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 33
    More: Obvious, HBO, executive directors, quality television, subscribers  
•       •       •

8404 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 21 Mar 2013 at 9:24 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-03-21 09:31:33 PM
4 votes:

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 08:05:23 PM
4 votes:
So HBO is going to be the premium channel that brings us ala carte TV.

I can respect that.
2013-03-21 07:57:44 PM
4 votes:

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.
2013-03-22 09:21:20 AM
2 votes:
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.
2013-03-21 09:42:54 PM
2 votes:
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 09:32:19 PM
2 votes:

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 08:14:34 PM
2 votes:

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 07:49:21 PM
2 votes:
So they finally actually are considering this. About time.
2013-03-22 11:33:50 AM
1 votes:

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 09:59:21 AM
1 votes:
PLEASE HBO!  Make the move, set the trend, push forward the internet to kill off TV!
2013-03-22 08:30:19 AM
1 votes:
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 08:03:52 AM
1 votes:
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 06:08:10 AM
1 votes:
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 12:15:30 AM
1 votes:

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 12:13:39 AM
1 votes:
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.
2013-03-21 11:52:26 PM
1 votes:
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 11:50:11 PM
1 votes:

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 10:47:42 PM
1 votes:

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 10:41:06 PM
1 votes:
You have my attention, HBO.
2013-03-21 10:40:39 PM
1 votes:

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.
kab
2013-03-21 10:32:20 PM
1 votes:

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 10:15:49 PM
1 votes:
Bottom line is HBO wants paid subscribers.  How they subscribe won't matter.
2013-03-21 10:09:10 PM
1 votes:

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 10:07:09 PM
1 votes:
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 09:48:59 PM
1 votes:
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 09:47:51 PM
1 votes:

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 09:45:29 PM
1 votes:

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 09:39:39 PM
1 votes:

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 09:29:46 PM
1 votes:
HBO could make a shiatton of money and people wouldn't steal Game of Thrones as much?
2013-03-21 08:57:55 PM
1 votes:
They should sell season packages to a show or individual episodes.  HBO has some crap that I won't pay for.
2013-03-21 08:22:49 PM
1 votes:
Ok, so I'm going to cancel cable the second this happens.
2013-03-21 07:44:28 PM
1 votes:

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 07:39:19 PM
1 votes:
So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"
 
Displayed 33 of 33 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report