> someone who watches a very small amount of content Your post is otherwise good; however its worth mentioning that the services tend to be narrow but extremel

> someone who watches a very small amount of content Your post is otherwise good; however its worth mentioning that the services tend to be narrow but extremely deep. This will have interesting market fragmentation effects... Theoretically I could change the channels tonight between full metal alchemist reruns and ESPN, although not being interested in sports, I won't. But I could, and if I was really bored maybe I'd magically transmute into a rabid rugby fan. In an era where credit cards have to be whipped out and customer service argued with to change the channel-app, its likely I'll subscribe to an anime streaming service and never even have the ability to see ESPN. And the follow on to that, is as a long term survival strategy, "TV apps" will almost need to let people stream one show per week for free with no subscription, otherwise due to normal churn you'll get 5% of your subs leaving annually and 0% new subs. At least currently, middlemen publishers need a smooth on ramp to survive. And the follow on to the follow on, is people who only watch one show on XYZ network will likely watch for free, and the "TV app" ecosystem will likely smell a lot like the existing premium channel marketplace. And the follow on to the follow on to the ..., is existing premium channels need to watch out... if the history channel gave up hitler, truckers, pawn shops, fishermen, and all the other stereotypical reality TV shows and actually did history for a change, HBO better look out if they think they can do everything with a headliner of a medieval g0repr0n series, surely a dedicated premium history app-channel could blow them out of the water, in fact trying to do everything will get them blown out of the water for everything, and given the lack of subscriber interest overlap, they're likely utterly doomed.