4 ms·
People don't want to pay $100 a month for cable TV either, but they did it anyway (for decades) and continue to do so. Now we're being asked to buy a bunch of s
by bookbinder 8y ago
People don't want to pay $100 a month for cable TV either, but they did it anyway (for decades) and continue to do so. Now we're being asked to buy a bunch of streaming services and we'll bitch and moan, but ultimately we'll pay because every major platform will have at least one show that justifies their existence.
I associate CBS with bland procedural crime dramas and awful three-camera sitcoms. CBS All Access would have been doomed without Star Trek: Discovery. Admittedly, the show isn't particularly good, but I'm a trekkie so it doesn't matter. On the plus side, I discovered The Good Fight (a surprising smart, entertaining and well written show) so I now I have a legitimate reason to give a damn about All Access.
And then Apple will offer their own gateway drug (Lord of the Rings?) and Disney (...well they could just offer their back catalogue alone and still be a major player) and so on.
- adjkant 8y ago> continue to do so What are the numbers on that? My impression was that cable is declining fast.
- daveFNbuck 8y agoI've paid for 2 months of CBS All Access, once at the end of each season of The Good Fight. That one show only gets me to pay a bit less than $1/month. Comedy Central doesn't have a streaming service, so I have to pay for shows individually on Amazon. That also ends up being a lot cheaper than CBS All Access, and it cuts me off from learning about their other shows. I think all the Comedy Central shows I used to watch have been cancelled, so they won't be getting any of my money going forward unless I somehow learn about their new shows. That's a lot easier to do if my existing services start recommending Comedy Central shows to me.
- MikusR 8y agoLord of the Rings is Amazon
- pwinnski 8y ago> People don't want to pay $100 a month for cable TV either, but they did it anyway (for decades)... In the absence of alternatives, it seemed like what entertainment cost. The alternatives for free or cheap are enough that many, many, many people are opting out. > ...and continue to do so. Evidence[0] suggests otherwise. Leaving evidence aside, I think that each service will likely have something to attract some number of subscribers, yes. Amazon is doing LotR, Disney wants a piece, CBS has Star Trek, etc. I don't think it follows that a large number of people are going to subscribe to more than one or two on an ongoing basis. People subscribe to CBS All-Access for one month, perhaps a trial month, and binge all of ST:D, then cancel. They already have a subscription to Amazon Prime for non-TV reasons. Maybe they share subscriptions with friends, or maybe they turn to piracy, or maybe they just shrug and go back to watching Netflix and YouTube, which is enough. Most people never had all the available channels, including premium channels, anyway. Going without a show or two isn't a problem for most people when the marginal cost is so high. [0] https://variety.com/2018/biz/news/cord-cutting-2017-high-cost-cancellation-pay-tv-1202728922/ https://variety.com/2018/biz/news/cord-cutting-2017-high-cos...
- EADGBE 8y ago> I associate CBS with bland procedural crime dramas and awful three-camera sitcoms. The Good Fight is really good, now I'm going back to watch the predecessor.
- s2g 8y agoI won't pay for Star Trek Discovery because it's on CBS all access. It's just not worth it. Amazon/Netflix/Hulu/HBO are worth it. thats what, about 50 a month? not bad. Even so I still end up on youtube a lot of the time.