Well, when they charge something like $20/mo PER each DVR... (As of last I looked, which admittedly, was a long time ago. I know some systems have modernized with streaming/cloud DVRs and whole-home systems.) At least with my U-Verse, it's $10 for HD, the first box (DVR) is included and I'm fortunate to be grandfathered in to paying $0 for additional receivers. Plus, I get discounts in enough places that the HD is *essentially* free. I do remember a big brouhaha a few years ago when the cable companies realized the live streamers didn't have to pay taxes/fees because their channels get delivered over the internet. The argument there was that some pay website offering live video didn't have to pay taxes, so why should Hulu/Fubo/etc. Of course, the satellite radio companies ended up not just having to pay taxes, but also music royalty fees. In 2004-2005 or so, everything was buried in to one cost. (And I'm down to $4/mo plus taxes/fees for two years for everything offered via one in-car radio and one app/website login.)
https://worldsoccertalk.com/tv/the-rise-and-fall-of-mls-on-tv-due-to-increased-competition/ The author fails to mention that not all MLS games are behind that paywall. There's usually a few free games every weekend plus the occasional game on Fox or FS1.
Ok, so here's my question/comment/observation: Back in the day, a game might be on ESPN and Univision. The ratings would have been **this** for ESPN and *that** for Univision. Ok, cool. But if a USMNT game is on TNT and TruTV, I'm guessing those ratings aren't combined, which might not necessarily be a good thing, given how ratings can affect ad dollars and contract negotiations. But... I'd also think the negotiators would be smart enough to realize such. Obviously there may be people watching on Max and they don't have to release those numbers, AFAIK.
https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-...us-or-hulu-for-free-with-a-kroger-membership/ You can get ONE of Disney+, ESPN+ or Hulu with a Kroger membership.
https://www.tomsguide.com/entertain...-cord-cutters-a-major-upgrade-heres-whats-new You can now sign up for various services like Paramount+ via Fubo without having a Fubo subscription. I *guess* the benefit is to be able to cancel the Fubo subscription and not download a new app. Other than that, I can't think of anyone who'd do this when you can sign up directly via Paramount+.
The catch with some of these "deals" is that they often only include the commercial-filled option. But yeah... for espn+ I find that doesn't really matter (with others, like Hulu, the commercial option is simply unwatchable and not even worth it if its free).
As usual, the internet is doing what it does. I'm watching college basketball on TNT via U-Verse. As usual, TNT West is about three seconds ahead of TNT East. (I've seen two different feeds be off by more though.) Max is just slightly ahead of TNT West. Hulu's TNT East is about :11 behind U-Verse TNT West. Hulu's TNT West is about +/- one second off Hulu's TNT East. Of course because it's fecking streaming video, good luck trying synch up TNT East (or West) on two different TVs...this problem isn't unique to Hulu or TNT. I've never tried to see if the same U-Verse channel is synched on two different TVs, but I really should. Streaming video is good if you're isolated, but if you're connected to the outside world, good luck. Person 1: "What a pass!" **30 seconds later.** Person 2: "What a pass!" Person 1: "Yeah, I saw that a while ago." This problem with the internet has been around for at least 20 years. You think they'd have it figured out by now. If you have five TVs set on the same DirecTV channel, well... I'm sure we've all been to a sports bar with a crazy number of TVs.
Oh, it was so fun seeing the result of the Jake Paul vs Mike Tyson fight pop up on my phone before the last round started. And the vast majority of people don't care. Others? It's just "proof" that "everything is scripted."
On Wednesday, 12/4, the Disney+ app is getting an ESPN+ tile. If that means LIVE content from ESPN/ESPN+, it just got real interesting. (It could be a better financial value to make someone's singular service be Disney+, as they'd be getting way more bang for their buck.) If that just means archives, some stuff is already on Disney+.
I think this is their way of making the current bundle easier to access while also allowing them to make the ESPN app itself the sole place to get the full ESPN standalone streaming service.
Will also post on Univision thread, but better visibility here. Pop up message on my Vix+ app the other day announcing price increase from $6.99 to $8.99 a month in December. Presumably price for annual subscription will go up as well. Does anyone know the date? I'd like to change my plan to annual with ads ($34.99) the day before the price increase.
This might be crazy, but here's what I'd be tempted to look at doing if I was their bosses: Hulu: One-stop shopping for live TV. Sell a subscription to ESPN+, accessible via a scaled-down Hulu app. Disney+: Keep this as-is, but move ALL archived ESPN content here. Disney+ becomes the home of archived stuff. Shut down the ESPN app. In FAAAACTTTT...I wonder if it could ALL be accessible via the Hulu app. Depending on someone's subscription level, they'd get different shows via that. There might be contractual issues with some of the show owners. Simpsons episodes are still in two different tiles: One for past seasons and one for the current season. Three apps for one subscription seems a bit of a hot mess. I don't believe they're even synchronized. If a show is in Hulu and Disney+ and I start watching it via Hulu, Disney+ is a separate algorithm and it doesn't keep track of what I watch via Hulu.
My problem with this is that the Disney+ app is the worst UI of the bunch by a mile. ESPN won't disappear as an app because they're going all in on all ESPN content, live channels, streaming, and archives, being in a single place for sports nuts.
Yeah, it seems they're gonna keep three apps AND have Venu. I could theoretically watch ESPN via my TV provider app, Venu or the ESPN app...possibly another way I'm forgetting. It seems a bit overkill.
Yup. There'll be a day when even Hulu Live, YTTV and Fubo are considered old/archaic. We'll pay DTC and get our shows via 17 (not really) different apps. We'll discover new shows via Google TV, Amazon Fire, etc...whatever their algorithms "suggest" which might be partially what people pay Google/Amazon more for a boost in said algorithms. As I've said, I get a chuckle when I see stuff like "I get my cable via Fubo" or "I have YouTube cable." I think us 20s through younger 40s are at a good time because we're young/savvy enough to keep abreast of the changes, but there'll be a time when we're not... hopefully it's settled down by then, but I doubt it. There'll be something AFTER the "Algorithm Era." Era 1 = OTA Era 2 = Cable Era 2.5 = Cable/satellite Era 3 = Streaming TV providers (Hulu, YTTV and even obsolete ones like PlayStation Vue. NOT DTC.) Era 4 = Algorithms being fed by DTC options Era 5 = ??? (2040s? 2050s? It could be the 2030s, for all anyone knows.) (IDK where U-Verse and FiOS are. Yes, they operate like cable, but there's a big technical difference.) Believe it or not, some older people are still in era 1. Those free options that tend to show the older shows, but are accessible via streaming devices are Era 4 even though they have similar shows/channels/methods to Era 1. And yes, it is possible for someone to be a mix. I have U-Verse as my primary TV, but also regularly use Peacock, Max, ESPN+ and Disney+.
Yeah, though I'm not sure the problem is solvable because isn't where you are located, the strength or your internet and how you're connected (through a cable or wifi) also impact the delay? If so, I don't see how the issue ever gets solved fully. Too many variables. But yeah... you'd think after 20 years we'd at least have the disparities down to a few seconds, not minutes.
https://9to5mac.com/2024/12/06/inside-details-on-apple-mls-deal-viewership-revealed-in-new-report/ Some of the MLS Season Pass numbers have been released. On one hand, it's really intriguing that other leagues haven't figured that "one-stop shopping" mindset out yet. OTOH, I'm glad they haven't. I'm not a big enough fan to drop $200 or whatever just to casually watch parts of random games. Then again, MLS skews younger...it makes sense they'd lead the charge, given how the vast majority of their fan base probably has Hulu, YTTV, Fubo or even no live TV at all.
https://tvanswerman.com/2024/12/07/fubo-launches-new-base-package-without-rsn-fees/ Fubo now has an option to pay for the base package (same price) without RSNs. Gosh...if only YTTV and Hulu could figure that out. (With their bankruptcy in the rearview mirror, there may be hope yet.)
YTTV only has a few RSNs and it doesn't effect the price. It also has the WBD channels so it's still a much better deal, along with having a better UI and other functions like the custom guide that Fubo doesn't have.
Fubo has them as an add-on. DirecTV Stream-slash-with Internet have the RSNs on their second tier. Hopefully this is a pathway for them to get back on Hulu, Sling and YTTV. And now with them charging customers direct...if they can charge $20/mo for app access, you'd think it'd be easier for them to get back on those three providers. If Hulu, Sling and YTTV can't get them back on, it's probably not an RSN problem.
RSNs are dead though. In Texas, the Stars are on a free streamer (Victory+) and both the Mavericks and Spurs have their games on local networks. The Rangers have ended their deal with Bally Sports (or whatever it's called now) and are considering either putting together a series of OTA deals like the Mavs/Spurs or joining Victory+ with the Stars in 2025. The only reason the Houston teams are still using an RSN is because they actually bought theirs and run it together.