3 ms·

My understanding is the old guard launched as the new guard (Discovery-Warner: http://cnn.com/2022/04/08/media/discovery-warner-media-merger-close http://cnn.co

My understanding is the old guard launched as the new guard (Discovery-Warner: http://cnn.com/2022/04/08/media/discovery-warner-media-merger-close http://cnn.com/2022/04/08/media/discovery-warner-media-merge...) was taking over. Probably should have waited to see how the new management wanted to play it, but likely the new team didn't have much say before everything closed. If I was to guess they are pulling it now because the numbers are terrible, but more importantly it needs to be rethought to fit into an HBO Max + Discovery + CNN mega service.

BaseballPhysics 4y ago
Exactly this. Everyone here is acting as though CNN+ was a failure as a product, when the real issue is that, in the context of the Warner Media Discovery entity, the new management no longer feels that product is aligned with their corporate strategy. I think we can expect a lot more of this kind of trimming as the combined organization continues to remove redundant services and programming, etc.
- tsimionescu 4y ago
  It failed as a product spectacularly. 18k subscribers after your first month and 300M$ is abysmal, below even obscure YouTube channels.
  - BaseballPhysics 4y ago
    Do you have access to their internal modelling? I don't. I have no idea what they were expecting. I agree, that seems like a slow start, but that's a single month in a very challenging quarter. Given Netflix, one of the biggest participants in the space, missed their subscriber projections by 2.7M in the first quarter, and are forecasting a further 2.5M contraction, I see a very crowded field where a niche offering should be expected to find a small audience and grow slow. Regardless, I stand by my claim that commenters are missing the forest for the trees, here, and using this as an opportunity to bash the CNN brand rather than stepping back and looking at the broader context.
    - throwawaylinux 4y ago
      > Do you have access to their internal modelling? I don't. I have no idea what they were expecting. That's pretty rich considering you asserted it did not fail as a product, then demanded this of someone who disagreed with you (and is obviously right).
    - kansface 4y ago
      They brought in less than 50k dollars on a 300 million investment with very high, ongoing operating costs.
    - bavell 4y ago
      > Do you have access to their internal modelling? I don't. I have no idea what they were expecting. This info is already out there [0] and they were laughably off the mark. They were expecting 2M subs this year and up to 18M in four years, according to McKinsey. It's funny watching people defending a dying brand. The broader context is that CNN and the rest of cable news has been self-immolating for awhile now and are circling the drain, desperate to remain relevant. [0] https://www.axios.com/cnn-plus-cuts-warner-brothers-discovery-1be0ac3a-6952-4af0-b8e2-03dd6ae0839c.html https://www.axios.com/cnn-plus-cuts-warner-brothers-discover...
- captaincaveman 4y ago
  I did seem to fail as a product though too!

BaseballPhysics 4y ago

Exactly this. Everyone here is acting as though CNN+ was a failure as a product, when the real issue is that, in the context of the Warner Media Discovery entity, the new management no longer feels that product is aligned with their corporate strategy. I think we can expect a lot more of this kind of trimming as the combined organization continues to remove redundant services and programming, etc.

tsimionescu 4y ago
It failed as a product spectacularly. 18k subscribers after your first month and 300M$ is abysmal, below even obscure YouTube channels.
- BaseballPhysics 4y ago
  Do you have access to their internal modelling? I don't. I have no idea what they were expecting. I agree, that seems like a slow start, but that's a single month in a very challenging quarter. Given Netflix, one of the biggest participants in the space, missed their subscriber projections by 2.7M in the first quarter, and are forecasting a further 2.5M contraction, I see a very crowded field where a niche offering should be expected to find a small audience and grow slow. Regardless, I stand by my claim that commenters are missing the forest for the trees, here, and using this as an opportunity to bash the CNN brand rather than stepping back and looking at the broader context.
  - throwawaylinux 4y ago
    > Do you have access to their internal modelling? I don't. I have no idea what they were expecting. That's pretty rich considering you asserted it did not fail as a product, then demanded this of someone who disagreed with you (and is obviously right).
  - kansface 4y ago
    They brought in less than 50k dollars on a 300 million investment with very high, ongoing operating costs.
  - bavell 4y ago
    > Do you have access to their internal modelling? I don't. I have no idea what they were expecting. This info is already out there [0] and they were laughably off the mark. They were expecting 2M subs this year and up to 18M in four years, according to McKinsey. It's funny watching people defending a dying brand. The broader context is that CNN and the rest of cable news has been self-immolating for awhile now and are circling the drain, desperate to remain relevant. [0] https://www.axios.com/cnn-plus-cuts-warner-brothers-discovery-1be0ac3a-6952-4af0-b8e2-03dd6ae0839c.html https://www.axios.com/cnn-plus-cuts-warner-brothers-discover...
captaincaveman 4y ago
I did seem to fail as a product though too!