Slashdot Mirror


Disney Will Price Streaming Service At $5 Per Month, Analyst Says (fiercecable.com)

Earlier this month, Disney announced it would end its distribution deal with Netflix and launch its own streaming service in 2019. Now, according to MoffettNathanson analyst Michael Nathanson, we have learned that Disney's new streaming service will be priced around $5 per month in order to drive wider adoption. FierceCable reports: Nathanson said that the new Disney streaming service and the upcoming ESPN streaming service need a clear distinction. The ESPN service will likely test different prices as it prepares ESPN to be ready to go fully over-the-top, according to the report, but the Disney service is about building asset value instead of taking licensing money from SVOD deals. At $5 per month in ARPU, Nathanson sees revenues from the Disney streaming service ranging from $34 million to $38 million in the first year and more than $230 million by year three. But with the loss of Netflix licensing revenues and accelerated marketing costs for launching the new service, Nathanson predicted Disney's losses will increase by about $200 million to $425 million per year. If Disney's new streaming service does end up costing around $5 per month, could you justify paying for it?

130 comments

  1. Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Disney movies, Star Wars, Pixar, Marvel, everything on the Disney channel?

    Disney wins. Netflix loses. We're done here.

    1. Re:Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by gfxguy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Depends... if you see most of the biggies in the theaters, then unless you like re-watching movies a lot, $60/year may not get you a lot. It's a very limited catalog compared to the bulk of what's out there. Of course, there's more than that... if they include all the Touchstone pictures, and they include their whole catalog and not just some limited selection every month (and if they stop "vaulting" the classics), then it certainly would be a clear win.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    2. Re:Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

      Disney movies, Star Wars, Pixar, Marvel, everything on the Disney channel?

      The previous rumors indicated Disney was exploring offering multiple streaming services, each of which would include only part of their catalog... I can't see that flying.

      If it's all rolled into one channel, they very well might be successful. I won't be buying it, though - they don't have that much content, and I already own most of the Disney/Pixar/etc. titles that I care about.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    3. Re:Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      C'mon, this is Disney we're talking here. For 5 bucks a month the best you can hope for is getting to see the old cartoons that are being rotated through the Disney channel.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re: Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Other than Star Wars, Disney is a waste of my money. Unless they're pumping out 4-5 Star Wars movies per year, I'll pass. See ya Disney, I was tired of super hero movies years ago and the rest never interested me.

    5. Re:Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. I won't give Disney one red cent directly, but I'll watch what I can on Netflix.

      Remember folks, Disney likes to "archive" movies so that they can "re-release" "extra-shiny-newest-half a second modified content-so-copyright-renews-bull-shit-release".
      They'll pull the same shit on this as well. You pay 5 bucks a month, one movie available, rotating every 3 months.

    6. Re:Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      How long until it goes full circle, everything diverges into separate subscriptions, people get tired of it, and someone has the amazing idea to bundle everything into one package and price to a purpose designed box connected to the TV that gives you a consistent experience. Oh snap, you already can!

    7. Re:Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by Wycliffe · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Disney movies, Star Wars, Pixar, Marvel, everything on the Disney channel?

      Disney wins. Netflix loses. We're done here.

      If it's their full catalog and they did away with the vault then yeah, $5 per month is a very good deal. My kids would be very content with only watching Pixar, Marvel, and Disney movies but considering that $5/month is cheaper than what it costs to add just the Disney Channel to most cable packages, I very seriously doubt it will be the full catalog. HBO charges $15/month for its content and doesn't have near the depth of Disney.

      It would be interesting to see what would happen if they did offer their entire IP for $5/month. I don't subscribe to any streaming services at the moment but I would pay for that and plenty of other parents would too.

    8. Re:Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      have you seen disney star wars, anything pixar post 1999, and 1 single program on the disney channel

      LOL

    9. Re:Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doubt it. I sincerely doubt it.

      5 USD per month is probably an introductory rate.

      Once they have you signed up they will start jacking up the price to make and more money from their antiquated library of has-been content.

    10. Re:Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by LostMyBeaver · · Score: 3, Informative

      My kids were not allowed to watch Disney Channel or cartoon network (with rare exceptions) for most of their childhood. Toon Disney was ok because it was things like Gummibears and Ducktales. But things like Hanna Montana and Two Kings (I think that's the name) or Wasabi Dojo etc... were all off limits.

      While this one rule wasn't enough to really shape their lives, my kids were almost famous among other parents for being the most well behaved and polite children in day care or school.

      The Disney Channel itself has one show after the next which glorifies being stupid, arrogant, popular, bossy, etc... There are multiple shows back to back that show that the people everyone loves most are the people with the worst judgement and loudest mouths.

      You would almost think that ESPN is paying Disney to make these shows to ensure they have a viewership later on.

    11. Re:Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by dave4 · · Score: 1

      I think this is more to do with you being the only parent who sets boundaries for their kids. Parents who let kids watch whatever are probably also going to be hands off in other areas. I watched a lot of crap on TV, but was always well behaved as my parents where quite strict in setting boundaries. I used to have big trouble explaining to friends that they where not allowed to just take whatever food and snacks where in the house and we should ask instead of raid the fridge.

    12. Re: Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HBO also doesnt count on people maintaining subs for more than about 3 months per year.

    13. Re:Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by johanw · · Score: 2

      > The Disney Channel itself has one show after the next which glorifies being stupid, arrogant, popular, bossy, etc... There are multiple shows back to back that show that the people everyone loves most are the people with the worst judgement and loudest mouths.

      Revenge of the nerds, manager edition? :-)

    14. Re:Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, not everything. Nobody seems to realize that Disney already has a streaming service. It's called DisneyLife. It costs (surprise!) £5/mo.

      It includes most Disney movies, most Pixar movies, no Star Wars movies, no Marvel movies, most Disney TV Shows, including most Star Wars cartoons, and some Marvel cartoons. It includes no Marvel live-action whatsoever.

      It also includes lots of music, but the interface for that is completely awful, to the point that this isn't worth considering as an actual feature.

      It also includes "books", and (at least used to) include "apps" (ie: mobile apps), but i think the apps are no-longer included.

    15. Re:Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How long until it goes full circle, everything diverges into separate subscriptions, people get tired of it, and someone has the amazing idea to bundle everything into one package and price to a purpose designed box connected to the TV that gives you a consistent experience. Oh snap, you already can!

      About 10+-2 years. That is the market cycle.

      The distributed/centralized computing cycle has happened three or four times. Own/rent equipment, living in trendy city centers vs saving money but losing time, development methods, management paradigms like open floor plans vs offices vs cubes, collaboration vs focus, it's all the same. Some MBA that has never lived the other method thinks hes a god for "changing the status quo". Other idiot MBAs buy into it, and about a decade later another set of MBAs switch it back each time costing overhead that outweighs the cost benefits.

    16. Re:Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and I already license most of the Disney/Pixar/etc. titles that I care about.

      FTFY

    17. Re:Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It might well be $5/month for the first 6 months or year for full catalog. Then $10/month...
      They'll want to get as many families with kids hooked then rely on the kiddies screaming blue murder if it's taken away when the prices go up. Keep increasing prices until they get to the absolute maximum 80%** of subscribers will stand. Better to end up with 1M subscribers at $15/month than 2M at $5/month.

      Summary: It's a lot easier to not give kids things at all than it is to take them away once they've got them. Disney know this well.
      If you've got kids who want this try to at least hold on till you see what the year 2 price is.

      ** Or whatever suitable figure is most profitable.

    18. Re: Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by rholtzjr · · Score: 2

      They are the reason I will not watch the new Star Wars movies. Once Lucas sold out to them, they became a "no longer interested" collection.

    19. Re:Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by msk · · Score: 1

      Plus all the TV shows they did, over the past seven decades or so.

      But better if they'd just make a new deal with Netflix.

      I don't see paying for yet another streaming service.

    20. Re:Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      Unless its the old politically incorrect cartoons from days gone by, still not worth it.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    21. Re:Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      No Disney loses. Netflix loses, but eventually wins. People already have Netflix, and I doubt many people will shell out $5 for little mermaid.

      As for Star Wars and Marvel, true fans will already have them on DVD/BR, and the rest will just wait for them to come on TV.

      I predict the disney stream will be still born and they will eventually crawl back to netflix like good little sheepe.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    22. Re: Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by laie_techie · · Score: 1

      Other than Star Wars, Disney is a waste of my money. Unless they're pumping out 4-5 Star Wars movies per year, I'll pass. See ya Disney, I was tired of super hero movies years ago and the rest never interested me.

      This 100%! Each family needs to determine if the $5 / month is worth it for them. With 2 toddler boys it might be worth it just for their cartoon selection. 1 Star Wars movie every two years isn't enough to justify it for me (cheaper to just buy the discs).

    23. Re:Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This isn't for adults. This is for families with little kids that love watching Disney movies. Now for $60/year, you can theoretically watch all of them on a non-stop loop.

      I'm about to start having kids, so this sounds like a smart move to me by Disney, although I wish it was still on Netflix. Heck, I would have kicked in $2-3/month extra for it. We'll see if I am weak enough to forfeit the money when it comes time to do so. I've held pretty strong for these services so far.

    24. Re:Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by Wulf2k · · Score: 1

      No, he owns them.

      He provided money to a store and received a product in return with no contracts being signed.

    25. Re:Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by Wycliffe · · Score: 1

      They'll want to get as many families with kids hooked then rely on the kiddies screaming blue murder if it's taken away when the prices go up.

      Kids that use netflix are already used to stuff disappearing. It would be easy enough to tell kids "this is the new service" or if they are a little bit older, give them a budget of $10/month and let them pick the service to switch to.

    26. Re:Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

      Own it today on Bluray or DVD!!!

      Nope. They already say you own the particular copy that you buy. They just refuse to acknowledge this little tidbit of information that tends to go into their advertising for their home video releases.

      --
      This space unintentionally left blank.
    27. Re:Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      I don't see how you can say that when the vast majority of movies produced by Disney (especially when you include Touchstone) are for adults.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    28. Re: Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by VisceralLogic · · Score: 1

      They are the reason I will not watch the new Star Wars movies. Once Lucas sold out to them, they became a "no longer interested" collection.

      Disney's Star Wars movies are better than the last three Lucas made.

      --
      Stop! Dremel time!
    29. Re: Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by rholtzjr · · Score: 1
      That is not the point. They deserve to be treated just like they treated their IT staff at Disney World. Like crap.

      However, I did hear that the first one was pretty good, but the second one had parts of the movie where you could not understand the actors due to their heavy accents and guttural speech.

    30. Re: Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by VisceralLogic · · Score: 1

      That is not the point. They deserve to be treated just like they treated their IT staff at Disney World. Like crap.

      Fair enough

      However, I did hear that the first one was pretty good, but the second one had parts of the movie where you could not understand the actors due to their heavy accents and guttural speech.

      Except for someone who's never interacted with someone who speaks English as a second language, there should be no problems with understanding.

      --
      Stop! Dremel time!
    31. Re: Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by rholtzjr · · Score: 1

      I grew up on Okinawa, and I currently live in a heavy Hispanic state, so I do not have issues with accents and non-interaction of English as a second language. I just have an issue with poor pronunciation.

    32. Re: Five bucks for everything Disney owns? by VisceralLogic · · Score: 1

      I grew up on Okinawa, and I currently live in a heavy Hispanic state, so I do not have issues with accents and non-interaction of English as a second language. I just have an issue with poor pronunciation.

      In that case, I think if you ever choose to watch it that you will be pleasantly surprised to discover that the entire dialog is comprehensible.

      --
      Stop! Dremel time!
  2. Corrupt the children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and then you will rule the world! No jews allowed!

  3. $5? Sure! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Sure, it will be $5 forever.

  4. maus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks like they're serious about keeping the mouse in the house...

  5. SLASHDOT. NEWS THAT SPECULATES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yeah, okay. With HBO wanting 15 bones, Netflix wanting 10 bones for HD. Hulu wanting 12 bones for ad-free...

    You're telling me Disney is going to ask for 5$? Maybe for an intro rate that changes after a year. Even crunchyroll wants 7$.

    When the only place you can watch Disney Movies, Star Wars, and all of the Marvel movies is the disney sub you better fucking believe they're gonna charge more than 5$ a month. Plus there's all the ESPN shit they own, and anything that is ABC.

    I didn't go to brandeis or yale like the analyst claiming it'll be 5$, but i'm not retarded.

    1. Re:SLASHDOT. NEWS THAT SPECULATES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, okay. With HBO wanting 15 bones, Netflix wanting 10 bones for HD. Hulu wanting 12 bones for ad-free...

      You're telling me Disney is going to ask for 5$? Maybe for an intro rate that changes after a year. Even crunchyroll wants 7$.

      When the only place you can watch Disney Movies, Star Wars, and all of the Marvel movies is the disney sub you better fucking believe they're gonna charge more than 5$ a month. Plus there's all the ESPN shit they own, and anything that is ABC.

      I didn't go to brandeis or yale like the analyst claiming it'll be 5$, but i'm not retarded.

      They didn't say what you'd get for $5. What if that is literally one channel? Like some terrible kids channel, with all the terrible Disney TV shows, and probably riddled with ads.

      Oh, you want the Star Wars and Marvel stuff? Well that channel is another $10.

      ESPN? There's a $15 add-on package for that too, which requires the other two packages as well.

      I guarantee this happens.

    2. Re:SLASHDOT. NEWS THAT SPECULATES by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Yeah, okay. With HBO wanting 15 bones, Netflix wanting 10 bones for HD. Hulu wanting 12 bones for ad-free...

      You're telling me Disney is going to ask for 5$? Maybe for an intro rate that changes after a year. Even crunchyroll wants 7$.

      No, that's actually quite a bit more than it should cost proportional to those other services. Hulu charges $12 for content from NBC, ABC, CBS, Fox, SyFy, USA, and probably a dozen other networks with smaller catalogs. HBO provides only TV shows from one provider, but provides an extensive movie collection. If you care about watching movies (I don't, which is why I don't subscribe to them), even that one is a decent deal.

      This is content from only a single network for ~42% of the cost of content from a couple of dozen networks. The problem is that you're using the cost to the user as an absolute metric, but users actually perceive the value of a service more in terms of [cost/number of titles worth watching]. So $5 is actually crazy expensive. IMO, it's worth about a buck. Maybe two.

      Of course, the bigger problem is that the way credit card companies charge for service, you can't make a profit at $1 a month because you could lose a third of that in processing fees alone. This makes any payment scheme where content is truly available a la carte from individual companies largely untenable.

      And the problem is made even worse by the lack of any sort of consistent standards for obtaining information about various companies' catalogs and playing the content. When I'm looking for somebody's content to watch, the absolute last thing I want to do is look through half a dozen different websites. I want to go to one place, search for something, and play it. I don't care in the slightest whether it comes from Netflix or Disney or HBO or Amazon or whatever. The only thing I care about is the content itself, and it royally p**ses me off to see content becoming more and more fragmented because of petty little bulls**t turf wars between companies that make more money than the Bureau of Engraving and Printing....

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    3. Re: SLASHDOT. NEWS THAT SPECULATES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forget that Disney owns a portion of Hulu. You pay Disney once for Hulu, then again for Disney's new streaming service. Then a third time when you pay to stream ESPN.

    4. Re:SLASHDOT. NEWS THAT SPECULATES by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      It really depends on how extensive Disney allows their library to be. When you consider everything that falls under the umbrella of Disney these days and how long they've been producing content, they could be very competitive. Then you also have to consider the hordes of rabid fans. If there is any company that stands a real chance of competing with Netflix it'd be Disney. I still expect them to abandon it in a few years when they get sick of trying to manage it, but in the meantime my kids will probably campaign for it to be a permanent subscription until it goes under. I figure the only way I don't end up paying for it is if they insist on keeping with their artificial scarcity vault scheme, and have a higher price than Netflix.

  6. No by duke_cheetah2003 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This splintering of streaming services is really stupid.

    There is no way I am dealing with this. Team up with NetFlix, or go home. I am not buying subscriptions for every content provider, it's just stupid.

    I don't even mind if you wanna force NetFlix to collect your $5/mo to access your content, that's ok. But no to multiple stream providers, I got enough accounts all over the web as it is now.

    1. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This is basically what I came here to say. Put it on my Netflix or I'll pirate it instead.

    2. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly this. Disney should license the content to Netflix that Netflix wants to buy, and license it to any other streaming service that wants it. If every studio just starts their own walled garden then it becomes useless. I suppose that's what a traditional copyright behemoth like Disney wants though.

    3. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This splintering of streaming services is really stupid.

      There is no way I am dealing with this. Team up with NetFlix, or go home. I am not buying subscriptions for every content provider, it's just stupid.

      I don't even mind if you wanna force NetFlix to collect your $5/mo to access your content, that's ok. But no to multiple stream providers, I got enough accounts all over the web as it is now.

      Amazon Prime video already does this with HBO. For an extra $15 a month, I have HBO shows on all my devices with no need for an extra App or account. It would be smart and easy to just piggy back off that concept and make a separate app / account for those who really want it.

    4. Re:No by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      I dunno. I think $5/mo for all Disney is pretty reasonable.
      Now, $10 or more... nope.

      That's part of the issue with the splintering of video services (or paid website subscriptions). There seems to be this notion of how much the rate should be that's based on some imaginary shared "minimum price", and not grounded in an analysis of the individual service and its content amount. Like here, Disney would say "we're going to price it at $x/mo because of Netflix's rate, completely ignoring the size of their content library vs. Netflix, or the more limited audience for their content, being Disney.

    5. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But VPN only costs $3 a month.. I'm confused. Screw them, and I'm going to stop buying diaper that have Disney characters on them too.

    6. Re: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously. Way overpriced. You'd think with all the money they're raking in they could afford to buy Donald Duck some pants. Amirite?

    7. Re:No by PsychoSlashDot · · Score: 1

      This splintering of streaming services is really stupid.

      Agreed. It's funny; I'd be willing to pay Netflix more, but I'm not willing to pay separate services individually.

      As in, I'd probably be okay with a Netflix bill being $15/mo instead of $10/mo to include Disney content. Add $5/mo for HBO, $5/mo for Starz, and so on, and I'd probably still be okay with it. But as long as I'm expected to deal with each one individually... no.

      Netflix gets my monthly subscription. End of story. Fragmentation is not negotiable. Price is.

      --
      "Oh no... he found the .sig setting."
    8. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed. I don't think the PHB's in all these Netflix wannabe's understand that it's just easier for people like myself to go without, then deal with more logins, more apps, more bills, etc. Disney will be a memory for me and if I'm lucky my children.

      Unless/until Netflix and Amazon start really sucking bad, they've got my money. And Hulu...they came close but kept screwing up the model (not enough content, too many commercials, weird rules around when to watch.

    9. Re:No by scdeimos · · Score: 0

      I am not buying subscriptions for every content provider, it's just stupid.

      Why? How is it any different than only ten years ago when you had to pay separate subscriptions to every newspaper and magazine you wanted to follow? (Or walk into a newsagent to buy them over the counter at full price.)

    10. Re:No by cervesaebraciator · · Score: 1

      How is it any different than only ten years ago when you had to pay separate subscriptions to every newspaper and magazine you wanted to follow?

      I got to keep the magazines I bought after I cancelled the subscription.

    11. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      disney already has a premium on-demand streaming service available through cable companies for $5-10 per month extra (exact price dependent on cable company's greed). TWELVE movies at a time, on a rotation that sees about 3 go and 3 come in every week.

      there is no fucking way they will give up the farm (their back catalog, especially the 'vault', and current theatrical releases that bring in billions annually) for a measly five bucks a month.

    12. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry, I'm sure it will only be $5 for a few months then they'll jack it right up. This is the same company that made peoples Christmas movies expire right before Christmas so they had to buy them again...

    13. Re:No by knorthern+knight · · Score: 1

      > This splintering of streaming services is really stupid.
      >
      > There is no way I am dealing with this. Team up with NetFlix, or go home.
      > I am not buying subscriptions for every content provider, it's just stupid.

      There is such an option... it's called cable TV. The problem is that the bundle of stuff that *YOU* want is not the same as the bundle *I* want or the bundle that *YOUR NEIGHBOUR* wants. If you bundle in everthing that all people want, into one honking big package, you get "the 500-channel universe" for $200/month. That's what people are trying to get away from.

      --

      I'm not repeating myself
      I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
    14. Re:No by duke_cheetah2003 · · Score: 1

      Agreed. It's funny; I'd be willing to pay Netflix more, but I'm not willing to pay separate services individually.

      This is where I don't agree. I am totally cool with a good solid streaming service charging for addons. Hulu is already doing it, you can add HBO stuff, but they want too much for it.

      I think the $5 price point is a good target. HBO addon for Hulu is $14.95. That's just a bit much to swallow for content.

    15. Re: No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's one thing some wanted; I wanted everything on demand from forever.

    16. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This just shows that cable had it right all along. The disagreement isn't about the arrangement, it's just about price. People want the single service. People want the bundles. They just want to pay less. Netflix is the new cable, without the cable.

    17. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get all your programming in one place!

      https://thepiratebay.org/

    18. Re:No by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      A better analogy would be if a publisher forced you to subscribe to all of their magazines in order to get the one you wanted. Just want to watch Game of Thrones and House of Cards? You can't get individual subscriptions to those, and have pay for all the content on HBO and Netflix to get them. Your analogy would be valid if they'd let you watch individual series for $1/month or whatever.

      With this fragmentation I am kind of hoping VOD will take off again at some point, but there's precious little on offer and the prices generally are outrageous, sometimes more than triple the price of video rentals in the days of yore.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    19. Re:No by rholtzjr · · Score: 1

      IMO, another bad decision by an equally bad company. The moment they replaced their IT staff, they became irrelevant to me. I will treat them just as they did their former employees.

    20. Re:No by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      I'll pay Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, or Disney but not all four. And even then HBO and Starz are a problem as well.

      Here's a question for you, why should they consolidate under Netflix and not YouTube Red?

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    21. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please keep buying the diapers, we're sick of you shitting all over this thread.

    22. Re:No by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      Not having cable TV is equivalent to child abuse.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    23. Re:No by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      That's how newspapers work. I only want the funnies and the recipes but I must buy the entire paper. If you live in a rural town you can at least subscribe only to the Sunday edition to get closer to what I consider ideal.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    24. Re:No by TheCastro1689 · · Score: 1

      Personally with Netflix's lack of content and not for me originals I'm closer than ever to cancelling.

  7. streaming will never replace the cable companies by schematix · · Score: 1

    when the cable co starts charging 200/mo for your standalone high speed internet and you need another $100/mo for 5 different subscription models, how is that better than what you have today? i'm no fan of the cable companies due to their piss poor service, but do you all realize they OWN the delivery system for their COMPETITION? They can't lose.... unless it all goes wireless.

    --
    Scott
  8. No thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I get tons of great content for less than that. Disney isn't so special to me and my family that we'd sign up just for that.

  9. Need a standard interface by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My Samsung television supports Netflix internally, but I use the PS4 for the service because the TV controls are awful.
    And that is with the same service on different devices.

    Then when you switch services, the controls and browsing is even more frustrating to switch.

    We need a common streaming browsing / playing interface, which all these streaming services can be plugins for.
    If only something like that existed...

  10. By Neruos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this is dumb, Disney should have just had Netflix create a Disney subchannel or partnership, all the infrastructure is there, and raised the price of the channel by 3-4$ a month. I would have bought that in a heart beat.

  11. ok now take Disney out of basic and let me save $5 by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ok now take Disney out of basic and let me save $5/mo.

  12. I don't know anyone here in Seattle... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that has a connection fast enough to stream. We need a download option. I have ISDN at home with sucky per minute charges, and at work we're sharing a 1.5 Mbps DSL connection from CenturyLink between almost forty people. We need a download options.

    1. Re: I don't know anyone here in Seattle... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. The vast majority of people can't use this service.

    2. Re: I don't know anyone here in Seattle... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ISDN is the norm here.

    3. Re: I don't know anyone here in Seattle... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same here in my area. Streaming video is useless.

    4. Re: I don't know anyone here in Seattle... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. We need download options.

    5. Re: I don't know anyone here in Seattle... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We have no choices.

    6. Re: I don't know anyone here in Seattle... by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

      ISDN, what is this 1994? You really have a 128k connection?

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    7. Re: I don't know anyone here in Seattle... by jawtheshark · · Score: 1

      ISDN is only 128kbps when you use both lines. Back in the day we had it, it was 64kbps, because the other 64kbps was to keep the phone working. Never mind that using both lines doubled the cost.

      --
      Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
    8. Re: I don't know anyone here in Seattle... by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      Vast majority? I was under the impression that even in the USA, most people have at least some basic internet over cable or ADSL, sufficient for streaming.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  13. no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No need for cartoons and movies with I already have Crunchyroll. Might be nice if you have children. $5 is still a bit much for cheap cartoons when you can get anime for the same price.

  14. Yeah, but probably as an introductory price by Lirodon · · Score: 1

    It will probably start increasing in price over the years that follow as Disney finds out how this market works.

  15. Clients? by GreatDrok · · Score: 2

    Netflix has clients on a large array of platforms so it is always easy to watch material. I have an Amazon Prime subscription but only a few devices have a client so I either watch on my laptop (rarely) or stream from my iPhone to my Apple TV (rarely) and I only have the subscription because of other benefits of Amazon Prime. Disney won't have such additional benefits so even at $5 a month, if I can't watch it other than on a few devices or in an inconvenient way via AirPlay then I'm not going to bother. There are other similar services around that are similarly limited and I don't subscribe to them either.

    --
    "I have the attention span of a strobe lit goldfish, please get to the point quickly!"
  16. Shenanigans?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I somehow doubt it'll ever really be $5. I anticipate some shenanigans on the monthly bill to raise the final amount. I'm looking at you mister "franchise tax fee" on my inflated cable and phone bills!

  17. Re:ok now take Disney out of basic and let me save by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this guy gets it. who wants this trash.

  18. depends by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they include Marvel stuff (which I believe they said would be separate) as well as eventually 'all' Disney movies (within reason, of course) and no rotating 'back in the vault' bs, then $5 would be a steal.

    The thing with a service like this is that it's a no-brainer for parents with younger children. Yes they will absolutely shell out another $5 to have an all-Disney option.

  19. Sure by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    And 5 U.S. dollars will magically turn into 10 Canadian dollars, plus taxes.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  20. dont support it by OppMan29 · · Score: 1

    IF no one supports it, they will give up but some idiots will think $5 is not much and purchase it... if they cant team up with Netflix they need go home.

    1. Re:dont support it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Within a couple of years it'll be deader than Disney Infinity:
      • It will take them that long to figure out that running a reliable content distribution network is hard.
      • It will take them that long to figure out developing streaming clients for Windows + PS4 + Xbox + macOS (good luck with Linux) is hard.
      • It will take them that long to figure out that the majority of their target customers don't have broadband that's either fast enough or stable enough to stream high definition video.
      • It will take their shareholders that long to figure out they're losing money on it.
    2. Re:dont support it by ixidor · · Score: 1

      they arleady have a reliable content distribution network the same place/people/hardware that is currently streaming MLB is what is going to do this "disney channel" just adding in more racks/servers/etc. the data center is currently only about 60% populated, with room/plans for physical expansion

    3. Re:dont support it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thus you have proven you don't know what a Content Distribution Network is. Hint: it involves more than one data center.

  21. I'm thinking no by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    > If Disney's new streaming service does end up costing around $5 per month, could you justify paying for it?

    Probably not. Disney has tried to roll their own before (the destructo-disks of several years ago) and when they realize that people aren't buying it, they eventually give up and do what everyone else is doing, while their marketing tries to make it seem like they invented it. (As in "Disney DVD".)

    But I'm probably not the target. TV isn't that important to me. I watch a movie a week on Friday (with pizza and beer), and that probably doesn't justify signing up for yet another service. When the next Star Wars film comes out, I'll just buy the disc.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  22. That's a good idea by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

    No one will play 15 a month or even 8 for just Disney.

  23. CenturyLink fiber in Seattle by tepples · · Score: 1

    I thought CenturyLink had deployed fiber throughout Seattle a couple years ago. What became of that?

    1. Re:CenturyLink fiber in Seattle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its in some places, as is Frontier Net (ex Verizon FiOS) I live in the Puget Sound area and I dont know anyone with CL fiber, and I know two people with Frontier Net. Everyone else is either rolling on CL DSL, or Comcast cable.

    2. Re:CenturyLink fiber in Seattle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They did one street in Northgate as a experiment, and it was a disaster so they stopped.

  24. Not the only pantsless Western cartoon character by tepples · · Score: 1

    If Alvin and John doesn't need pants, why does Donald?

  25. Shouldn't come as a surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With Netflix and Amazon both trying to become their own networks, it isn't a surprise that Disney is seeing them as more of a competitor. Especially since they (Netflix) seem less willing to shell out billions for content from other networks.
    With Disney owning so many channels, it shouldn't come as a surprise that they want their own streaming system.
    I wonder if they'll pull their content from Sling TV as well? If so, I won't miss them.

  26. If all Disney movies and TV ever is on there? by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 2

    If all Disney movies and TV shows ever are available on there, it might be worth it for families with small children.

    Most adults like myself already own the MCU content, Star Wars content, and Disney movie content that they want so it's probably not worth it.

    --
    If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
  27. Haha yeah for now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Forget this shit. Staying Netflix exclusive and just over-the-air for anything else.

  28. Just let us this level of choice on cable / sat so by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    Just let us this level of choice on cable / sat so we don't have to deal with 3-4 different services

  29. disneylife.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    £5/month.

    Guess this is not promoted in US

    1. Re: disneylife.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I've never seen any Disney on Netflix over here.

      Either way, Disney is pretty shit. The kids love Mary Poppins although it's pretty weird and disjointed. They love Toy Story, but that was Pixar until Disney bought them, and rumoured to have a fourth in the works - because Disney has no ideas of its own.

      I'll probably just keep buying DVDs of a few of the good bits and bollock to the rest of it, and save money.

  30. we dont watch disney anyway by Osgeld · · Score: 1

    with a small child in the house disney should be a dead given

    but their channel is absolute shit, you can turn it on, get a half hour of commercials of shit your kid would want to watch, then get some garbage made for 15 year old's that are not watching it anyway

    NOW you want me to pay for a streaming service full of shit that a little kid wont watch, and a bigger kid wont watch as well??

    LOL fuck you and good luck with that crap

    1. Re:we dont watch disney anyway by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      I understand the sentiment, but find this poor logic. If your two objections are commercials and poor timing with the programming, then a streaming service would fix both. There would be no commercials (I assume), and you could pick what shows you wanted to watch and when. Sounds like this would be perfect for you!

    2. Re:we dont watch disney anyway by painandgreed · · Score: 2

      NOW you want me to pay for a streaming service full of shit that a little kid wont watch, and a bigger kid wont watch as well??

      LOL fuck you and good luck with that crap

      It's worse than that. They want you to pay for a streaming service full of their movies and your little kid will pick their favorite and play it over and over and over till you have all the songs memorized and are driven insane. Judging by the tone of your post, that may have already happened.

    3. Re:we dont watch disney anyway by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      but we dont watch anything on it, there's no reason to pay another service to pick and choose stuff we dont watch

  31. Haa haaa haaa haaa. I hurt from lauging so much. by EmperorOfCanada · · Score: 1

    I love these old companies that think they can join the modern age by copying other companies; except they always copy the wrong things and then go on to keep the things that allow the successful companies to end run the old ones.

    For instance, who thinks that Disney will have endless advertising for their other products, toys, etc? Who thinks that they will have endless FBI warnings? Who thinks that they will do things to manipulate schedules so as to "addict" the little tikes?

    Also who thinks that this would stay at $5 if it were to take off. I guarantee there is a spreadsheet and powerpoint presentation with an eventual price of $19.95 once they have "done in" Netflix.

    Here is my simple litmus test. McDonalds and Disney have had a long standing relationship. What are the chances that somehow this new online thing continues to peddle McDonalds poison?

    Here is the simple truth: People who have cut cords are enjoying their freedom from being told what to buy their kids and how their kids should think. Disney is insane if they think that people will give them money to have that crap back in their lives.

    The movie industry is suffering big time from this. Quite simply, I enjoy movies, but have no idea what is on in theaters anymore. This is because I have pretty much eliminated advertising from my life. No Cable, no newspapers (foreign magazines only), adblocking galore, and subscriptions to things like Netflix that don't advertise much (some product placements). I am a much happier person for this.

    I would love to raise kids now that they won't plunk themselves in front of TV and be told what to buy for the next 18 years.

  32. $5 Australian? Sure by renegadesx · · Score: 1

    If it winds up being $AU8 then forget it, but $AU5, that and Stan ($AU10 a month) has everything my kids watch for the same price as Netflix ($AU15). Sure I'll consider it.

    --
    Make SELinux enforcing again!
    1. Re:$5 Australian? Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if you support this model then in a year or 2, it won't be disney +stan or netflix, it will be disney+WB+stanor Netflix, then soory after Disney+WB+Paramount+Universal+etc etc+ stan or Netflix, closing following that their will be no stan or Netflix and you will need to subscribe to every studio just like a normal cable/payTV scam most of us went online to escape but without the convenience of a single vendor.

  33. Can I justify paying for it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If Disney's new streaming service does end up costing around $5 per month, could you justify paying for it?

    No. Absolutely not. I already pay for two services. There is no way I will pay for yet another. Will not happen.

    The only way I would go with a new service, is if the new one were to supplant the existing ones in terms of the content I am interested in, so that I can get rid of them, which is also not going to happen with all of the "exclusivity" nonsense going on.

    In short: No.

  34. fuck off disney by gravewax · · Score: 2

    could I justify paying it? sure. WILL I justify paying it? Fuck NO. supporting this would mean supporting proliferation of streaming services, the end result is me having to subscribe to 20 or 30 streaming services to get content I currently get from a couple or worse yet it drives the collapse of content provider agnostic services forcing everyone into this fucked up model, NO THANKS.

    1. Re:fuck off disney by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize that the alternative is to allow Netflix to have a monopoly forever?

    2. Re:fuck off disney by gravewax · · Score: 1

      no it isn't. they don't have a monopoly now and even if they did the fucked up ancient distribution model they want to force you is not the answer.

  35. Prediction by BlueCoder · · Score: 1

    While bundling sites might work Disney doing it's own thing will actually lead to more piracy. Everything for $40 is the magic price point for streaming. $10 more for sports. If all the content producers are going a la cart then it should be more like $2 for Disney and $5 for HBO originals.

    At $5 or even $20 I'm instantly thinking... signup once or twice a year and rip everything I'm interested in to a hard drive or more simply just binge it all in a month. But I'm lazy and tend to just not watch TV anymore if it's not cheap and convenient.

  36. Price isn't the problem by Tukz · · Score: 1

    If Disney's new streaming service does end up costing around $5 per month, could you justify paying for it?

    It's not the price that'll need to be justified.

    It's the damn fragmentation.

    And how will the application be? What quality will they stream in? Will it be stable and support all major platforms, and the popular smaller ones, at launch?

    It's already a crap-shoot when trying a new provider. Out of my 8 or so providers (most of them I get bundled), only 2 of them are of sufficient quality; Netflix and HBO Nordic.

    The rest is a mixture of missing sufficient sound quality or no Full HD. I don't want to pay for the "privilege" to watch Movies and TV Shows in SD and crappy Stereo sound. They may be 'fine' for mobile devices, but I have a TV and a surround system; I, at the very least, want HD and DD+ 5.1.

    --
    - Don't do what I do, it's probably not healthy nor safe. -
  37. I don't care... by sad_ · · Score: 1

    ...how they price their service, i'm only subscribing to one streaming service, and for now it is Netflix that still provides me with the most content i'm interested in.
    i don't really care losing disney, because of all the things I watch, not much is disney related (except the Marvel-Netflix series).

    --
    On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
  38. Well, that's a relief by JudgeFurious · · Score: 1

    Now I can see exactly how much money I'll be saving by ignoring their service completely. $60 a year added to what I don't spend on CBS's service is starting to look like real money!

    --
    Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
  39. The Disney Religion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Indoctrinate those little minds while they are open and receptive,
    and they will be Disney subscribers for life.

  40. We'll see by OneHundredAndTen · · Score: 1

    If it is the whole catalog, all the time, yes. If there are any strings attached, a big resounding no. Your move, Disney.

  41. $5 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Didn't expect to be going with this service, but $5 is a low enough price to make me consider it.

    Of course it depends on what I'd be getting at that price.

    It also depends on how long it is before they jack it up.

  42. Nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm already paying $10/mo for Netflix which used to have the Disney content. One subscription service is enough - if I were to jump on this bandwagon it would pretty much be like paying $15/mo for Netflix. Guess I'll just go back to the former convenient way of watching Disney content.

  43. Prediction by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

    When this news came out, I predicted

    if it doesn't cost at minimum 2x as much as Netflicks [sic} and suck hard, I'll be really surprised. When the only way to watch some of the older Disney movies, Star Wars, and Marvel movies is their platform, they're going to squeeze people soooo hard..... I wouldn't be surprised if the blueray prices got bumped up as well, just to make sure that their streaming service looks a little more enticing.

    I'm sticking by that, not because I'm an analyst in the field, but because Disney has a long, storied tradition of ripping customers off and squeezing every list cent out of things. The analyst gives no rational in this article for why $5, except "to drive adoption." BS that it's going to be $5. I don't even believe that it will be $5 for the intro rate, for the roll-out. Disney gives nothing away.

    --
    Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
  44. Technically, you don't... by gosand · · Score: 1

    According to Disney, you don't own any of that content. You should know that by now. Disney owns it, and you simply have a copy - otherwise you are a filthy thief.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    1. Re:Technically, you don't... by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 1

      Own a license or a copy, whatever. There is not a time limit on my ownership of the digital version or the bluray/DVD.

      --
      If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
  45. Sports? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Doesn't Disney own ESPN? Will we be getting streaming sports along with all the other Disney properties? I'm suddenly a lot more interested than just being able to watch Marvel and Lucasfilm movies on demand (like many, I already buy the movies I want).

  46. There will always be other options by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is why torrents and 'other' modes of streaming services will never die. People will always find a better way.

  47. Re:Not the only pantsless Western cartoon characte by laie_techie · · Score: 1

    If Alvin and John doesn't need pants, why does Donald?

    John is wearing a sleeping gown, which was common sleeping wear back in the day. Nothing immodest about it, even if it is dated.

  48. Re:Not the only pantsless Western cartoon characte by tepples · · Score: 1

    And Donald is wearing a natural covering of feathers that adequately cover his inside-out pOnOs.

  49. Re:ok now take Disney out of basic and let me save by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is Disney even in basic?