AVS Forum banner

2181 - 2200 of 2261 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,001 Posts
What I can't get it why YouTube TV decided to add channels found in other services to start with? Sure they'll say this is what many customers wanted. Did they ask for the price increases too?

But it never made sense to me to add channels that lined up with a popular combo that many had when Google-Alphabet had YTTV at $35- YTTV + Philo. If YTTV couldn't add all the Philo stations at 16 or 20 bucks, don't even start adding them.

Thirty dollar increase and still not got all the Philo channels. Seems Sling is smarter. They have many of those channels but not at a high premium. At least until many sports are back to competing, I can get by with Sling Blue. At these prices, maybe I can add some add-ons as needed.

I had hoped that the YTTV plan would be more sports focused than what they've been, dropping many Fox RSNs. Rather than losing a bunch of subs by raising prices continually, maybe just accept that some would-be subs will never be happy until they find a streaming provider with all channels in one app. Golly gee, dropping Sling Blue + Philo and going Fubo looks better than YTTV right now to me but both YTTV and Fubo are disappointing with losing sports centric focus.

Sent from my PH-1 using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,088 Posts
See the attached contract our condo bldg has with Comcast. 3 or 4 nearby bldgs have the same deal. How they can do this, I don't know. Virtually every channel (incl HBO, SHO etc.) X-1 service in main room and 2 bdrms (tons of storage 240Mbps internet - ALL for under $90/mo.!! The condo Assn pays the $88 per unit each month, included in our monthly dues.
Comcast brought fiber to the bldg. and to each unit. Before that just had regular Comcast service. They call this "bulk service".
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
155 Posts
This should give people an idea of what providers pay for channels:

https://www.streamingmediablog.com/2019/01/live-ott-channel-costs.html

The above list has 96 channels, including the ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX. Only Paramount is listed for Viacom.

Let's just say the 8 channels added probably between $2 to $5 maximum. Most channels are under $1 and many are under $0.50 per subscriber.

So, $10 of the $15 increase is either for added costs for existing programming, or a way to make a profit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,512 Posts
This should give people an idea of what providers pay for channels:


https://www.streamingmediablog.com/2019/01/live-ott-channel-costs.html


The above list has 96 channels, including the ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX. Only Paramount is listed fro Viacom.



Let's just say the 8 channels added probably between $2 to $5 maximum. Most channels are under $1 and many are under $0.50 per subscriber.



So, $10 of the $15 increase is either for added costs for exiting programming, or a way to make a profit.
Wow that was interesting, thanks for the link. 6 bucks for ESPN per sub is nuts. That is a fortune. They rest, most are reasonable. Bravo at 1.10 per sub is surprising to me. It's a strange system in any event. I don't know why it works the way it does.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
155 Posts
There used to be an exhaustive list, on the Internet, which listed every channel. But, I could not find it. The carriers do not want the info to get out for obvious reasons.


ESPN is the most expensive of any channels out there, except premiums.

But, providers must buy blocks of channels. If you want to carry ESPN, the provider has to carry National Geographic, ABC, Freeform, Disney, FX, FXX, FXM, etc. and that cost about $17 - $20/subscriber. CBS/Viacom, NBC/Comcast, AT&T/Turner/Time-Warner, A&E Networks, Hearst and Scripps the same thing.

The thing provider fear is ala carte and the better networks atrt streaming on their own, like AMC.

So, YouTube TV is not spending $15 for Viacom. Philo has all the A&E, Scripps, Hearst, Viacom and Hallmark, and they charge $20 for the whole lot.



Wow that was interesting, thanks for the link. 6 bucks for ESPN per sub is nuts. That is a fortune. They rest, most are reasonable. Bravo at 1.10 per sub is surprising to me. It's a strange system in any event. I don't know why it works the way it does.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,512 Posts
There used to be an exhaustive list, on the Internet, which listed every channel. But, I could not find it. The carriers do not want the info to get out for obvious reasons.


ESPN is the most expensive of any channels out there, except premiums.

But, providers must buy blocks of channels. If you want to carry ESPN, the provider has to carry National Geographic, ABC, Freeform, Disney, FX, FXX, FXM, etc. and that cost about $17 - $20/subscriber. CBS/Viacom, NBC/Comcast, AT&T/Turner/Time-Warner, A&E Networks, Hearst and Scripps the same thing.

The thing provider fear is ala carte and the better networks atrt streaming on their own, like AMC.

So, YouTube TV is not spending $15 for Viacom. Philo has all the A&E, Scripps, Hearst, Viacom and Hallmark, and they charge $20 for the whole lot.
I know everyone wants a la carte but I'm not sure in the end that works. I think it will cost more in the end and you'll end up with a package anyway. We are in a bind. Choose the service that works for you and stick with it I guess.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,245 Posts
.....So, YouTube TV is not spending $15 for Viacom. Philo has all the A&E, Scripps, Hearst, Viacom and Hallmark, and they charge $20 for the whole lot.
I agree with several others. YTTV was looking for an excuse to raise their rates. The addition of Viacom gave them one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,681 Posts
This should give people an idea of what providers pay for channels:

https://www.streamingmediablog.com/2019/01/live-ott-channel-costs.html

The above list has 96 channels, including the ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX. Only Paramount is listed for Viacom.

Let's just say the 8 channels added probably between $2 to $5 maximum. Most channels are under $1 and many are under $0.50 per subscriber.

So, $10 of the $15 increase is either for added costs for existing programming, or a way to make a profit.
But, providers must buy blocks of channels. If you want to carry ESPN, the provider has to carry National Geographic, ABC, Freeform, Disney, FX, FXX, FXM, etc. and that cost about $17 - $20/subscriber. CBS/Viacom, NBC/Comcast, AT&T/Turner/Time-Warner, A&E Networks, Hearst and Scripps the same thing.

The thing provider fear is ala carte and the better networks atrt streaming on their own, like AMC.

So, YouTube TV is not spending $15 for Viacom. Philo has all the A&E, Scripps, Hearst, Viacom and Hallmark, and they charge $20 for the whole lot.
As the author mentioned in his article, these fees are not standard for all cable operators/streaming services across the board. A service with more subscribers will be charged a higher monthly subscriber fee for channel packages, while a medium/smaller operator pays less.



The channel owners are trying to make up for the loss of cable subscriber fees, by subjecting the new streamers to the same pricing they've always gotten from cable/satellite.



They're gonna choke off this new distribution outlet then whine about why they aren't making as much as they did previously.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
This should give people an idea of what providers pay for channels:

https://www.streamingmediablog.com/2019/01/live-ott-channel-costs.html

The above list has 96 channels, including the ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX. Only Paramount is listed for Viacom.

Let's just say the 8 channels added probably between $2 to $5 maximum. Most channels are under $1 and many are under $0.50 per subscriber.

So, $10 of the $15 increase is either for added costs for existing programming, or a way to make a profit.
But what we're NOT talking about is the next paragraph in the article:
The channel pricing listed gives a good insight into one of the major costs of running a live OTT platform and when you add in the distribution costs, and all the technical pieces of the workflow, on top of the content costs, it’s not possible to run a profitable streaming live TV business. Even at scale, I don’t know of any live OTT service that isn’t losing money which is why all of the major services are owned by MVPDs, ISPs, or others that can afford to lose money on the service, since their offering is part of a bigger product ecosystem.
So if you add up all the costs of the channels, that's ONLY the cost of the product. Everything between the cost of then product and our fee is the cost of delivery. Like the author said, cable companies can eat a part of that cost because they are also selling you the internet access. None of the streaming platforms like YTTV can do that. It would be interesting to price all the channels we get and see how much YTTV was subsidizing our costs before now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,243 Posts
This should give people an idea of what providers pay for channels:
https://www.streamingmediablog.com/2019/01/live-ott-channel-costs.html
The above list has 96 channels, including the ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX. Only Paramount is listed for Viacom...
Thanks for this useful link.
For fun, I rated all 48 (96?) Channels in the list from 1-4. My favorite Channels are rated 1 and 2, and I would definitely watch all of them regularly. The suck Channels are rated 3-4, and I would never watch any of them.
For all 48 channels the total cost is $49.90. For my 22 favorite channels the cost is $31.53, which could (theoretically) lower my YTTV price by 37%. One can only dream for a better world, like the Liberty Mutual ads say: "Only pay for what your need." :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,420 Posts
Thanks for this useful link.
For fun, I rated all 48 (96?) Channels in the list from 1-4. My favorite Channels are rated 1 and 2, and I would definitely watch all of them regularly. The suck Channels are rated 3-4, and I would never watch any of them.
For all 48 channels the total cost is $49.90. For my 22 favorite channels the cost is $31.53, which could (theoretically) lower my YTTV price by 37%. One can only dream for a better world, like the Liberty Mutual ads say: "Only pay for what your need." :)
It's like a restaurant pricing dishes, you have to buy in bulk. So it helps if a lot of people want the channels you want. It's also why real ala-carte will never work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Thanks for this useful link.
For fun, I rated all 48 (96?) Channels in the list from 1-4. My favorite Channels are rated 1 and 2, and I would definitely watch all of them regularly. The suck Channels are rated 3-4, and I would never watch any of them.
For all 48 channels the total cost is $49.90. For my 22 favorite channels the cost is $31.53, which could (theoretically) lower my YTTV price by 37%. One can only dream for a better world, like the Liberty Mutual ads say: "Only pay for what your need." :)
It's like a restaurant pricing dishes, you have to buy in bulk. So it helps if a lot of people want the channels you want. It's also why real ala-carte will never work.
And as gets repeatedly mentioned, the streamer has to buy packages of channels (thanks to network consolidations) in order to provide you with the one channel you want to watch. So the channel list needs to be re-ordered into groups of providers, and the price for each group added up. That would be as close to à la carte as you can get.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,144 Posts
This should give people an idea of what providers pay for channels:

https://www.streamingmediablog.com/2019/01/live-ott-channel-costs.html

The above list has 96 channels, including the ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX. Only Paramount is listed for Viacom.

Let's just say the 8 channels added probably between $2 to $5 maximum. Most channels are under $1 and many are under $0.50 per subscriber.

So, $10 of the $15 increase is either for added costs for existing programming, or a way to make a profit.
I added up my must have channels and it came to only $10.86 a month!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,144 Posts
I was watching a movie on YTTV yesterday on the OWN channel and I added it to my library while watching. I got a phone call and was on the phone for a while. Later in the day, when I found the movie in the library thinking I would continue watching, there was no link to actually PLAY the movie. A couple of other times, I've noticed that things I've added to my library when I go back to play them have a message saying that the content cannot be streamed. What's the deal?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,147 Posts
I was watching a movie on YTTV yesterday on the OWN channel and I added it to my library while watching. I got a phone call and was on the phone for a while. Later in the day, when I found the movie in the library thinking I would continue watching, there was no link to actually PLAY the movie. A couple of other times, I've noticed that things I've added to my library when I go back to play them have a message saying that the content cannot be streamed. What's the deal?
Not sure what happened in this case but whenever I get phone calls when watching something on YTTV I just hit pause and then hit play when I’m done with my phone call. You can pause for a long time. I’ve done it for around 45 minutes or so but don’t really know what the limit is. It’s all done in the cloud so doesn’t use any local storage. When you start playing again you also have the ability to FF/REW.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,453 Posts
Mine comes to about $30 if I also include the few channels that it would be nice to have but I could live without. But that price doesn't include more than a half-dozen channels not listed here I'd want (my Fox Sports RSN, TNT, BBCA, CBS Sports Network, Syfy, Animal Planet, MSNBC, CW, PBS), which are included with YouTube TV.
 
2181 - 2200 of 2261 Posts
Top