN0K5K W /ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1363915694&sr=8-4&keywords=game+of+thrones

That's so passe. We want individual scenes. Damnit, I have 1st amendment rights!




Well, just clear screen caps of the boobies will do.
 
2013-03-21 10:29:13 PM  
My cable company only allows access to HBO through a package that costs almost $40 per month. This would allow HBO to receive >$0 of my money, because fark that. There's little else I'd watch in that package so it functionally amounts to charging me the price of a movie ticket to see each episode of Game of Thrones.
 
kab
2013-03-21 10:32:20 PM  

JasonOfOrillia: kevinboehm: So it's like an HBO-only version of Netflix?  I'd probably check it out.

I think HBO wants to become Netflix before Netflix becomes HBO.


I think it's too late for that, but who knows....
 
2013-03-21 10:40:19 PM  
Meh. I don't even use HBOGo on my Roku or my $90,000 PC.
/Hold on! Let me take off these whale skin Prada pants so I can wipe my arse with this $1000 bill
 
2013-03-21 10:40:39 PM  

Zombie DJ: timujin: I've already decided to get rid of cable when I move, to just go with Netflix.  However, I'd add this to my monthly budget if it comes through.

Yeah, I did that.
I lasted about 4 months before running out of things to watch.
They need to get more stuff on faster.


Yeah, I'm doing it because I'm moving from the 'burbs to about 4 miles from the beach.  I'm hoping that the lack of video entertainment will encourage me to take advantage of that.
 
2013-03-21 10:41:06 PM  
You have my attention, HBO.
 
2013-03-21 10:43:02 PM  
No wonder these people make several orders of magnitude more money than the average American salary.  It's not everyday that someone is smart enough to think up such a ridiculously unbelievable scheme like this.  The thought had literally never occurred to myself or anyone else that this might be a good thing.  Can we make these people president of the world?  Imagine the problems they could solve.
 
2013-03-21 10:46:13 PM  
fark. I'm an HBO subscriber and I still can't get HBO GO.

Screw you, Cable One!!
 
2013-03-21 10:47:42 PM  

RexTalionis: thornhill: TuteTibiImperes: naughtyrev: So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"

Not per episode, they're looking at a monthly subscription model.  All in all it's not a bad idea.  $15 per month or so could net them a lot of subscribers, and it might encourage them to make sure they always have a hit series running instead of the current situation where there are sometimes several month droughts between when one ends and a new one begins.

If the service is the same as HBO GO -- all episodes of old shows and all movies in rotation available -- that's a huge amount of content outside of the new shows. It's also going to be years until Netflix offers the same number of original shows.

And it'll take HBO years before they can offer this kind of service. At which point, Netflix's exclusive first run deal with Disney would've kicked into high gear.


Why would it take years? The product, HBO GO, is finished. They've gone as far as making it available on tablets, smart phones, streaming devices like Roku, and gaming consoles -- so in other words, it has the same possible level of market penetration as Netflix and Amazon Prime.

I imagine that holdup is pricing and fear of cannibalizing home video sales. HBO spends hundreds of millions just to produce original content (not just TV shows, but movies and documentaries). They likely need to charge more than $10 a month, but feel that it cannot be substantially more than what Netflix and Amazon charge. Further, one of the ways HBO is able to turn a profit on their shows is through home video sales. Game of Thrones Season 1, for instance, did over $30 million in DVDs just in 2012 (so that doesn't include Blu-ray sales); it's hard to imagine that many people would keep buying HBO shows on home video when they're all available on demand via streaming.
 
2013-03-21 10:49:35 PM  

megalynn44: fark. I'm an HBO subscriber and I still can't get HBO GO.

Screw you, Cable One!!


You too, DirecTV!
 
2013-03-21 10:50:02 PM  
I like Jay Leno.

He reminds me of my proctologist, except with more cars.
 
kab
2013-03-21 10:53:10 PM  

L.D. Ablo: They should sell season packages to a show or individual episodes.  HBO has some crap that I won't pay for.


I think they should charge by script syllable.  That way, you never get to hear something you don't like.
 
2013-03-21 10:58:01 PM  

kab: JasonOfOrillia: kevinboehm: So it's like an HBO-only version of Netflix?  I'd probably check it out.

I think HBO wants to become Netflix before Netflix becomes HBO.

I think it's too late for that, but who knows....


It can take a longtime to develop a new TV show. House of Cards, for example, was first announced in March 2011. So it's going to be a longtime until Netflix has anywhere near as much original content as HBO.

And HBO has been picking up the pace. Not only have they been doing more original movies with actors and directors that normally do Hollywood films, such as the Phil Specter movie with Pachino, directed by David Mamet, and the Liberace bio-epic with Douglas, Damon and Soderbergh.
 
2013-03-21 11:01:46 PM  

thornhill: RexTalionis: thornhill: TuteTibiImperes: naughtyrev: So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"

Not per episode, they're looking at a monthly subscription model.  All in all it's not a bad idea.  $15 per month or so could net them a lot of subscribers, and it might encourage them to make sure they always have a hit series running instead of the current situation where there are sometimes several month droughts between when one ends and a new one begins.

If the service is the same as HBO GO -- all episodes of old shows and all movies in rotation available -- that's a huge amount of content outside of the new shows. It's also going to be years until Netflix offers the same number of original shows.

And it'll take HBO years before they can offer this kind of service. At which point, Netflix's exclusive first run deal with Disney would've kicked into high gear.

Why would it take years? The product, HBO GO, is finished. They've gone as far as making it available on tablets, smart phones, streaming devices like Roku, and gaming consoles -- so in other words, it has the same possible level of market penetration as Netflix and Amazon Prime.

I imagine that holdup is pricing and fear of cannibalizing home video sales. HBO spends hundreds of millions just to produce original content (not just TV shows, but movies and documentaries). They likely need to charge more than $10 a month, but feel that it cannot be substantially more than what Netflix and Amazon charge. Further, one of the ways HBO is able to turn a profit on their shows is through home video sales. Game of Thrones Season 1, for instance, did over $30 million in DVDs just in 2012 (so that doesn't include Blu-ray sales); it's hard to imagine that many people would keep buying HBO shows on home video when they're all available on demand via streaming.


Their current agreements with the cable providers restrict them from offering a standalone offering like this. Cable providers, you see, don't want to have HBO compete with them for a revenue stream that they currently have exclusive monopoly over with their customers. At the very least, they need to wait a few years when the agreements come up for renegotiation before they can offer such a standalone plan.
 
2013-03-21 11:05:19 PM  
At $15 a month ($200/yr for those bad at maths), I'd rather use that cash to buy whatever shows or movies I want on DVD/bluray.

I will end up saving money and not have yet another monthly bill that must be up kept just to keep access to my content.

Lets say you want game of thrones. You can get it for around $38 for season 2. 48 if you really have to have blu-ray. And then you have it, forever. No needing to upkeep a subscription. Heck, when you get bored with it, or rip a quality copy, you can resell it and recoup at least half the cost.

But, maybe you are looking forward to other shows, like maybe the upcoming American gods or dark tower works. Ok, even then you are looking at $150 yearly for those, or less depending on what they consider to be a season. That still leaves $50 to blow on various movie rentals or buys as long as you are decently smart.
 
2013-03-21 11:10:20 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: I didn't read the article but I'm sure this will piss off the cable companies.


All the more reason I'm for it.  I can't tell you how much better my life has been since cutting off Comcast.  Their customer service is about as good as shouting at a brick wall.
 
2013-03-21 11:28:20 PM  
Awesome. We had to cut back right in the middle of Boardwalk Empire season 2. So, Go subscribers: are The Wire and Deadwood back seasons available as well? I... kinda... never saw them.
 
2013-03-21 11:29:16 PM  
Brilliant.  this is why they get paid the big bucks.  I'm surprised no-one thought of this until now.
 
2013-03-21 11:36:17 PM  

msupf: At $15 a month ($200/yr for those bad at maths), I'd rather use that cash to buy whatever shows or movies I want on DVD/bluray.

I will end up saving money and not have yet another monthly bill that must be up kept just to keep access to my content.

Lets say you want game of thrones. You can get it for around $38 for season 2. 48 if you really have to have blu-ray. And then you have it, forever. No needing to upkeep a subscription. Heck, when you get bored with it, or rip a quality copy, you can resell it and recoup at least half the cost.

But, maybe you are looking forward to other shows, like maybe the upcoming American gods or dark tower works. Ok, even then you are looking at $150 yearly for those, or less depending on what they consider to be a season. That still leaves $50 to blow on various movie rentals or buys as long as you are decently smart.


You just have to wait for the DVD/Blu-Ray to come out.  Depending on how badly you need to see something as it airs, that could be an option.
 
2013-03-21 11:40:10 PM  
a lot of people on Twitter are jumping at the concept that HBO could be packaged with Internet fees

No, PLEASE, do NOT do that. I wouldn't mind paying $20 a month for HBO, but PLEASE do NOT make me pay my ISP for it.

Be independent HBO. I'll gladly pay you $20 a month to watch Game of Thrones, Boardwalk Empire, Angry Boys and whatever other shiat you come up with, but I will NOT pay you via Comcast.

Comcast has worn out its welcome and I want them to die a slow painful death even though I'm not holding out much hope for it.
 
2013-03-21 11:40:13 PM  

JosephFinn: megalynn44: fark. I'm an HBO subscriber and I still can't get HBO GO.

Screw you, Cable One!!

You too, DirecTV!


you too, paul bunyan television!

yeah, that's an actual thing.
 
2013-03-21 11:40:50 PM  

JosephFinn: megalynn44: fark. I'm an HBO subscriber and I still can't get HBO GO.

Screw you, Cable One!!

You too, DirecTV!


DirecTV has it. You need to try harder.
 
2013-03-21 11:49:09 PM  

kevinboehm: I would rather have Showtime, because I am so far behind on Dexter, but... beggars can't be choosers.


Meh - I'm 2 seasons behind on Dexter. I never saw it until last summer and I paid Blockbuster $20 a month for 2 months and I burned through every available DVD of that show very quickly.

I'm not going to let Comcast hold it hostage. I can wait for it. And I will wait for it.

Just like I'll wait for the latest season of Boardwalk Empire which I actually like better.
 
2013-03-21 11:50:11 PM  

TuteTibiImperes: kevinboehm: So it's like an HBO-only version of Netflix?  I'd probably check it out.

I believe HBO sort of owns Cinemax as well, so perhaps that content would come along for the ride.


I would easily shell out Netflix or Hulu rates for HBO content. At some point, these companies are going to have to realize that not everyone wants a damn cable bill. Period. Screw the per view, just give us a subscription service that is worth it. Otherwise, folks will wait until the content hits Netflix, or hits the stores, or worse, hits the Internet anyway. At least if you control the distribution, you will see some profit.
 
2013-03-21 11:51:35 PM  
I enjoy masturbating to images of women that are partially or compley unclothed. HBO programming helps me with this.
 
2013-03-21 11:52:26 PM  
If they were smart, they'd work with Amazon and Netflix to establish an HBO content package on top of what's already available rather than create a boutique streaming service.

I already have 2 different streaming services, I don't want yet another interface and I sure as hell don't want one that doesn't have a 10 foot experience.
 
2013-03-21 11:54:22 PM  

Superjoe: JosephFinn: megalynn44: fark. I'm an HBO subscriber and I still can't get HBO GO.

Screw you, Cable One!!

You too, DirecTV!

DirecTV has it. You need to try harder.


not on roku. Ways around it, sure. still annoying
 
2013-03-21 11:55:36 PM  
I don't even HAVE cable and I use HBO GO.

Of course, I use a co-worker's login, but that's beside the point.  Yes, he gave it to me.

If you're way into their original stuff, then it should be worth it.

As far as the other choices it offers, I was actually a tad disappointed. There's some good flicks, and stand up stuff.  It is kind of like when you're in a hotel, and they have /blink FREE HBO /blink.  You flip through the lil guide pamphlet in your room, and you're kind of like, "meh".  A few good flicks, lots of old/don't care flicks.  A ton of stand up specials, but many of them are gloriously old.  Like Ellen with a girl hair-do old.  And, there's a shiat ton of boxing stuff of course.  Again, meh.  And a smattering of softcore flicks and their silly Taxicab Confessions shows and the like.

If I was a full-on paying customer, AND got HBO GO, it would be nice added value.

If they offered it stand-alone, I wouldn't pay more than five bucks a month.

Netflix iz teh dum for not taking "re-loadable" cards, BTW.  I would have bucked up for that months ago, but I guess you have to have a bank account.  From a "bank" bank.
 
2013-03-22 12:03:40 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: kevinboehm: So it's like an HBO-only version of Netflix?  I'd probably check it out.

I believe HBO sort of owns Cinemax as well, so perhaps that content would come along for the ride.


Which would be great because Banshee and Strike Back are two of my favourite guilty pleasures.
 
2013-03-22 12:08:33 AM  

timujin: I've already decided to get rid of cable when I move, to just go with Netflix.  However, I'd add this to my monthly budget if it comes through.


Got rid of cable during my last move about 3 years ago with the same idea. Never got around to it and don't miss it. I've rented the occasional movie at the local market and that's about it.
Go out and be creative. You get so much more out of it.
 
2013-03-22 12:08:37 AM  

carnifex2005: I believe HBO sort of owns Cinemax as well


Not sort of.  They be on the same team.  Showtime and The Movie Channel are a tandem as such, too.  Or, they were...is there still Movie Channel?
 
2013-03-22 12:10:15 AM  

Mr. Eugenides: If they were smart, they'd work with Amazon and Netflix to establish an HBO content package on top of what's already available rather than create a boutique streaming service.

I already have 2 different streaming services, I don't want yet another interface and I sure as hell don't want one that doesn't have a 10 foot experience.


Genius
 
2013-03-22 12:13:39 AM  
RTFA

Do it. You all sound like goddam morons.

Except for spacemanjones,
he has exhibited a remarkable amount of intelligence and wisdom on this subject and I thank him for his contributions.
 
2013-03-22 12:15:14 AM  
Or they could just post new episodes to Amazon, like many of the other cable networks already do.
 
2013-03-22 12:15:30 AM  

spacemanjones: I enjoy masturbating to images of women that are partially or compley unclothed. HBO programming helps me with this.


Dear HBO: Bring back Dream On. It's not like Brian Benben is doing anything these days.
 
2013-03-22 12:22:50 AM  
$15 per month?  But I'm currently getting HBO for $9 per month.
 
2013-03-22 12:25:52 AM  
People stream online because it's cheaper and more convenient. They wont get many people to cough up $10-$15 a month when services like Hulu are free and Netflix/Amazon Prime cost only $5 a month. Even if they put up every show they own, old and new, once people watch all those not many are going to keep paying that kind of money to watch the three or four decent shows they have.

I've been using Hulu for about 5 years now and I've never wanted for something to watch. My current queue is over 300 shows and try as I may, I can never seem to get it down.
 
2013-03-22 01:03:25 AM  
Telos:
That would actually be a bit much.  NetFlix is less, has it's own original content AND tons of movies.  Same with HuLu.  Price needs to be less than $10/month, probably around the $5/month range if they only offer HBO Content.

This is why some of you would never, ever, be put in charge of a company.
 
2013-03-22 01:17:11 AM  

AdolfOliverPanties: I didn't read the article but I'm sure this will piss off the cable companies.


Anything that hurts Comcast is a good thing.
 
2013-03-22 01:30:59 AM  

JosephFinn: megalynn44: fark. I'm an HBO subscriber and I still can't get HBO GO.

Screw you, Cable One!!

You too, DirecTV!


Um, you get hbo go with directv
 
2013-03-22 01:37:31 AM  
I was a rabid fan of Real Time with Bill Maher, but refuse to pay $90 a month for DirecTV when I watched only a handful of shows. I'm hoping they do this.
 
2013-03-22 01:42:56 AM  
The article seemed to imply that it would only be available if your internet provider was in fact a cable company, so it still kinda blows.
 
2013-03-22 01:46:06 AM  
Don't start getting wet over this yet. It will be years before this happens and HBO is going to have to pay off providers to let it happen, so the price is going to be more than the $10-15/month they are talking about.
 
2013-03-22 01:54:50 AM  
I pay for the second or third highest uverse option now.

15 is too much for just hbo.

If I break down my cable bill by channel watched in my household I should be paying like a couple bucks per channel.

I MIGHT pay fifteen bucks a month for full current access to HBO and be able download all their old content for keeps. To keep people from only signing up once every couple months they could have a timedlay before older content became download available or something.

It isn't like OZ is selling dvds anymore.

But instead of a good system i pay my brazillion a month so I can have some flipping options when bored, then pirate 70+% of my television content. Oh, and iirc most of my pay goes to cable companies and sports channels. So umm, nice work all you other stations.
 
2013-03-22 03:09:59 AM  

stewbert: rugman11: L.D. Ablo: They should sell season packages to a show or individual episodes.  HBO has some crap that I won't pay for.

And this is why a la carte models are always such a struggle.  Some people can never be satisfied.

Networks offered a la carte - "We want individual shows"
Individual shows offered a la carte - "We want individual seasons"
Individual seasons offered a la carte - "We want individual episodes"
Individual episodes offered a la carte - "It's too expensive to buy individual episodes.  Give us cheaper seasons"

Also:  http://www.amazon.com/Game-Thrones-Destinations-Season-2/dp/B00AN0K5K W /ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1363915694&sr=8-4&keywords=game+of+thrones

That's so passe. We want individual scenes. Damnit, I have 1st amendment rights!


America demands GoT gifs!
 
2013-03-22 03:14:47 AM  

ReapTheChaos: They wont get many people to cough up $10-$15 a month


They do right now, on top of a cable package. HBO currently gets $7 per subscriber per month, after the cable company's cut. I don't see any reason they would need to charge less than they do currently.

That's not to say they couldn't have more customers at $5/month than at $15/month (though whether or not that works out to a net increase in revenue is anybody's guess), but to say people won't pay $15/month for HBO ignores existing evidence.
 
2013-03-22 03:21:35 AM  
This will work, depending entirely on how good the programming is.

Would I pay $15 a month, for the months when new episodes of 'Game of Thrones' are aired?  Oh HELL yeah!

But if the rest of the programming isn't as good, then I won't continue past that point.
 
2013-03-22 04:21:01 AM  
ch131.so
 
2013-03-22 04:33:50 AM  
People will still steal it
 
2013-03-22 04:56:42 AM  

RatMaster999: FTFA: "But that $10-$15 per month figure thrown out by HBO is awful low. "

Low?  No its not.  That's about right.  Netflix streaming is only about $8/month.  Why would I pay more than twice that for a single channel's worth of programing?  $10/month sounds pretty reasonable to me.  Maybe $15/month if they start making more good shows, rather than just running movies.


Right now it's $5 to $20 bucks a month thru Comcast depending on the promotions.
 
2013-03-22 05:12:05 AM  

naughtyrev: So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"


shut up and take my money.jpg
 
2013-03-22 06:08:10 AM  
I'd prefer to not have yet another online account/subscription just to legally access shows & movies, but I'm still interested.

/Just get into bed with netflix already, you know your fanbase will follow suite
 
2013-03-22 07:34:10 AM  

impaler: naughtyrev: So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"

They will be the richest company on the planet if they do.


Both of these.
 
2013-03-22 08:03:52 AM  
The "cut the cord" discussion happened in my house just last night, and HBO/HBOGO were a big part of that discussion, so seeing an article like this was a welcome thing this morning.

I have HBO and Showtime, and after analyzing my family's viewing habits, I've come to the conclusion that with the exception of some kids programming, there's no reason not to dump our satellite package.  We have a History Channel that doesn't have history-related programming (which we used to watch regularly), a Biography Channel that doesn't have biographies, not one but two channels from Music Television that don't play music, and not less than FIFTEEN home shopping channels, which we've blocked out.  And our bill is around $130/month.  The only show I watch religiously but haven't found accessible online (because I've not looked; I'm sure it's out there) is The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson on CBS.

Meanwhile, I stream Netflix at $8/month and get more value from it.  If HBO is getting $7 per subscriber, there's absolutely no reason they couldn't sell HBOGO at a $9.99 price point and make money.  And the cable/satellite providers aren't going anywhere - even with a declining market share, they have to have marquee programming to sell.
 
2013-03-22 08:30:19 AM  
I cut the cord awhile ago, stream through either my xbox or my roku. I will say this, if HBO go opens up to non cable subscribers?

cdn.overclock.net
 
2013-03-22 08:55:34 AM  
Don't know if I should let the cat out of the bag or not, but when I installed HBOGO on my Xbox I don't remember putting my Dish login info in, and it works just fine for me......

/ymmv
 
2013-03-22 08:59:05 AM  

naughtyrev: So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"


[shutupandtakemymoney.jpg]

I'd gladly buy an HBO subscription if it allows them to make monies off good quality shows (that aren't subject to the paradoxical censoring of US networks..)

As one of my peeps who don't purchase cable/satellite, I'm always enthusiastic when I see a-la-carte models (at least, per channel if not per show) being pushed forward.
 
2013-03-22 09:21:20 AM  
cable is so awful. TV is so awful. Why anyone PAYS MONEY to have a box that pipes advertising into your life is beyond me.

quitting tv is like any other addiction, like sodas or smoking or something. you miss it like hell for a bit then you stop missing it... then after a while you think "man why did i ever have that shiat in my life in the first place".

my roommate before my wife had 2 tvs which he never turned off... never ending low volume noise of ESPN in my life for 2 years. never got cable again after he left, and the peace its provided is so nice. if i wanna watch something, i'll netflix or apple tv it. the only thing i really kinda miss is hockey... but the hockey games were so filled with commercials i hardly liked watching those any more either.

in short, everyone should cut the cord. tv is awful.
 
2013-03-22 09:25:10 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: naughtyrev: So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"

Not per episode, they're looking at a monthly subscription model.  All in all it's not a bad idea.  $15 per month or so could net them a lot of subscribers, and it might encourage them to make sure they always have a hit series running instead of the current situation where there are sometimes several month droughts between when one ends and a new one begins.


That's what I pay now.

/not getting rid of cable.
//EVER!
 
2013-03-22 09:38:32 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: naughtyrev: So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"

Not per episode, they're looking at a monthly subscription model.  All in all it's not a bad idea.  $15 per month or so could net them a lot of subscribers, and it might encourage them to make sure they always have a hit series running instead of the current situation where there are sometimes several month droughts between when one ends and a new one begins.


So they're still doing it wrong.  You really think they're going to get people who are already paying for Cable, paying for internet, paying for Hulu, paying for Netflix, to pay more than the latter two services to watch Game of Thrones?
 
2013-03-22 09:39:40 AM  

dehehn: TuteTibiImperes: naughtyrev: So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"

Not per episode, they're looking at a monthly subscription model.  All in all it's not a bad idea.  $15 per month or so could net them a lot of subscribers, and it might encourage them to make sure they always have a hit series running instead of the current situation where there are sometimes several month droughts between when one ends and a new one begins.

So they're still doing it wrong.  You really think they're going to get people who are already paying for Cable, paying for internet, paying for Hulu, paying for Netflix, to pay more than the latter two services to watch Game of Thrones?


FTM
 
2013-03-22 09:43:57 AM  
I've been thinking about dropping HBO but GOT is about to restart and I don't want to miss it.  Most of the time there is nothing worth watching on HBO.  They don't even show decent movies anymore.

Also, one of the reasons I have cable is picture quality.  My ignorance is boundless as far as what is available online and whether the quality of sound and picture will live up to cable.  I'd like to cut the cord but I also want to watch in HD.  I guess my rambling point is that I'm too lazy to search out my options.
 
2013-03-22 09:55:39 AM  
About time. HBO was our first 'premium' cable channel in the 1970s, fahgodsake, and it's nice to see them taking some kind of ersatz lead on this. I don't have cable/satellite, and will drop cash on this and a few other select channels the instant they become legal.
 
2013-03-22 09:59:21 AM  
PLEASE HBO!  Make the move, set the trend, push forward the internet to kill off TV!
 
2013-03-22 10:10:27 AM  

Smackledorfer: I pay for the second or third highest uverse option now.

15 is too much for just hbo.

If I break down my cable bill by channel watched in my household I should be paying like a couple bucks per channel.


And this, right here, is the perfect example of why, for the vast majority of people, cable bundling is a good thing.
 
2013-03-22 10:11:43 AM  
Okay, since I work for Time Warner Cable, I feel that I need to say my piece here.  I do think this is a good plan by HBO and it will make it vastly easier to get people to increase their standard internet speeds.  Normally HBO costs about $14 per month in this area, with Cinemax or Showtime it is $11.98 or something.  I think if they kept to that or cheaper for HBO Go, it would be worthwhile and even stackable with Max Go (Cinemax's version).  The only problem I see is this could give HBO a reason to slow content to Go if they wanted (going to the two week lull on new episodes like you see for On Demand content).

The cable cutters are going to cut their cable no matter what.  The college students that simply have internet service will live through Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime, and (if this plan goes through) HBO Go.  Forward thinking cable companies simply need to use this information to finally get channel providers to lower their prices in negotiation, focus on high speed data packages and put down the infrastructure to make it consistent (lived in MN and dealt with Comcast garbage before coming to New York), and work on finding ways to increase service on cable packages (so the people who do have cable do not simply sit and wish they only had High Speed Data).

/end armchair CEO
 
2013-03-22 10:16:39 AM  

rugman11: And this, right here, is the perfect example of why, for the vast majority of people, cable bundling is a good thing.


For a large portion yes, but a vast growing number of us are finding that we can get the content we want, when we want, and for less by cutting the cord.

One thing I tell people too, is that once you finally cut that cord and take the leap your viewing habits change. We used to just have the TV on, it was always on, even just in the background. And we'd channel surf and find something that often would just be on in the background. No more anymore.

Now when we watch TV, we actually watch TV. Meaning we are watching with purpose. We stream internet music when the TV is just on in the background and ultimately you know what? We find ourselves actually watching TV less and spending more time doing other things.

Ohh and I've found Im actually pirating less content too. This is mostly because that 70 dollars I saved by cutting the cord, I don't feel so bad about spending 4 bucks for something that catches my eye on VUDU or Amazon.

It won't be the dominate for awhile, but the new model is here and its awesome.
 
2013-03-22 10:33:12 AM  
I would sign up since I do not have cable TV service. I do get HBO Go now, because I am using the login info. of a friend who has HBO service.
 
2013-03-22 10:45:09 AM  

KatjaMouse: Awesome. We had to cut back right in the middle of Boardwalk Empire season 2. So, Go subscribers: are The Wire and Deadwood back seasons available as well? I... kinda... never saw them.


Yep! Most of their older original content is available. The only series I've noticed they're missing is Carnivale. (There could be more, but they have all the stuff I wanted to see: Boardwalk, Rome, The Sopranos, The Wire, Deadwood, Oz, Big Love, Generation Kill, etc.) They're also pretty good about posting new stuff right after it airs on the east coast.

This is pretty much tailor made for someone like me. The only reason I subscribe to cable is HBO; I have the lowest tier possible plus HBO. And I don't even watch HBO on my TV! I use Go all day at work to marathon through series and documentaries.
 
2013-03-22 10:51:47 AM  

thornhill: it's hard to imagine that many people would keep buying HBO shows on home video when they're all available on demand via streaming.


Did people stop buying CDs when songs became readily available via iTunes and Amazon and Pandora and such? And if they did, was that a net gain or loss for the content provider?
 
2013-03-22 10:52:38 AM  

chi_tino: zobear: HBO could make a shiatton of money and people wouldn't steal Game of Thrones as much?

The first two seasons of Game of Thrones are already available right now as part of my Netflix DVD plan.


I'm amused by your use of the word "already". It takes nearly a year after the season finales to release the DVDs. That is a long ass time of avoiding spoilers and not being able to talk to anyone about it.

I stopped pirating things years ago...except Game of Thrones because there is currently no convenient way to watch it unless you pay a shiat ton for a bunch of other channels you don't want. (And for the record, I later bought the Blu-Ray sets when they came out).
 
2013-03-22 10:55:10 AM  

Profedius: I would sign up since I do not have cable TV service. I do get HBO Go now, because I am using the login info. of a friend who has HBO service.


Quit violating the terms of service, dammit. The login is clearly legally not transferrable.
 
2013-03-22 11:18:35 AM  

Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: TuteTibiImperes: naughtyrev: So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"

Not per episode, they're looking at a monthly subscription model.  All in all it's not a bad idea.  $15 per month or so could net them a lot of subscribers, and it might encourage them to make sure they always have a hit series running instead of the current situation where there are sometimes several month droughts between when one ends and a new one begins.

I steal HBO GO right now. I'd gladly pay them for it because I think people should be paid for creating content. I just really don't want to pay AT&T $100 a month and have to surf through 5,000 channels of Spanish and Jesus programming to see Game of Thrones.


This.
 
2013-03-22 11:32:01 AM  
I don't care what HBO does as long as I can see Boardwalk Empire.
 
2013-03-22 11:33:50 AM  

SurfaceTension: thornhill: it's hard to imagine that many people would keep buying HBO shows on home video when they're all available on demand via streaming.

Did people stop buying CDs when songs became readily available via iTunes and Amazon and Pandora and such? And if they did, was that a net gain or loss for the content provider?


Actually, yes, they did.  And it was a terrible loss.

static2.businessinsider.com

Note that album sales peak in 1998-1999 right after digital downloading became popular and continued declining after the launch of iTunes and other legal download avenues.  The average American used to buy almost 4 CDs per year.  They now buy 1.  And note, also, that digital sales haven't even come close to making up for that lost revenue because most people buy digital singles, not digital albums.  And when more than 90% of your revenue comes from album sales (as was the case with the music industry before 2003) that's a big deal.

The demise of the music industry has happened also entirely thanks to the unbundling of merchandise, moving from an album-based model to a single-based model.  And it's resulted in a 64% decline in revenue.
 
2013-03-22 11:39:55 AM  

browntimmy: chi_tino: zobear: HBO could make a shiatton of money and people wouldn't steal Game of Thrones as much?

The first two seasons of Game of Thrones are already available right now as part of my Netflix DVD plan.

I'm amused by your use of the word "already". It takes nearly a year after the season finales to release the DVDs. That is a long ass time of avoiding spoilers and not being able to talk to anyone about it.

I stopped pirating things years ago...except Game of Thrones because there is currently no convenient way to watch it unless you pay a shiat ton for a bunch of other channels you don't want. (And for the record, I later bought the Blu-Ray sets when they came out).


If only there were a way to figure out what happens in the next season of Game of Thrones...

/thpoilerth!!!!
 
2013-03-22 11:43:16 AM  
For those who want a la carte, there IS an option, but the channel selection is limited, there's no HBO, and you need a 8' dish connected to an old receiver that only outputs SD.

http://www.programming-center.net/pdfs/H2HPricing.pdf
 
2013-03-22 11:45:00 AM  

RexTalionis: Profedius: I would sign up since I do not have cable TV service. I do get HBO Go now, because I am using the login info. of a friend who has HBO service.

Quit violating the terms of service, dammit. The login is clearly legally not transferrable.


How about not a chance of that happening.
 
2013-03-22 11:58:12 AM  

L.D. Ablo: They should sell season packages to a show or individual episodes.  HBO has some crap that I won't pay for.


You can already do this with many series using Amazon On Demand. I'm able to watch Mad Men and Breaking Bad without having cable.
 
2013-03-22 12:13:24 PM  

Tigger: AdolfOliverPanties: I didn't read the article but I'm sure this will piss off the cable companies.

Anything that hurts Comcast is a good thing.


The cable companies (Comcast included) are already starting to reposition themselves for the decline of revenues from traditional cable TV service.  Heck, they even have part of a model to work from - the death of long distance phone revenues.  They can at least study what didn't work there and try something else.

Let's face the fact that TV, just like voice services, is an application that runs on a network.  Instead of confusing the customer into thinking they are buying the application, just sell them the network.  Better for everyone in the long run.  Let the content owners deal with having to market their content - and price it.  Will make for better results in the long run, as good stuff will get the money and the dreck will be canceled as it should be, as it can't generate any kind of revenue stream at all.
 
2013-03-22 12:16:44 PM  

impaler: naughtyrev: So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"

They will be the richest company on the planet if they do.


No, not really. While Game of Thrones gets a lot of love here on Fark, there are vast numbers of people who don't like it. Hell I tried to read the first book in that series after HBO started showing their episodes and quickly realized it was another piece of shiat book from George RR Martin, who I have never liked as an author.
 
2013-03-22 12:23:54 PM  
The only reason I have cable is for HBO so I would totally sign up for this.  Oh, and HODOR!
 
2013-03-22 12:24:35 PM  
HBO's got what I crave.

I'd ditch cable for them.  I already can get most of Comedy Central through their website.  Sports I can just head to a sports bar.  Neflix and Amazon provide me with movies.
 
2013-03-22 01:32:59 PM  
I would dump my shiatty Cable One service in a heartbeat for this. Get me HBO GO, and Showtime Go and I have no need for Cable again.
 
2013-03-22 01:35:03 PM  

Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: TuteTibiImperes: naughtyrev: So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"

Not per episode, they're looking at a monthly subscription model.  All in all it's not a bad idea.  $15 per month or so could net them a lot of subscribers, and it might encourage them to make sure they always have a hit series running instead of the current situation where there are sometimes several month droughts between when one ends and a new one begins.

I steal HBO GO right now. I'd gladly pay them for it because I think people should be paid for creating content. I just really don't want to pay AT&T $100 a month and have to surf through 5,000 channels of Spanish and Jesus programming to see Game of Thrones.


$42 a season on itunes
 
2013-03-22 02:02:13 PM  

rugman11: SurfaceTension: thornhill: it's hard to imagine that many people would keep buying HBO shows on home video when they're all available on demand via streaming.

Did people stop buying CDs when songs became readily available via iTunes and Amazon and Pandora and such? And if they did, was that a net gain or loss for the content provider?

Actually, yes, they did.  And it was a terrible loss.

[static2.businessinsider.com image 618x416]

Note that album sales peak in 1998-1999 right after digital downloading became popular and continued declining after the launch of iTunes and other legal download avenues.  The average American used to buy almost 4 CDs per year.  They now buy 1.  And note, also, that digital sales haven't even come close to making up for that lost revenue because most people buy digital singles, not digital albums.  And when more than 90% of your revenue comes from album sales (as was the case with the music industry before 2003) that's a big deal.

The demise of the music industry has happened also entirely thanks to the unbundling of merchandise, moving from an album-based model to a single-based model.  And it's resulted in a 64% decline in revenue.


And every single network exec and cable exec wakes up in a cold sweat w/ this graph over their head. Sports commissioners should also be worried. How much would the NFL have to charge if they sold all of their games a la carte?
 
2013-03-22 02:15:34 PM  
images2.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2013-03-22 02:36:10 PM  

legion_of_doo: browntimmy: chi_tino: zobear: HBO could make a shiatton of money and people wouldn't steal Game of Thrones as much?

The first two seasons of Game of Thrones are already available right now as part of my Netflix DVD plan.

I'm amused by your use of the word "already". It takes nearly a year after the season finales to release the DVDs. That is a long ass time of avoiding spoilers and not being able to talk to anyone about it.

I stopped pirating things years ago...except Game of Thrones because there is currently no convenient way to watch it unless you pay a shiat ton for a bunch of other channels you don't want. (And for the record, I later bought the Blu-Ray sets when they came out).

If only there were a way to figure out what happens in the next season of Game of Thrones...

/thpoilerth!!!!


I have no idea what the hell you were trying to say here. That I can find out what happens by reading the books? Thanks, that in no way addresses what I said.
 
2013-03-22 03:07:00 PM  

Father_Jack: cable is so awful. TV is so awful. Why anyone PAYS MONEY to have a box that pipes advertising into your life is beyond me.

quitting tv is like any other addiction, like sodas or smoking or something. you miss it like hell for a bit then you stop missing it... then after a while you think "man why did i ever have that shiat in my life in the first place".

my roommate before my wife had 2 tvs which he never turned off... never ending low volume noise of ESPN in my life for 2 years. never got cable again after he left, and the peace its provided is so nice. if i wanna watch something, i'll netflix or apple tv it. the only thing i really kinda miss is hockey... but the hockey games were so filled with commercials i hardly liked watching those any more either.

in short, everyone should cut the cord. tv is awful.


Agreed. I cut the cord four months ago, purchased a Roku box, subscribed to Amazon Prime, Netflix, NHL Gamecenter Live and MLBtv to take care of my viewing interest needs. I got rid of phone service from Comcast in favor of a Google phone number along with a OBi100, which gives me free unlimited calls to the USA and Canada. The net savings is $120 per month along with the satisfaction of not paying for an endless supply of crappy shows and obnoxious commercials. I couldn't be happier with this setup.
 
2013-03-22 03:09:31 PM  

Mr. Eugenides: If they were smart, they'd work with Amazon and Netflix to establish an HBO content package on top of what's already available rather than create a boutique streaming service.

I already have 2 different streaming services, I don't want yet another interface and I sure as hell don't want one that doesn't have a 10 foot experience.


I recently bought a Roku. There are a lot of different streaming services and none of them seem to be teaming up with each other, but they have teamed up with Roku. It's one very small device that offers a lot of things. Why should HBO bundle itself with Netflix?

I'm sure HBO considers itself to be very different from Netflix. Their one flaw is that you still have to have cable (or satellite) to get HBO.

23FPB23: I don't even HAVE cable and I use HBO GO.

Of course, I use a co-worker's login, but that's beside the point.  Yes, he gave it to me.
.


And this is why we can't have nice things - because assholes like you will just steal them.
 
2013-03-22 04:30:09 PM  

SurfaceTension: thornhill: it's hard to imagine that many people would keep buying HBO shows on home video when they're all available on demand via streaming.

Did people stop buying CDs when songs became readily available via iTunes and Amazon and Pandora and such? And if they did, was that a net gain or loss for the content provider?


That's apples and oranges. Right now you can watch all episodes of all HBO series on HBO GO.

The equivalent with the music business would be if you paid a monthly subscription fee to Sony, for example, and in return, could listen to any of its songs on demand as many times as you wanted, whenever you anted.

So if Game of Thrones Season 2 has been available on HBO GO since it premiered last year, and it will be available on HBO GO indefinitely, I would think few pople who have access to HBO GO would have much of a reason to buy it on DVD/Blu-ray when it comes out this month.
 
2013-03-22 07:13:15 PM  

Happy Hours: Mr. Eugenides: If they were smart, they'd work with Amazon and Netflix to establish an HBO content package on top of what's already available rather than create a boutique streaming service.

I already have 2 different streaming services, I don't want yet another interface and I sure as hell don't want one that doesn't have a 10 foot experience.

I recently bought a Roku. There are a lot of different streaming services and none of them seem to be teaming up with each other, but they have teamed up with Roku. It's one very small device that offers a lot of things. Why should HBO bundle itself with Netflix?

I'm sure HBO considers itself to be very different from Netflix. Their one flaw is that you still have to have cable (or satellite) to get HBO.

23FPB23: I don't even HAVE cable and I use HBO GO.

Of course, I use a co-worker's login, but that's beside the point.  Yes, he gave it to me.
.

And this is why we can't have nice things - because assholes like you will just steal them.


YEAH!!! I also hoard ketchup and Taco Bell sauce packs, Sweet n Low packs, and I STEAL PUBLIC RESTROOM TISSUE!!!

BWAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAAA
 
2013-03-22 08:11:38 PM  

naugahyde monkey: JosephFinn: megalynn44: fark. I'm an HBO subscriber and I still can't get HBO GO.

Screw you, Cable One!!

You too, DirecTV!

Um, you get hbo go with directv


Sorry, I should be clearer, I meant how DirecTV blocks HBOGo on Roku.
 
2013-03-22 08:26:25 PM  
I would buy this for 10 weeks while GoT was on.  Actually I take that back.  I would buy this for long enough to watch series front to back of Sopranos, Oz, The Wire, etc.

Netflix really spoiled me as to how I watch TV series.  I'll put 4 episodes down a night depending on what Im doing.  I killed BSG in a month for instance.

I borrowed GoT seasons 1 and 2 on DVD and rewatched those in a week in preparation for season 3.  Now when Season 3 comes out I can only watch one episode a week of course...Nooooooooooo!  I'm almost tempted to let it go through and watch them all in 2 nights 2 months from now.
 
2013-03-22 08:51:55 PM  

JosephFinn: How about if DirecTV stops blocking HBOGo on Roku?


I can't tell you how much this pisses me off as well.
 
2013-03-22 10:40:09 PM  

browntimmy: That is a long ass time of avoiding spoilers and not being able to talk to anyone about it.


You....do realize how long the book series has been out for, right?


/would go for Go
 
2013-03-22 11:00:14 PM  
We have HBO simply for Game of Thrones.  We almost never watch it otherwise, though, so it would be nice to have something cheaper than premium cable just to see it.
 
2013-03-23 12:10:27 AM  

Happy Hours: Mr. Eugenides: If they were smart, they'd work with Amazon and Netflix to establish an HBO content package on top of what's already available rather than create a boutique streaming service.

I already have 2 different streaming services, I don't want yet another interface and I sure as hell don't want one that doesn't have a 10 foot experience.

I recently bought a Roku. There are a lot of different streaming services and none of them seem to be teaming up with each other, but they have teamed up with Roku. It's one very small device that offers a lot of things. Why should HBO bundle itself with Netflix?

I'm sure HBO considers itself to be very different from Netflix. Their one flaw is that you still have to have cable (or satellite) to get HBO.



They are, HBO is a content creator Netflix, like cable, is content delivery.  I'm sure HBO could do content delivery, but it's not their core business.  If they get into delivery, they are competing directly with their existing cable company customers and biting the hand that feeds them.
 
2013-03-23 01:32:54 AM  

Mr. Eugenides: Happy Hours: Mr. Eugenides: If they were smart, they'd work with Amazon and Netflix to establish an HBO content package on top of what's already available rather than create a boutique streaming service.

I already have 2 different streaming services, I don't want yet another interface and I sure as hell don't want one that doesn't have a 10 foot experience.

I recently bought a Roku. There are a lot of different streaming services and none of them seem to be teaming up with each other, but they have teamed up with Roku. It's one very small device that offers a lot of things. Why should HBO bundle itself with Netflix?

I'm sure HBO considers itself to be very different from Netflix. Their one flaw is that you still have to have cable (or satellite) to get HBO.


They are, HBO is a content creator Netflix, like cable, is content delivery.  I'm sure HBO could do content delivery, but it's not their core business.  If they get into delivery, they are competing directly with their existing cable company customers and biting the hand that feeds them.


Netflix is moving into content creation. House of Cards, for example.
 
2013-03-23 02:50:14 AM  

dumbobruni: Mr. Eugenides: Happy Hours: Mr. Eugenides: If they were smart, they'd work with Amazon and Netflix to establish an HBO content package on top of what's already available rather than create a boutique streaming service.

I already have 2 different streaming services, I don't want yet another interface and I sure as hell don't want one that doesn't have a 10 foot experience.

I recently bought a Roku. There are a lot of different streaming services and none of them seem to be teaming up with each other, but they have teamed up with Roku. It's one very small device that offers a lot of things. Why should HBO bundle itself with Netflix?

I'm sure HBO considers itself to be very different from Netflix. Their one flaw is that you still have to have cable (or satellite) to get HBO.


They are, HBO is a content creator Netflix, like cable, is content delivery.  I'm sure HBO could do content delivery, but it's not their core business.  If they get into delivery, they are competing directly with their existing cable company customers and biting the hand that feeds them.

Netflix is moving into content creation. House of Cards, for example.


Yeah - there is some overlap, but they are very different. Netflix is starting to create content. HBO has been doing it for a while. But both of them have been delivering other people's content for a long time - HBO much longer than Netflix, but still delivering other people's content.

HBO doesn't need Netflix to deliver their shiat. HBO already has HBO Go which right now is restricted to cable subscribers who also pay for HBO, but the infrastructure is there. It's a simple business decision for them to make and I'm not sure why they don't bypass the cable companies and just do it.

I'd pay $20 a month for HBO. That's a bit much, but that's what I was paying for HBO when I had cable TV. I understand other people pay $10-15. Whatever it costs I was sick of paying Comcast $160 every month. That did include internet, but it was still ridiculous especially when Comcast couldn't even deliver the service they promised.;

We seriously need some competition in the US. My only other option for internet is Century Link.

They flood TV with promises of $19.95 a month. Read the farking fine print. It's $19.95 a month IF you pay $45 a month for phone service.

There ought to be a law.
 
2013-03-23 10:22:42 AM  

rugman11: SurfaceTension: thornhill: it's hard to imagine that many people would keep buying HBO shows on home video when they're all available on demand via streaming.

Did people stop buying CDs when songs became readily available via iTunes and Amazon and Pandora and such? And if they did, was that a net gain or loss for the content provider?

Actually, yes, they did.  And it was a terrible loss.

[static2.businessinsider.com image 618x416]

Note that album sales peak in 1998-1999 right after digital downloading became popular and continued declining after the launch of iTunes and other legal download avenues.  The average American used to buy almost 4 CDs per year.  They now buy 1.  And note, also, that digital sales haven't even come close to making up for that lost revenue because most people buy digital singles, not digital albums.  And when more than 90% of your revenue comes from album sales (as was the case with the music industry before 2003) that's a big deal.

The demise of the music industry has happened also entirely thanks to the unbundling of merchandise, moving from an album-based model to a single-based model.  And it's resulted in a 64% decline in revenue.


Yeah, maybe... but that's because a lot of albums would have one good song and a ton of crappy ones.  If the music industry starts putting out more good songs, they will sell more songs.
 
Displayed 141 of 141 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report