Slashdot Mirror
HBO To Offer Online Streaming Without TV Subscription
An anonymous reader writes By now, everyone not living in total isolation knows that HBO has announced plans to offer content streaming in 2015 with no TV subscription requirements. Many wonder what took HBO so long to make this transition. Some speculate that the growing unpopularity of ISP giants has shifted bargaining power in HBO's favor. Others say that it's purely maths; there are more cord-cutters and more people willing to shell out money for specific content, as evidenced by Netflix surpassing HBO in earnings this year "despite Netflix having a smaller customer base". Whatever the reason, all are expecting this development to induce "more content providers to make their shows more readily available online".
This is bad news for ESPN, that gets several dollars out of every cable subscriber now.
IF they will give me episodes...
1) On their TV release date.
2) Of quality at least as good as cable feeds
3) In a usable non-DRM container which doesn't require a web browser
4) Charge no more than $5 per episode (even that is steep).
Then, HBO will get my five bucks. Otherwise they get zero. It's just that simple and I still suspect people fail at both math and psychology if they can't get this right.
obligatory theoatmeal, http://theoatmeal.com/comics/g...
..."stream breaks. Download episode via bittorrent in 3 1/2 minutes and enjoy.
A large portion of what I watch actually happens to come from HBO, but regardless I end up downloading the content like anything else. Classic example, I purchase a season of the Vikings from google play store in advance b/c I do not own cable but would like to watch the show legally (even a day late from when it aired). I get a notification that a new episode is available. I click play "Last week on Vik...." stream breaks. Hit replay, "Last wee...." stream breaks. Hit replay, "Last week on
I'm happy to pay for content, but make that shit work.
By now, everyone not living in total isolation knows that HBO has announced plans to offer content streaming in 2015 with no TV subscription requirements.
I like to think that I'm not in total isolation, I read online news (including Slashdot), occasionally check in to Facebook and Twitter, but I never heard this before.
I heard that all the cool kids are on Snapchat now - I suppose that's where this news broke?
This service will truly be tested once the next season of Game of Thrones comes on HBO. If they stay true to same-day airing, I think this service will take off. After that, the hardest part will be getting the cheapskates and frugal users of the world to switch to this from the free price they've been paying until this point in time.
Meow what do we have here?
Exactly this. Until it's easier to buy than to steal, they haven't got it right. Netflix is getting pretty close, but it's still not quite there (Unless I can store offline for viewing without a data connection... then Netflix has figured it out).
I spoke with the head of a local municipal cable provider years ago--he said the equipment could already handle a-la-cart programming--they just legally weren't allowed. Who wants 300 home shopping and prayer channels bundled just to get the 10 channels they really want--and to have to pay more for the privilege?
I think they'd have a much better subsriber uptake if they got rid of all the bundling "packages" crap and just let people buy what they want. Seems itunes proved that model *years* ago and the TV gods are just late for their short bus.
I like some of the prospects, and I cut my cord in favor of netfix (and ..other.. sources) long ago, but i do not want to pay HBO, ESPN, Showtime, netflix, Hulu and a dozen different providers either.
Silence is a state of mime.
Really this is what the merger was really about and having content abandon them couldn't be better.
Netflix 8$/month streaming
HBO $20/month tv + straming
HBO Subscribers >> Netflix
Who is actually profiting here ? The cable TV company
Net neutrality and isp choice => their death and there couldn't be more deserving entities for capitalism's creative destruction
And it's just in time for the end of net neutrality, so you can be sure your ISP will charge you a premium plan to access HBO online.
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
MGM, Universal, Sony, and all copyright owners should just make all their content watchable on their own websites. Instead of clicking to channel 24, I should click to channel mgm.com, paramount.com, or whatever.
This usage of a middleman like Netflix, where most content isn't even available, doesn't make sense to me.
I guess they would have to figure out how to inject ads in or around all their content, or standardize on OAuth Connect or something so I don't have to sign up on each website. They would also have to be happy with micropayments per show or very small monthly credit card charges. I can't sign up on all of them for $10 a month.
Who is actually profiting here ? The cable TV company
HBO is owned by Time Warner. Time Warner sells cable and makes a lot of money from people buying cable just to get HBO. Hence Time Warner has actively resisted HBO selling their content a la carte. Time Warner will make money either way - they've just been denying the sound of inevitability because the folks at the top fear change.
From what I've read, HBO is considering offering its service as an add-on for you ISP (who is often-times also your cable company). So, while this is slightly better, it's actually bad news because it's entirely possible and probable that ISPs will start bundling gold and platinum packages with HBO, Netflix, Hulu, whatever.
I don't know, I guess I could just see this going really badly even though it sounds like a good thing at the moment.
Wow, HBO wasn't whistling Dixie earlier this year when the new season of their most popular show was premiering and they insisted they were working diligently on making their content more available, between the Amazon deal and now this.
The reason is simple: because Game of Thrones.
While it's still not hitting Sopranos in traditional ratings, between the HBOGO and DVR ratings it's estimated it's audience right up there with the largest scripted TV network show right now (beating BBT) - if you factor in pirating it's easily the most watched scripted television show currently in production worldwide, period.
Not only that, but the merchandising is making HBO a bundle right now - they can afford to take this route. Truth be told, I doubt the cable companies cared much - HBO is a huge PITA for them post-GoT, because folks sign up for three months just to watch it then drop it, and they clog the phone centers with "retention" calls to a huge degree trying to worm free HBO out of them for whatever complaint (which usually gets you 3 months, same length as a season).
I'm not a white hat, but I'm not a "download everything free mwhahahaha world owes me anyway" type either. That said - this pretty much takes any "valid" excuse away from pirating the show - and those that still do so are really crapping on the content. I know it won't change most, or even many, folks doing this - but if ever there was a time to support something financially, it's here. The money paid to HBO for subscriptions pays for these shows and keeps them on the air. There are no commercials, no subsidizing with other network divisions, etc. - this is as "real" and direct as it gets for directly supporting traditional content.
FWIW, this was my final impetus. I've been ready to dump cable for two years now (and if you knew how much I love TV you would find the notion itself shocking), but in the end, it was ease of access to HBO, Dallas on TNT (which just got canned), and Nick at Night - besides the "it's already installed" convenience factor - that are why I hadn't cut yet. With HBO accessible on it's own, Nick at Night isn't going to cut it for $150/month. All told, once I get alternate internet, Hulu, HBO, TiVo, etc. I'm going to be paying more like $80 a month for content, which is just fine with me (especially since I can cut those bills if need be or desire wanes much easier than just having to get rid of everything like you do with cable).
So props to HBO for taking the leap - I'll be signing up on day one.
not in canada though, their deal with Bell precludes this option. Bell repackages HBO programming with Canadian content to meet CRTC rules (Canada's FCC). CBC reported today that no online content will be available in the near future (contract with Bell til Hell freezes over, no doubt)
The problems that could happen from content providers selling their services online can be irritating:
- One might choose flash, while the other silverlight, while the other HTML5, and yet another using an entirely different technology. (Though, this is the least extreme case.)
- Too many bills and such. Honestly, if I want to watch content from fifteen different providers online, am I going to have to have fifteen different bills and charges? And will this accumulation be more expensive than buying them as a whole?
- Who will provide them as a whole? Another cable/network provider? This puts us back to what we're trying to get out of.
Some good things to come from this:
- The really crappy content will finally be ignored, and providers that suck will fade into nothingness.
- New standards and technology. Demand without supply can drive innovation as others seek to profit from (or pillage) those demanding the product/services. It wouldn't take long for a new idea that will make it easier and better.
Not sure where the poster got their data, but HBO revenues are significantly higher than Netflix. Netflix 2014Q2 revenue was $838milion, HBO 2014Q2 revenue was $1.4billion. Netflix has more SUBSCRIBERS than HBO, but they make far less revenue, and are also far less profitable.
Netflix 2014Q2: http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/NFLX/3548772358x0x769748/9b21df7f-743c-4f0f-94da-9f13e384a3d2/July2014EarningsLetter_7.21.14_final.pdf
HBO 2014Q2: http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9MjQ1MzkzfENoaWxkSUQ9LTF8VHlwZT0z&t=1
$49/mo.
-OR-
Episodes ala-carte $2.49
SD / $2.99 720HD / $3.49 1080HD
-AVAILABLE-
Within 12 hours of air
Step 3: Profit.
THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
As long as they treat me as a first class media consumer i will be subscribing to this service during the new Game of Thrones seasons. Just to be clear, this means:
1. As soon as i would be able to watch it with a HBO subscription i need to have access to it in streaming format, if i can get it faster with a torrent released 2 hours afterwards this service will fail
2. I need to have at least 720p quality, giving me substandard video is not an option.
3. I'm fine with DRM assuming i'm able to use Firefox/chrome and flash/silverlight plugins, NO OTHER 3RD PARTY PLUGIN INSTALL PERIOD! **However if you try to pull HDCP Crap on me then i'm out, if netflix allows me to stream to a 42 inch DLP Via VGA you should be able to do it too!
4. Price is reasonable i would be fine in the $10-15/month price range
Now, please, stream to other countries (in Europe) and you directly get my money.
I hate having to wait for the DVD releases if I want good (legal) quality of the HBO stuff I like. What's wrong with earning money, HBO? Screw licenses in my country - you can get my money directly, without any middlemen.
I'm not sure what the relationship is between HBO and "HBO Nordic" but for the past year Denmark, Norway and Sweden have been able to buy access to HBO content through HBO Nordic. A web and streaming only service. Samsung SmartTVs, Android, IOS and more currently have an app. AppleTV and Chromecast being the two major platforms not supported. They promise HBO content within 12 hours of it airing in the states.
Hi, Please don't use British English in stories about America. Its almost as bad as the English-speaking Germans who insist on using the numerical formatting of continental Europe while writing in English.
Not sure if that relates to the story. It might.
It's interesting that my local cable monopoly, Time-Warner, has recently offered me cable for $30 per month, including HBO. We seriously considered it, but with the cost of renting the equipment, installation fees, and the fact that that price was good only for one year, we decided that torrents were still a better option. I would happily pay for HBOgo, as long as it's reasonably priced. Same goes for other so-called premium channels. A la carte cable would also be a nice option, but really, you can't beat having shows on demand. I work evenings, so the sit-in-front-of-the-TV-at-a-certain-time model doesn't work for me anyway.
-- sudon't
Air-ride Equipped
The big question is: what will stop your cable-providing-ISP from capping bandwidth when you stream HBO? To get around that, they need to go the BBC iPlayer route and allow time-bombed downloads. Of course you can dis-arm the 'feature' by simply renaming the file.
This sortof misses the point. Sure, it's create for people who only want HBO without cable, but those of us who want "unbundling" are really looking for specific programs. I don't want to subscribe to "The Discovery Channel." I just want Mythbusters. I don't want to subscribe to "Fox", I just want So You Think You Can Dance. I don't want to subscribe to HBO, I just want Game of Thrones.
I think, especially with DVRs, people have moved past a channel/network mentality and are in a per-show mentality, just like when we go to watch a movie, there's a specific movie we're aiming to see. No one goes to the theaters with the intention of watching the next great Paramount Pictures film*
Obviously, the networks don't want me to feel this way, but I'm long past caring about networks, and I don't think most people care about networks either.
*The big exception would be studios like Pixar, Dreamworks, Laika, Disney, where the filmmaking pool is shared among productions)
I wonder if this means HBO have come up with an "ingenious" method to prevent geo-unblocking? or maybe they don't care about that?
This all looks great! HBO and other providers going internet for a price. However, the cable companies will have the last laugh. Wait until HBO has their internet signal throttled just like Netflix and have to pay more (much more) for bandwidth. Until cable companies are recognized as common carriers just like the phone companies, they will still be in the drivers seat as to what we can watch.
My karma is bad. Don't get too close!!!
Let me guess: "This content is not available in your region" messages for anyone outside the US. :(
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.