HBO Max HBO Max (Official Thread) (1 Viewer)

[Lord Dalek]

-Existing, paying customers of HBO will be provided with HBO MAX accounts at no extra cost

I have NOT read that. That is what is important to me.

 

[Garysb]

I don't think there has been an official announcement on pricing yet, Until then I would classify the free to HBO subscribers to be a hoped for rumor. Maybe it will be free, maybe it will be offered at a discount, maybe there will be different levels of access with HBO subscribers getting the basic level for free. There are all sorts of possibilities.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I don't think there has been an official announcement on pricing yet, Until then I would classify the free to HBO subscribers to be a hoped for rumor. Maybe it will be free, maybe it will be offered at a discount, maybe there will be different levels of access with HBO subscribers getting the basic level for free. There are all sorts of possibilities.

If it's not then they're going to have lower subscription numbers and/or it will affect their other customer numbers that have their services. I'm on the cusp of dropping AT&T as a DirecTV customer with the Premier package along with my Phone and Internet services. If I don't get this service free then that tells me all I need to know about AT&T and their customer loyalty.

 

[Johnny Angell]

Maybe I've completely misunderstood, but from all that I've read about this:

-HBO MAX will include content from HBO and non-HBO content from Warner's extensive library
-Existing, paying customers of HBO will be provided with HBO MAX accounts at no extra cost

Frankly, this is along the lines of “too good to be true.” I’m not doubting you, just the idea.

 

[Johnny Angell]

Frankly, this is along the lines of “too good to be true.” I’m not doubting you, just the idea.

Although, maybe they’re adopting Amazon’s Prime model. Over the years the price has gone up, but the value has, IMHO, exceeded the price increases, particularly if you are a streamer.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Frankly, this is along the lines of “too good to be true.” I’m not doubting you, just the idea.

It's been pointed out to me since I posted that that may have been a rumor rather than something that's the genuine gospel.

However, I hope something like that happens.

Currently, HBO Now (which is the streaming version of HBO you get directly from them rather than your cable company) costs $15 a month - and I believe HBO is even more than that when purchasing from your cable company. Considering that Disney+ is about to offer a wide variety of content for just $7 a month, I'm not sure the market will bear Warner charging more than the $15 that HBO already costs to add in additional material. I think the $15 that HBO Now charges represents the highest price that's out there for a popular streaming service in HD.

So for Warner's own sake, whatever they come up with - I'm not sure that there's really that much wiggle room to increase the price beyond what HBO Now already costs.

 

[Johnny Angell]

It's been pointed out to me since I posted that that may have been a rumor rather than something that's the genuine gospel.

However, I hope something like that happens.

Currently, HBO Now (which is the streaming version of HBO you get directly from them rather than your cable company) costs $15 a month - and I believe HBO is even more than that when purchasing from your cable company. Considering that Disney+ is about to offer a wide variety of content for just $7 a month, I'm not sure the market will bear Warner charging more than the $15 that HBO already costs to add in additional material. I think the $15 that HBO Now charges represents the highest price that's out there for a popular streaming service in HD.

So for Warner's own sake, whatever they come up with - I'm not sure that there's really that much wiggle room to increase the price beyond what HBO Now already costs.

Since I buy HBO from DTV, I get HBONOW at no additional charge.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

You mean HBO Go?

 

[Todd Erwin]

AT&T is really mudding up the waters with all these new streaming services they are launching. DirecTV-Now is getting rebranded at AT&T TV-Now, despite the announcement of another completely different but identical competing service they are launching later this year called AT&T-TV.

 

[Lord Dalek]

I don't think there has been an official announcement on pricing yet, Until then I would classify the free to HBO subscribers to be a hoped for rumor. Maybe it will be free, maybe it will be offered at a discount, maybe there will be different levels of access with HBO subscribers getting the basic level for free. There are all sorts of possibilities.

At the very least it better be a discount. I could cancel VRV and channel that money into this because it has the same content.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Too many product tiers doesn’t work. Too many tiers equals confusion, confusion equals people either not watching the content at all, or pirating it. I don’t condone it but that’s the reality.

These companies really better start understanding that their competition isn’t really other streaming services, other studios or other networks; the competition is piracy. Make your product offerings affordable, easy to understand and easier to use, and they’ll likely do fine. But understand that for $100 and no tech savvy, anyone can buy a hacked streaming device on Amazon or at Walmart and have unlimited access to all of this stuff for free. Or, for $0 and only the tiniest amount of technical ability, you can illegally download almost anything released on a home media format ever. And the vast majority of people who do so do not perceive what they are doing to be stealing and never will. That’s what all of these services are competing with. It’s basically an honor system at this point as to whether people pay for the content they consume. Putting a credit at the very end of movies and shows (after the audience has tuned out) that says “The making of this film supported over 10,000 jobs” does absolutely nothing in terms of changing public perception or behavior.

So when these companies throw out confusing releases with half baked plans, mystery pricing and unclear details, they’re just encouraging the general public to share a password with someone who already paid for it or to buy a hacked streaming box.

Perhaps I’m overly cynical, but the only way these companies survive is if their product is easier to use than the pirated one and almost as cheap. That’s how it’s worked with music. Subscription services like Spotify have thrived because they’re dirt cheap, have everything the majority of the general public wants, and are easier to use than piracy services. It’s about time that the film and television studios and their owners recognize that.

 

[Todd Erwin]

Too many product tiers doesn’t work. Too many tiers equals confusion, confusion equals people either not watching the content at all, or pirating it. I don’t condone it but that’s the reality.

These companies really better start understanding that their competition isn’t really other streaming services, other studios or other networks; the competition is piracy. Make your product offerings affordable, easy to understand and easier to use, and they’ll likely do fine. But understand that for $100 and no tech savvy, anyone can buy a hacked streaming device on Amazon or at Walmart and have unlimited access to all of this stuff for free. Or, for $0 and only the tiniest amount of technical ability, you can illegally download almost anything released on a home media format ever. And the vast majority of people who do so do not perceive what they are doing to be stealing and never will. That’s what all of these services are competing with. It’s basically an honor system at this point as to whether people pay for the content they consume. Putting a credit at the very end of movies and shows (after the audience has tuned out) that says “The making of this film supported over 10,000 jobs” does absolutely nothing in terms of changing public perception or behavior.

So when these companies throw out confusing releases with half baked plans, mystery pricing and unclear details, they’re just encouraging the general public to share a password with someone who already paid for it or to buy a hacked streaming box.

Perhaps I’m overly cynical, but the only way these companies survive is if their product is easier to use than the pirated one and almost as cheap. That’s how it’s worked with music. Subscription services like Spotify have thrived because they’re dirt cheap, have everything the majority of the general public wants, and are easier to use than piracy services. It’s about time that the film and television studios and their owners recognize that.

Partially what drove this trend was the studios realizing that they had licensed much of their content to Netflix at a very undervalued price, then felt that they could make more money by trying to do it themselves with their own library of content. Now we are being bombarded with streaming services left and right, both subscription and non-subscription, to the point that it would make anyone's head spin and drive them to piracy even more so.

And you are right - most people think it is perfectly OK to pirate a movie or TV show using a hacked streaming device. Part of that thinking is that anyone who works in the entertainment industry is overpaid anyway (which is actually the exact opposite, as I know many who are working in the industry and live almost paycheck to paycheck, hoping that the next job is right around the corner). I tried to explain this many times to my co-workers when I was working at a big box retailer, and it fell on deaf ears nearly every time.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Part of that thinking is that anyone who works in the entertainment industry is overpaid anyway

Absolutely! And thats generally not the case among the rank-and-file. The people whose names you see flash by in a ten minute end credit role are not making “I’m gonna buy my own tropical island” money. And for those of us who don’t even make the credit roll...

I’m not crying poverty or anything but it’s kinda frustrating that many people think we’re all getting Tom Cruise money and in many cases, we’d be financially better off if we did something else, but do it because it’s our vocation.

Tom Cruise will be fine if he stopped working tomorrow. But the 10,000 people who work on his films wouldn’t be.

 

[Johnny Angell]

You mean HBO Go?

Yes, sorry ‘bout that.

 

[Cranston37+]

HBO Max could be paying $1.5 billion for The Big Bang Theory and Two and a Half Men.

Goes to show how valuable these catalog shows are to bringing in subscribers...

https://deadline.com/2019/08/hbo-ma...its-marketplace-off-network-spree-1202663188/

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

HBO Max could be paying $1.5 billion for The Big Bang Theory and Two and a Half Men.

Goes to show how valuable these catalog shows are to bringing in subscribers...

Given that they're both Warner Bros. shows, it's just AT&T taking money out of one pocket and putting it into another pocket.

 

[Todd Erwin]

Given that they're both Warner Bros. shows, it's just AT&T taking money out of one pocket and putting it into another pocket.

Yes, but they don't want to be accused of what Fox did with Bones on Hulu - underselling the show to a service they (partially) owned and thus reducing the amount of fairly due residuals to the talent involved.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/t...g-cheating-reprehensible-studio-fraud-1190346

 

[Cranston37+]

Given that they're both Warner Bros. shows, it's just AT&T taking money out of one pocket and putting it into another pocket.

Let me rephrase - they see these properties as valuable enough to leave a lot of money on the table by not selling to a 3rd party like Netflix...

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Yes, but they don't want to be accused of what Fox did with Bones on Hulu - underselling the show to a service they (partially) owned and thus reducing the amount of fairly due residuals to the talent involved.

As the studios get locked into just funneling content to their corporate sibling streaming service, I think you're going to see more and more disputes like that. How do you establish fair market value when only one entity is allowed to bid?

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I also wonder how much market value this content will have long term - are people subscribing to streaming services specifically for reruns of Two and a Half Men, or are they watching them because they're already on a service they're paying for?

I just wonder whether there's enough of a paying audience for this content to justify investing over a billion dollars in it.