I'm not sure what the benefit is. Why would I want to wait until 9:15 to start a show when I've been able start it at 8:09 for the past few years? People who pay for Max through their TV provider can probably get the linear HBO/Cinemax channel their TV provider. People, like me, who just get Max? What's the benefit to linear channels? With that said, what they probably should have done was have themed channels unique to Max. They could have had a Batman channel, a Game of Thrones channel, a seasonal channel, a channel for sports (things like sports-themed movies and Hard Knocks), a Harry Potter channel and so forth. The real prize? Who has the key to the vault where Tales From The Crypt is kept?
I haven’t tried multiview yet, but one key limitation: I notice is that it only shows the games that are on Peacock. So today there are 3 games, only 2 of which are on Peacock. The one on USA will not show up in multiview, at least not from what I can tell. this is another example of how NBC’s ununified, bifurcated streaming platforms are clunky at best. They’ve needed to create a seamless GUI for years. Some day?? Edit: but now that I see how the MV interface works, it looks good. Just think they should put all the games on there.
USA is a cable channel. It'll maintain legacy technology until cable dies. It's not worth the investment.
That's literally what every streamer has an issue with because most current sports broadcasting contracts were negotiated before streaming surpassed cable and over the air viewing. The EPL deal with NBC runs through 2028 so it's almost definite that USA and NBC broadcasts won't be live on Peacock, and part of the multiview, until the next deal after that.
That’s not really the issue IMO. I suspect it’s stupid legal/rights bullshit. Which causes them to “strand“ certain games that are being broadcast on their legacy channels. They’ve had years to figure that out, and never have. when you watch GoalRush (a non-NBC production), all games are covered I believe.
I think it also has a lot to do with the way games are distributed internationally. Sky, TNT UK (formerly BT), Canal+ or DAZN etc probably determine which plug to put in which hole. The US streaming channels just take whatever they're given. They want to spend the minimum on redistribution.
All I’m saying is that if NBC wants to offer/tout their fantastic new multiview feature, they should show all the matches. Right now in order to do true multiview I have to be watching two matches on Peacock and one match on linear USA. That’s dumb. BTW every time the NBC presenter has mentioned using multiview, they have never said “oh and by the way there will be times when multiview cannot show you all the matches because of rights”
The HORROR! I can't watch any domestic match at any level (including women's) at 3 pm because I'm in England. The Chelsea and Man Utd games on Sunday weren't shown at all because Sky wants maximum viewers for its one match.
Yeah, the 3 PM blackout rule in the UK is now also antiquated and dumb. But I’m not living in the UK, as much as I’d like to be. I’m living in the USA where NBC has complete rights to broadcast every EPL match, which is completely different than what exist in the UK. So that’s why IMO NBC should figure out whatever they need to figure out to be able to show all live matches in multiview, for example.
I'm sure they're not investing. They're showing what they get. If they can utilize the technology they've developed for other sports that's great. But the EPL is a nice little earner for them it's not a major source of revenue. Look at F1 on ESPN. It's literally the Sky Sports feed with the UK commentary and all the colloquial references. Compare it to ten years ago, or a couple of decades ago, where the feeds were lousy and Setanta was charging $20 per game for the matches not on basic cable. Anyway it's foreign. What's wrong with real 'Murican sports like rodeo, choreographed wrastlin' and monster truck racing?
I’ll take your word for that. And I guess that means that’s been NBC’s strategy for sometime, i.e. to let USA disappear into the sunset and not have to deal with fixing the rights issues which have made things so clunky for years. Next year USA will be gone, which will have pros and cons. But being able to see every match in Peacock/multiview will be one of the pros.
That really isn't how it works. There's not somebody in England who plugs in a cord that makes a game's feed only work on the USA network and not on Peacock. NBC gets all the the feeds and puts them on its various platforms based on its scheduling decisions and contractual requirements.
There's a huge network of undersea cables to connect the Internet and telephone systems across the oceans, but I'm pretty sure live sports are transmitted by satellite.
I've literally just had to explain to my 88 year-old Dad how we could do a match "catch up" on Amazon Prime all week but we can't do it on Sky.
Yup that's been pretty obvious for years. You can often see the hallmarks of satellite "quality impairment"
Interesting, the last time I tried to watch one of those it wasn't on Peacock, but that's also been a while. I almost always have access to NBC and enjoy the better picture quality OTA. CBS does almost the same thing with the CBSSN games being the only ones that are never available on Paramount+.
Just a silly idea from a boomer but I assumed the NBC and USA games came through the pipes and the streamed games directly over the Interwebs.
... which, of course, would include the death of two satellite providers, plus at least four live streaming providers. Honestly, I don't see the Philos, YouTube TVs, Fubos, DirecTV Streams and Hulus going away anytime soon. People are flocking to them when they're "cable without expensive equipment" these days.
I forgot about YouTube TV. I don't hear anything about in hear in the UK. I'm not sure what their level of commitment really is. The other companies are media based or subsidiaries of non-tech companies which don't really have the resources Amazon and Apple do to throw at a project without being carefully overseen by accountants. Max is probably the closest but it's owned by Time Warner. Off topic I'm not really sure what Google's strategy is with anything these days. They've ruined their search engine though it's still the best imho.
YouTube TV has over 10 million US subscribers, by far the #1 for streaming live TV, and has the NFL Sunday Ticket package. They're bigger than their competitors and pulling away.