5 ms·

HBO Says No, for Now, to Fans Who Want a Web-Only Option

25 points by waterlesscloud 14y ago

Codhisattva 14y ago
Which would be tantamount to open warfare in the minds of the cable companies. (Incumbents like to over react when revenue they feel entitlement over is at stake.)
- cremnob 14y ago
  This is about HBO determining that it's better for their business to stay with the cable companies. The argument is laid out pretty well here: http://dcurt.is/hbo-forbes-journalism http://dcurt.is/hbo-forbes-journalism
  - scott_s 14y ago
    It's better for their business now. In fact, I think it's true that they will get less money as online-only than in the current scheme. But that's not important, because I think the current business model is going to go away. That is, I think they'll eventually have to have an online-only option, or they'll die.
zedpm 14y ago
Offering a complete streaming service might be a bad idea, but it's a shame they don't do like so many other content providers and offer individual episodes for sale via Amazon Instant Video. Many popular cable shows (and even shows from ABC/NBC/Fox etc.) are available for purchase on Amazon the day after they air, usually for $2 each. This option would avoid the technical difficulties and the added expense of operating their own web-based content delivery system.
whalesalad 14y ago
This is why Game of Thrones is the one of the most pirated TV shows of all time: http://torrentfreak.com/whos-pirating-game-of-thrones-and-why-120520/ http://torrentfreak.com/whos-pirating-game-of-thrones-and-wh... People are willing to pay, and they're not responding to customer demand.
- mmuro 14y ago
  People that are pirating the show aren't willing to pay. If they were then they'd be subscribed to HBO.
  - axiak 14y ago
    Maybe they don't have TVs/cable?
    - jgeorge 14y ago
      I don't have cable/satellite. The minimum monthly cost to obtain HBO for me is about $45/month for basic cable, HBO, and a DVR option. My GF is completely addicted to Game of Thrones, but she openly admits she will not pay $540/year for basically a single season of a show. All the "but look at all the other content you get" arguments are null, if I were interested in any of that other content, I'd already be paying for it. But we're not. She can torrent it now and watch it when she likes for free. While she will undoubtedly go buy the DVDs when they're released (she always does), the incentive to watch it "now" as it's being broadcast is worth some amount of money $0<n<$540 for her. I really don't buy the argument that HBOGo wouldn't make any money if they charged $15/mo for streaming-only access. Nearly everyone I know (none of whom have cable/satellite and HBO now) would gladly pay that price or even marginally higher.
  - mdhen 14y ago
    If they have cable, and they're pirating - you would be correct. It would however be incorrect to assume that someone who doesn't want to pay 80 dollars a month before being allowed to pay for HBO would pirate it if given the chance to just pay for HBO directly.
  - cheshire137 14y ago
    Some folks are willing to pay for exactly what they want, but they're not willing to pay an additional amount to get content they don't care about. Same thing that happened with the music industry: people don't want all the filler bullshit on some albums, they just want the hot single. Let folks buy a single MP3 and they will, or they'll pirate if you only provide the entire album for sale.
aero142 14y ago
Ok. That's fine. But I now fully consider piracy for HBO to be a business decision and I don't want to hear any moral condemnation and cries for government intervention from them.
- ig1 14y ago
  HBO isn't some critical drug that you need to live, it's an entertainment channel. You don't have a need for HBO that gives you a moral right to make an unauthorized copy of it. If you want to make a copy of it, fine, but don't try and pretend it's anything other than lack of self-control on your part by trying to gloss with a "moral high ground".
  - magicalist 14y ago
    I agree completely, but it's important to remember the other side as well: in the United States, control over your intellectual property is not considered a moral right either. While there is no justification to be found in that distinction for pirating the show, it makes it much less clear that you have a moral imperative to maintain "self-control" and not pirate it.
  - moron 14y ago
    Sure, agreed. But it is reasonable to assume from this that HBO considers whatever losses it is suffering from piracy to be acceptable in some sense, or at least preferable to selling their shows online, which is interesting in its own right.
  - aero142 14y ago
    I'm not talking about self justification here, i'm talking about business and politics. Lately the entertainment industry has been campaigning for government intervention to clamp down on the internet because content producers can't make enough money because of piracy. To me, this argument clearly states that they believe they make more money from a premium price with a restricted supply that encourages piracy than they would from an easily available product that would reduce piracy. I am perfectly fine with them making this business decision. However, as a citizen who would like to have as little government intervention as possible while still protecting functioning markets, I see no problem here and don't want to hear about how they need government intervention to prevent content creators like them from going out of business.
BenjaminDyer 14y ago
I think this makes complete sense for HBO, although as a consumer its pretty irritating. I'm hunting for the reference but I seem to remember reading about (UK) Sky signup accelerating after the launch of Sky Atlantic, which shows HBO content pretty much exclusively, their content brings people to providers. Until the cord cutters outnumber the cable subscribers its not going to change I'm afraid. Also the providers also have their own IPTV solutions so whats the benefit to HBO?
seanieb 14y ago
Their decision makes perfect sense, today. But, my guess is that cable subscriptions are decreasing, they have just hooked their little red wagon to a sinking ship. I think HBO are overlooking an opportunity.

Which would be tantamount to open warfare in the minds of the cable companies. (Incumbents like to over react when revenue they feel entitlement over is at stake.)

cremnob 14y ago
This is about HBO determining that it's better for their business to stay with the cable companies. The argument is laid out pretty well here: http://dcurt.is/hbo-forbes-journalism http://dcurt.is/hbo-forbes-journalism
- scott_s 14y ago
  It's better for their business now. In fact, I think it's true that they will get less money as online-only than in the current scheme. But that's not important, because I think the current business model is going to go away. That is, I think they'll eventually have to have an online-only option, or they'll die.

zedpm 14y ago

Offering a complete streaming service might be a bad idea, but it's a shame they don't do like so many other content providers and offer individual episodes for sale via Amazon Instant Video. Many popular cable shows (and even shows from ABC/NBC/Fox etc.) are available for purchase on Amazon the day after they air, usually for $2 each. This option would avoid the technical difficulties and the added expense of operating their own web-based content delivery system.

whalesalad 14y ago

This is why Game of Thrones is the one of the most pirated TV shows of all time: http://torrentfreak.com/whos-pirating-game-of-thrones-and-why-120520/ http://torrentfreak.com/whos-pirating-game-of-thrones-and-wh... People are willing to pay, and they're not responding to customer demand.

mmuro 14y ago
People that are pirating the show aren't willing to pay. If they were then they'd be subscribed to HBO.
- axiak 14y ago
  Maybe they don't have TVs/cable?
  - jgeorge 14y ago
    I don't have cable/satellite. The minimum monthly cost to obtain HBO for me is about $45/month for basic cable, HBO, and a DVR option. My GF is completely addicted to Game of Thrones, but she openly admits she will not pay $540/year for basically a single season of a show. All the "but look at all the other content you get" arguments are null, if I were interested in any of that other content, I'd already be paying for it. But we're not. She can torrent it now and watch it when she likes for free. While she will undoubtedly go buy the DVDs when they're released (she always does), the incentive to watch it "now" as it's being broadcast is worth some amount of money $0<n<$540 for her. I really don't buy the argument that HBOGo wouldn't make any money if they charged $15/mo for streaming-only access. Nearly everyone I know (none of whom have cable/satellite and HBO now) would gladly pay that price or even marginally higher.
- mdhen 14y ago
  If they have cable, and they're pirating - you would be correct. It would however be incorrect to assume that someone who doesn't want to pay 80 dollars a month before being allowed to pay for HBO would pirate it if given the chance to just pay for HBO directly.
- cheshire137 14y ago
  Some folks are willing to pay for exactly what they want, but they're not willing to pay an additional amount to get content they don't care about. Same thing that happened with the music industry: people don't want all the filler bullshit on some albums, they just want the hot single. Let folks buy a single MP3 and they will, or they'll pirate if you only provide the entire album for sale.

aero142 14y ago

Ok. That's fine. But I now fully consider piracy for HBO to be a business decision and I don't want to hear any moral condemnation and cries for government intervention from them.

ig1 14y ago
HBO isn't some critical drug that you need to live, it's an entertainment channel. You don't have a need for HBO that gives you a moral right to make an unauthorized copy of it. If you want to make a copy of it, fine, but don't try and pretend it's anything other than lack of self-control on your part by trying to gloss with a "moral high ground".
- magicalist 14y ago
  I agree completely, but it's important to remember the other side as well: in the United States, control over your intellectual property is not considered a moral right either. While there is no justification to be found in that distinction for pirating the show, it makes it much less clear that you have a moral imperative to maintain "self-control" and not pirate it.
- moron 14y ago
  Sure, agreed. But it is reasonable to assume from this that HBO considers whatever losses it is suffering from piracy to be acceptable in some sense, or at least preferable to selling their shows online, which is interesting in its own right.
- aero142 14y ago
  I'm not talking about self justification here, i'm talking about business and politics. Lately the entertainment industry has been campaigning for government intervention to clamp down on the internet because content producers can't make enough money because of piracy. To me, this argument clearly states that they believe they make more money from a premium price with a restricted supply that encourages piracy than they would from an easily available product that would reduce piracy. I am perfectly fine with them making this business decision. However, as a citizen who would like to have as little government intervention as possible while still protecting functioning markets, I see no problem here and don't want to hear about how they need government intervention to prevent content creators like them from going out of business.

BenjaminDyer 14y ago

I think this makes complete sense for HBO, although as a consumer its pretty irritating. I'm hunting for the reference but I seem to remember reading about (UK) Sky signup accelerating after the launch of Sky Atlantic, which shows HBO content pretty much exclusively, their content brings people to providers. Until the cord cutters outnumber the cable subscribers its not going to change I'm afraid. Also the providers also have their own IPTV solutions so whats the benefit to HBO?

seanieb 14y ago

Their decision makes perfect sense, today. But, my guess is that cable subscriptions are decreasing, they have just hooked their little red wagon to a sinking ship. I think HBO are overlooking an opportunity.