AVS Forum banner

381 - 400 of 403 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,258 Posts
To be fair, they are not making zero dollars. HBO is on those platforms and they still make $15 a month from it. It's just that HBOMAX is not there.

Would they get more subscribers if HBOMAX was there? Probably.

Would it be a lot more subscribers?

Would it be enough more profit to offset the perceived danger of the extreme "tax" those platforms want to charge for HBOMAX?

Apparently Warner doesn't think so. Maybe they are playing chicken, maybe they are laughing at still raking in money from those platforms even without MAX being on them.

Meanwhile users like us are stuck in the middle. But I can't say I'd do things differently if I were Warner.
I think you mean HBO is still on those platforms, and Warner makes something less than $15 a month from it -- reportedly up to 50% less, at least for subscriptions through Amazon/Roku. At some point those deals expire, and then they will make zero on those subs, and, if there is no deal in place, Amazon and Roku will probably pull the apps.

As I indicated above, I don't think it is unreasonable for Warner to try to get a better cut of those subs, especially given the ridiculous tax on those platforms. I just don't think Warner is being smart about how they are going about it. Sign a 1 year deal, get as many subs as you can, so you have more clout if you leave, and then renegotiate for better terms the next time around, when a lot of angry customers will complain to Amazon/Roku if their app goes away.

I get that Warner is under a lot of pressure to grow their OTT subs, so it just doesn't seem smart to hamstring yourself this way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,485 Posts
How Is It September and HBO Max Still Does Not Do 4K or HDR?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,485 Posts
Roku announced last week that their ad-supported THE ROKU CHANNEL would be made available in the next few months as a standalone app for Android and iOS devices. Within ONE WEEK of that announcement THE ROKU CHANNEL is now available for all Fire TV devices, their largest OTT hardware device competitor. Yet, HBO Max remains 'officially' unavailable on both Roku and Amazon devices.

Yea. That makes complete sense, AT&T. :unsure:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hetfieldjames

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,485 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,485 Posts
It's there any news at all for HBO Max adding 4k HDR? I mean this is just a tad ridiculous at this point.
Haven't you heard?? This was a 'flawless' launch!!! :eek: :rolleyes:

Maybe the LOTR and Hobbit trilogies getting 4K HDR/DV/ATMOS treatment for a December 1st release will 'inspire' Warnermedia to get off the dime and try and tie some form of HBO Max 4K HDR support of select titles around the same timeframe. That is about as much hope as I can muster at the moment for them actually caring about it at all. :mad:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
35,388 Posts

Let's hope some of the HBO Max streaming developers and the team 'working' on 4K HDR support survive this round of layoffs.
I hope so too but this is simply AT&T trying to shed as much debt as possible. With AT&T it's always about the investors and their short term gains above anything else.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,922 Posts
Haven't you heard?? This was a 'flawless' launch!!! :eek: :rolleyes:

Maybe the LOTR and Hobbit trilogies getting 4K HDR/DV/ATMOS treatment for a December 1st release will 'inspire' Warnermedia to get off the dime and try and tie some form of HBO Max 4K HDR support of select titles around the same timeframe. That is about as much hope as I can muster at the moment for them actually caring about it at all. :mad:
Everything AT&T does is flawless.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,485 Posts
  • Like
Reactions: Hetfieldjames

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,636 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,494 Posts
Anyone know when the Snyder cut of Justice League will be released on HBO Max? I plan on signing up just for that and then canceling shortly after.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,485 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,035 Posts
Unless I missed it, that article seems to ignore the fact that HBO is on ROKU and FIRE devices, collecting money, already. It's HBO MAX that is missing, not HBO, and while there might be an uptick in subscribers if Max were available, the article's math assumes there are zero subscribers right now for the regular HBO service on those devices.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,485 Posts
Unless I missed it, that article seems to ignore the fact that HBO is on ROKU and FIRE devices, collecting money, already. It's HBO MAX that is missing, not HBO, and while there might be an uptick in subscribers if Max were available, the article's math assumes there are zero subscribers right now for the regular HBO service on those devices.
It depends on how you subscribe. I have HBO Max through my AT&T Wireless UNLIMITED data plan. There is no 'official' way to install the HBO or HBO Max app on a Roku or Fire TV device and access any content. I can side load HBO Max on my Fire TV device and get HBO and HBO Max content. I can install the HBO app on a Roku device or Fire TV device, but with a subscription through my AT&T Wireless plan there is no way to sign in and access any content.

And people with HBO through cable subscriptions were using the HBO GO app to gain access on Roku and Fire TV devices. That option was removed at the end of August by AT&T.

I think the main point of the article is still valid. If they want to grow HBO Max beyond their existing cable subscription add-on experience they can't afford to play this game for much longer. People seek out Roku and Fire TV devices for simple easy access to content. They are not going to hack or jump through multiple hoops to figure it out. Look how few people that were granted a 'free upgrade' to HBO Max have actually activated it. They either don't care or they were interested and then went to their Roku or Fire TV device only to discover that you can't use either for easy install and access.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,258 Posts
Unless I missed it, that article seems to ignore the fact that HBO is on ROKU and FIRE devices, collecting money, already. It's HBO MAX that is missing, not HBO, and while there might be an uptick in subscribers if Max were available, the article's math assumes there are zero subscribers right now for the regular HBO service on those devices.
Consider the source. Wall Street doesn't care about what you did for them 1 minute ago. They care about how much you are going to grow your business in the next minute. Existing revenue (of which HBO reportedly gets only 50%) is old news.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,485 Posts
Consider the source. Wall Street doesn't care about what you did for them 1 minute ago. They care about how much you are going to grow your business in the next minute. Existing revenue (of which HBO reportedly gets only 50%) is old news.
Good point. I don't know what AT&T/HBO's take is on a $14.99 a month cable subscription. It likely is less than $14.99.

I know the negotiations are more complex than a basic subscription sharing split, but it was interesting to read that if the standard subscription share from Roku were implemented a $14.99 a month HBO Max subscription from a new subscriber would net AT&T $11.99 a month. AT&T is currently promoting a discounted one-year price of $11.99 a month. Call me crazy, but trying to launch an expanded HBO Max service and keeping it off of the top two OTT services with 80 million users for the same net monthly subscription fee that you are willing to accept directly from a customer for the next year seems a bit odd.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ncted

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,694 Posts
^ $5 is the number I've repeatedly heard that cable operators get from selling HBO to their subscribers. So HBO collecting $11.99 sounds consistent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,670 Posts
^ $5 is the number I've repeatedly heard that cable operators get from selling HBO to their subscribers. So HBO collecting $11.99 sounds consistent.
I read somewhere a long while back that the average wholesale rate that cable operators paid per HBO subscriber was only about $7.65. Whatever the cableco charged above that, they got to keep. And for awhile now, the standard a la carte price of HBO has been $15, although many cableco's included it as part of larger channel packages and also sometimes give it away free or at a discounted rate for a period of time as a promotion or incentive to attract or retain customers. So the effective average retail price would have been less than $15. Also, cable operators, not HBO, were originally largely responsible for marketing the service. And of course they had to ingest the signals from HBO, distribute it on their system, handle the billing and customer service, etc. So there are some operational costs that come out of their cut of the price.

The economics of a direct-to-consumer app are different and the typical cut that a video service pays to a digital app store distributor/biller like Apple, Google, Amazon or Roku is 20% (maybe 30% the first year, though). When the service is entirely distributed from HBO's servers and consumed within the HBO Max app, all the app store is really doing is keeping the app on their servers and handling the billing for anyone who signs up in the app downloaded from them.

Then you have the situation that HBO is trying to get away from, digital distributors that ingest HBO into their own app and stream the content from their own servers, like Prime Video and The Roku Channel.
 
381 - 400 of 403 Posts
Top