So… is it time to go back to piracy yet?

Zhaoman
So… is it time to go back to piracy yet?

I'm not saying I will use piracy as a result of this, amongst many other anti-consumer practices going on right now, but services like Netflix provided a perfect solution to piracy, but once again, corporate greed has ruined that with the need to squeeze out every last penny from shows/films.

The pie is only so big, and just because they all want a piece, does not mean we should have to pay more for the pie in the first place, they should all just earn less from an already bloody expensive pie.

When piracy becomes a big issue again, don't come crying to us. @netflix @amazon @disney @sky

I was big anti extra streaming service when things like this were announced but the content and the price is really appealing, especially for my kids.

Zhaoman
So… is it time to go back to piracy yet?

The fact that its only going to be US based to start with is only going to encourage piracy when the rest of the world wants to watch its content.

So many streaming services, so much crap to watch.

Isn't TV wonderful.

Zhaoman
So… is it time to go back to piracy yet?

Go back to ? Isn't it still there, in fact the entire world is able to watch it quicker before it even begins to stream.

Hoonigan
I'm not saying I will use piracy as a result of this, amongst many other anti-consumer practices going on right now, but services like Netflix provided a perfect solution to piracy, but once again, corporate greed has ruined that with the need to squeeze out every last penny from shows/films.

The pie is only so big, and just because they all want a piece, does not mean we should have to pay more for the pie in the first place, they should all just earn less from an already bloody expensive pie.

When piracy becomes a big issue again, don't come crying to us. @netflix @amazon @disney @sky

I have some sympathy for that but, on the other hand, if Disney have a valuable set of products, they shouldn't be required to sell them through someone else, like Netflix or Prime, which ultimately only serves the interests of Netflix/Prime.

It's for them to offer an alternate service, and for us as customers to decide it does, or doesn't, offer adequate value for money, and subscribe or not accordingly.

Otherwise, why do we have supermarkets other than Tesco? Let everybody just sell everything via Tesco. Never mind that both the Aldi/LIDL model and the Waitrose model have a different product mix and a different retail proposition, and appeal to different consumers for different reasons.


As for piracy, it is no more or less the answer now than it ever was. It's still about “I want, but don't want to pay what it costs”.

$6.99 a month or $69.99 per year

That's not too terrible a value proposition, however it depends largely on a few other things, how much new content they can produce throughout the year and how they decide to translate the USD to UK Pounds Sterling. If there is even any hint of region locking content it's a simple “no” from me, but the prior two points also count.

Netflix works due to the new content they push out, Prime video works due to it having multiple benefits in more than just one area, NOW TV works due to being cheaper than having SKY TV (even though it's owned and run by SKY). All of them offer value proposition, for any new additional streaming services, they're going to have to work hard to enter the market. At least Apple can bundle their upcoming service with a Apple music subscription and sell it alongside their hardware. Disney have none of these advantages.

Iota
That's not too terrible a value proposition, however it depends largely on a few other things, how much new content they can produce throughout the year and how they decide to translate the USD to UK Pounds Sterling. If there is even any hint of region locking content it's a simple “no” from me, but the prior two points also count.

Netflix works due to the new content they push out, Prime video works due to it having multiple benefits in more than just one area, NOW TV works due to being cheaper than having SKY TV (even though it's owned and run by SKY). All of them offer value proposition, for any new additional streaming services, they're going to have to work hard to enter the market. At least Apple can bundle their upcoming service with a Apple music subscription and sell it alongside their hardware. Disney have none of these advantages.

Disney has the advantage of a huge back catalog of stuff that everyone has heard of. They've certainly got more to offer than Apple currently do on that front.

I wonder if anyone's ever tallied up how much it would cost to subscribe to all the streaming services that are out there nowadays, I'm far to lazy to do it myself but it would be interesting to read how much it would cost to watch all the new content published each month.

Corky34
I wonder if anyone's ever tallied up how much it would cost to subscribe to all the streaming services that are out there nowadays, I'm far to lazy to do it myself but it would be interesting to read how much it would cost to watch all the new content published each month.

Its a bit like totalling up how much it would be to subscribe to BT, Sky and Virgins TV packages all at once. Pointless because nobody will actually do it.

Not really, at least i don't think it would be, do BT, Sky and Virgin produce their own new content?

High School Musical: The Musical: The Series: The Sound of a Barrel Being Scraped

Not for me, I'm afraid.

spacein_vader
Its a bit like totalling up how much it would be to subscribe to BT, Sky and Virgins TV packages all at once. Pointless because nobody will actually do it.

I had enough trouble working out which parts of Sky or Virgin's offerings I wanted. Forget premium sports and movies, but just the basic mix.

It always seemed to work out that there were maybe 12-15 channels I wanted because either of several things I kinda-wanted, or one thing I really wanted, and to get thise 12-15 channels I had to pick an option that gave me 200+ more I never have and never will watch.

Right now, we have VM, which means no Sky Atlantic, which means no Game of Thrones, but after the way Sky messed me about, to hell with them.

I'm tempted to go back to a mix of Freeview, Freesat and buying the occasional boxset (and I mean physical DVD's), and be done with the lot of ‘em. What I’m certainly not up for is multiple subscription services.

Corky34
Not really, at least i don't think it would be, do BT, Sky and Virgin produce their own new content?

They certainly commission it. Whether it's actually produced in house or by 3rd parties I've no idea.

Saracen: I think I've mentioned this before but I've found Freeview/Freesat (channel wise they're largely interchangable, only the delivery method changes,) plus a Roku box with iPlayer, ITV player, 4 On Demand and UKTV play covers virtually everything we want, and then we dip into the odd month sub of Netflix/Prime/Sky(NowTV) also through the Roku app. For example this year we had 1 month of Netflix in January (£7) and have just bought a 3 month NowTV entertainment pass (£17.99) to cover Game of Thrones. The only other TV spending (apart from the TV licence,) we have planned so far is a month of Sky Sports (£25) during the Ashes.

Worth looking into depending on the channels you value.

Hoonigan

Zhaoman
So… is it time to go back to piracy yet?

I'm not saying I will use piracy as a result of this, amongst many other anti-consumer practices going on right now, but services like Netflix provided a perfect solution to piracy, but once again, corporate greed has ruined that with the need to squeeze out every last penny from shows/films.

The pie is only so big, and just because they all want a piece, does not mean we should have to pay more for the pie in the first place, they should all just earn less from an already bloody expensive pie.

When piracy becomes a big issue again, don't come crying to us. @netflix @amazon @disney @sky

As someone who spends his living making these TV shows for the international market, I’d enocurage you not to pirate. A lot of the shows on Netflix, Amazon, etc. are produced by small businesses (mine employs about 20 full time staff in London) who work incredibly hard. If you don’t pay for content, then those companies don’t get paid and neither do the actors, writers and crew, many of whom are not wealthy.

From my point of view this is not going to make me spend more money on another streaming service. I will just do without. I already have two AND had to go back to paying the licence fee for the BBC that I never watch. If this pattern continues I'll probably just find that the market is so fragmented that I won't bother. It'll end up so fragmented that streaming services will become almost like channels on TV but you have to pay for each one. Then someone will come along and strike a deal with each service and bundle them up for slightly less. I don't want to go full circle. Sorry Disney, you're too late to the party.

philehidiot
Then someone will come along and strike a deal with each service and bundle them up for slightly less.

I think that is what Sky are trying to do, though once you bundle in Sky channels it becomes bundled for slightly more.

Edit: For my son it seems to be working out quite sociable though. He goes to a friend's house to watch sports, his friends come here to watch The Grand Tour.

But mostly the kids watch YouTube, so I wonder if these services are chasing a shrinking market.

I think it's telling that they didn't launch this at a theme park to fanfare and with giveaways and massive customer engagement. No, they launched it at an investment bank. They're chasing investors and not the public.

Nothing wrong with that but it comes across as a cynical business move rather than engaging with their customers. Dry old money orientated business rather than fun loving, blah blah blah.

I'm not a big fan of adding yet another service, but I've read elsewhere Disney will offer a bundle with Hulu, which might make it more worthwhile. On the other hand, Spotify Premium has a free Hulu deal going on right now. Whatever happens, I'd expect Disney's apps to offer downloads for offline viewing.

spacein_vader
Disney has the advantage of a huge back catalog of stuff that everyone has heard of. They've certainly got more to offer than Apple currently do on that front.

That's fine if you have use for the back catalogue, such as a form of kids entertainment. However old will only carry you so far, it's the new stuff a lot of people are interested in.

Iota
That's fine if you have use for the back catalogue, such as a form of kids entertainment. However old will only carry you so far, it's the new stuff a lot of people are interested in.

Given how many copies of things like Snow White Disney shift the old stuff still works for keeping kids entertained and it'd take a mong time for them to work through them all, especially when you add the series in too.

As for the newer stuff I'd imagine that's where Marvel comea in. Along with a seemingly never ending series of films Netflix proved spin off series for supporting characters can be successful and I'd be amazed if Disney didn't already have so. E of those in production.

I'd also assume they intend to follow the Marvel model with Star Wars, so look forward to Episode 27 and series like Vader: the college years.

So now i have to pay for sky, amazon, netflix and now this if i want to watch a wide variety of stuff legitimately?

Its like when BT Sport became a thing and people where praising them for competition when in reality we have to pay for both Sky and BT for sports like football when i was far cheaper to just pay sky sports and be done with it.

You see i dont mind if there is multiple stream channels around but if they ALL share the same content!!

xyt
As someone who spends his living making these TV shows for the international market, I’d enocurage you not to pirate. A lot of the shows on Netflix, Amazon, etc. are produced by small businesses (mine employs about 20 full time staff in London) who work incredibly hard. If you don’t pay for content, then those companies don’t get paid and neither do the actors, writers and crew, many of whom are not wealthy.

So can you just distribute your show across multiple subscription chanels then instead of picking one and the consumer having to pay a subscription just to watch your show?

Get your show on amazon, netflix, sky etc and whichever customer who is a member of either can go watch your show fine

j.o.s.h.1408;4087679
So can you just distribute your show across multiple subscription chanels then instead of picking one and the consumer having to pay a subscription just to watch your show?

Get your show on amazon, netflix, sky etc and whichever customer who is a member of either can go watch your show fine

That logic works really well until you consider the respective market power of a small, 20-person production company trying to tell an Amazon or Netflix that you're selling the show to everybody - when they turn round and tell you “No exclusivity, no sale”.

Oh sure, if you're sitting on the rights to the next grest thing and everybody desperately wants it, maybe you have some clout, but until then you'll get about the swme response as a small dairy farmer trying to dictate terms to a top four supermarket, who will tell you …. these are our terms, want the order or not.

Market power rulez. Unfortunately.

I'm not in the TV business but for press …. been there, done that. Many simply tell you how it's going to be, and they send you their contract, take it or leave it. More than a few times, I've left it because the terms are simply too one-sided, to the point of being outrageous.

For example, one required unlimited indemnification to cover all professional and legal fees in the event legal action was taken against them over an article. So not only do I get to pay (or insure against) my legal fees, but I risk paying for their team of top lawyers, accountants, whatever …. ovef an article I might make £100-£200 from? Put my home and everything on the line? Hell no. So I walk. But …. no sign, no work. Some muppet will sign it, quite possibly because he/she either didn't read it or didn't understand what it meant.

Market power. They just find a more gullible sap go agree it.

Saracen999
As for piracy, it is no more or less the answer now than it ever was. It's still about “I want, but don't want to pay what it costs”.

My point was that, only a few years ago, a whole host of amazing shows were available for £10 a month, which could then even be split between a few friends if you were clever about it, but these days, to watch all of the shows I'm interested in, I realistically need 3 subscription services. That's £25-£30 a month, and that doesn't include this latest Disney service.
All of those shows were available on Netflix to begin with.

It just annoys me that these multi billion dollar companies decide that we're the ones doing things wrong, when really, there's a LOT of room for movement on prices, if they just reduced their greed somewhat. Capitalism is all well and good until they take the pee with it, IMO.

j.o.s.h.1408;4087676
So now i have to pay for sky, amazon, netflix and now this if i want to watch a wide variety of stuff legitimately?

Its like when BT Sport became a thing and people where praising them for competition when in reality we have to pay for both Sky and BT for sports like football when i was far cheaper to just pay sky sports and be done with it.

You see i dont mind if there is multiple stream channels around but if they ALL share the same content!!

The big advantage streaming still has is that you don't get tied in longer than a month so in principle you can watch everything you want by subscribing to Netflix for a month, watching the show you like on there, cancelling and moving to Disney for a month etc.

In reality people want to watch it when it's just released, so won't do that.

As for football competition, that falls down because now if you want to watch “some Premier league football” it's cheaper to do so than before. The problem is nobody does that. Everyone I know who wants to watch it either wants to watch every game available (so wants BT and sky,) or wants to watch all of their teams games (which also tends to involve both broadcasters.)

The only winning move is not to play.

spacein_vader
The only winning move is not to play.

I win! :)

I Have Amazon Prime, but only because it’s bundled with Prime delivery - and I very very rarely use that. I just don’t have enough time in the day to watch the output from broadcast or catch up from the traditional broadcasters (BBC/ITV) without subscribing to additional services.

Gh0sty
The fact that its only going to be US based to start with is only going to encourage piracy when the rest of the world wants to watch its content.

I can't believe that will actually happen, or at least not Western/English speaking markets with a new Star Wars series at launch. They would be asking for people to pirate it.

Unless they plan to use Disney Life for shows like that for now until the full Disney + experience launches.

Hoonigan
services like Netflix provided a perfect solution to piracy

Only if you get decent enough internet, though.
Round our place, you have a choice - Watch 9 episodes of something via the Sky dish for the evening, or stream one episode into the buffer and watch that, before repeating the process next evening…

Saracen999
As for piracy, it is no more or less the answer now than it ever was. It's still about “I want, but don't want to pay what it costs”.

Actually, it's more “You're actually asking money for this abysmal, unnecessary reboot cack?” :D

Seriously, why do we need a remake of the already-dire Charmed series?

Ttaskmaster
Only if you get decent enough internet, though.
Round our place, you have a choice - Watch 9 episodes of something via the Sky dish for the evening, or stream one episode into the buffer and watch that, before repeating the process next evening…

When I'm away from decent internet for a couple of days I go to a cafe, order a drink, and download movies and shows to my Netflix and Amazon Prime apps for offline viewing. Very handy. I am starting to expect that for every service.

markzero
When I'm away from decent internet for a couple of days

And what about when you're away from it permanently?

Ttaskmaster
And what about when you're away from it permanently?

Get a phone that has MicroSD support and buy a huge (in terms of GB) MicroSD Card?

But I'm sure you'd have other worries (or maybe none at all) if you didn't have any access to internet permanently.

AlvieM
Get a phone that has MicroSD support and buy a huge (in terms of GB) MicroSD Card?

How does that help the fact that I don't have internet fast enough to use VPN?
I can store more, yes, but it still takes as long to fill it up.

Ttaskmaster
And what about when you're away from it permanently?

Utilise IP over Avian Carriers https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1149

The latency is huge but the bandwidth is pretty impressive with a big enough set of SD cards.

Ttaskmaster
How does that help the fact that I don't have internet fast enough to use VPN?
I can store more, yes, but it still takes as long to fill it up.

Do you really need a VPN when downloading off of Netflix etc? People have different safety levels of privacy and security but personally if it was so slow - I'd disable it. Anyways, there will probably be other things that you'd rather be doing and enjoying if you were in a place without internet access. Those are just my thoughts

spacein_vader
Utilise IP over Avian Carriers https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1149

The latency is huge but the bandwidth is pretty impressive with a big enough set of SD cards.

I know this is a joke RFC, but you know the black hole image? They flew half a tonne of hard drives as sending it over the internet would have congested the entire world.

spacein_vader
Utilise IP over Avian Carriers https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1149
The latency is huge but the bandwidth is pretty impressive with a big enough set of SD cards.

Unfortunately all technology in our house is physically safeguarded by canine triple-level security. AvCar data packages would be manducated at point of receipt.

AlvieM
Do you really need a VPN when downloading off of Netflix etc? People have different safety levels of privacy and security but personally if it was so slow - I'd disable it. Anyways, there will probably be other things that you'd rather be doing and enjoying if you were in a place without internet access. Those are just my thoughts

I don't think it matters whether or not I use VPN, really. Internet is so slow here that it takes an age, regardless of what you're doing!

Ttaskmaster
And what about when you're away from it permanently?

Same thing, though to save money I'd probably also start using the free wifi at local libraries.

taskmaster Your dreams are answered .. You will soon be mandated to have internet of 10down/1up . Nobodys mentioned that of course its nice and cheap @£6.99 .. but wait and see in 5 years it'll be £12.99 or greater , many tiers also? I think SKY wont last much longer as a seperate streaming service. harr, drag on the old flaming beard, parrot and WOODEN STUMP .

Unless they're paying me $6.99/m, hard pass.

persimmon
taskmaster Your dreams are answered .. You will soon be mandated to have internet of 10down/1up .

That's what they said when they installed 1Gb fibre cable down the road and a connection pot right outside my house 18 months ago… I'm still waiting for it.

Available subscriptions

1. Disney Life
2. Netflix
3. Amazon Video/Prime
4. Hulu
5. Sky Store/Sky Go
6. Now TV
7. Mubi
8. Rakuten TV
9. Sky Sports
10. BT Sports
11. Premier Sports
12. Eleven Sports…

Far too many