HBO to Launch Stand-Alone Streaming Service

[Maximus]

I don't think it's necessarily related to how good it is, but rather to whether they've managed to cross the bar to entry.

[Eddie Teach]

Put it this way- I haven't seen a single webseries* that I felt would be better off in hour long chunks than the 5 minute chunks they typically come in.

*Excluding original shows from Netflix, Hulu, etc.

[garbon]

On a different note, what is up with some of these original shows being debuted as a full season. I guess it doesn't matter as much for Netflix, but still seems like they could have more buzz, more lasting users if they released on a weekly basis or something like that.  As it was, I got free trial, watched Arrested Development and peaced.

In the case of Amazon, it seems like it make more sense to have users continuously coming in as that's more times you could potentially make a sale.

[DontSayBanana]

Is that not ok?

I mean, if they have the best of intentions to eventually get licensing, I don't see what the problem is...

The problem is they proved the GS people knew they were using the material illegitimately.  Even if it was temporary, it was willful copyright infringement.  And there were 6,000 uploads at issue, so given the courts' tendency to award punitive damages for willful infringement, they're looking at potential judgments far oustripping the company's revenue.

Also, they proved GrooveShark hasn't been aggressive in taking down uploads of material owned by labels with which they still don't have any sort of deal (particularly Sony), so no safe harbor exemption.

[Eddie Teach]

On a different note, what is up with some of these original shows being debuted as a full season.

A lot of people prefer binge watching a show as opposed to stretching it out over months.

[garbon]

On a different note, what is up with some of these original shows being debuted as a full season.

A lot of people prefer binge watching a show as opposed to stretching it out over months.

I understand why a consumer would like that, but I wonder if it would really stop people from tuning in if the service did what was better for its business. Besides, eventually binge watch would be possible just not in the "original run".

[Eddie Teach]

I guess they figure it isn't worth mildly inconveniencing a lot of customers(some of whom will be on the fence about leaving at any given point) to retain a handful who are only on for the one show.

[garbon]

I guess they figure it isn't worth mildly inconveniencing a lot of customers(some of whom will be on the fence about leaving at any given point) to retain a handful who are only on for the one show.

Again I can sort of understand for Netflix which is soft - as well as it doesn't matter much when customers come in, but not sure why Amazon is falling in same footsteps given that for them it would help to have steady traffic rather than binges.

Besides both services have a lot of content that can be binge-watched. I don't see why anyone would leave if the original content was in a format that triggered them to tune in next week. "Fuck Netflix, I ain't going to watch Orange is The New Black because I can't watch it all in one day for the season debut"?

[celedhring]

I think it's a strange decision. I get that's probably more convenient for customers, but they lose the hype that can be built with the weekly discussions in social media after each episode is broadcast, etc... also you can "lock" fans of the series for a longer stretch of time where they will be paying your monthly subscription.

I suppose that Netflix wanted to make a bit of a splash by being "different" and disrupting how a series is presented in order to garner exposure, and now Amazon has sort of been forced to follow in their steps - since it's something that customers are getting used to now and will demand from original online content providers.

[garbon]

I think it's a strange decision. I get that's probably more convenient for customers, but they lose the hype that can be built with the weekly discussions in social media after each episode is broadcast, etc... also you can "lock" fans of the series for a longer stretch of time where they will be paying your monthly subscription.

Yeah exactly.

I suppose that Netflix wanted to make a bit of a splash by being "different" and disrupting how a series is presented in order to garner exposure, and now Amazon has sort of been forced to follow in their steps - since it's something that customers are getting used to now and will demand from original online content providers.

I wonder if Amazon really is though. I mean Amazon's streaming is just one part of Amazon Prime, so it isn't like they likely have many customers who sign up just to binge watch original content.

[CountDeMoney]

I think we are seeing the start of the end of cable and satellite as content delivery mechanisms.

It simple doesn't make any sense.

Some entity creates content they want to sell to consumers.

The current model of cable and/or satellite as the means of getting that content into your home makes absolutely no sense at all except as a legacy. You don't need them, nobody needs them, the internet can deliver digital media just fine.

The only reason there isn't a more integrated, rational delivery method already is because cable and satellite don't allow it. This cannot last.

Sell any stock you have in cable/satellite providers. They will go the way of Kodak.

I'm not so sure;  look at the concessions Netflix had to make with the cable providers recently.  It may be Netflix content, but it's still the cable providers' pipelines, and the cable providers know it.

I see it falling similar to the way the deregulation of the energy industry went years ago:  sure, you can now pick your energy supplier from a list of multiple providers, but you're still paying your local regulated utility through them because it's still their infrastructure. 

Cable and satellite may make less money in the future, but they'll still be making a shitload--even if it's in hidden payments piggybacked onto Netflix and HBO--if their providers want to use their pipes.

[DontSayBanana]

I'm not so sure;  look at the concessions Netflix had to make with the cable providers recently.  It may be Netflix content, but it's still the cable providers' pipelines, and the cable providers know it.

I see it falling similar to the way the deregulation of the energy industry went years ago:  sure, you can now pick your energy supplier from a list of multiple providers, but you're still paying your local regulated utility through them because it's still their infrastructure. 

Cable and satellite may make less money in the future, but they'll still be making a shitload--even if it's in hidden payments piggybacked onto Netflix and HBO--if their providers want to use their pipes.

I'm gonna have to disagree.  The pressure on the FCC to reclassify ISPs as common carriers under Title II is already massive, and it's only increasing.  Once that happens, I think we're likely to see a repeat of the Bell breakup in the '80s, with Comcast and possibly Time Warner having to split up into smaller companies to compete with themselves.

[MadImmortalMan]

It's conceivable that Comcast, Time Warner, Charter, et al will revert to internet service providers.

[CountDeMoney]

I'm gonna have to disagree.  The pressure on the FCC to reclassify ISPs as common carriers under Title II is already massive, and it's only increasing.  Once that happens, I think we're likely to see a repeat of the Bell breakup in the '80s, with Comcast and possibly Time Warner having to split up into smaller companies to compete with themselves.

Common carrier regulation?  In the Age of Deregulation?   Meh.

And you're smoking your socks if you think the Roberts court is going to allow anything to be broken up like Ma Bell was.  The Feds will lose that fight.

Nah...Comcast, Verizon, AT&T, and every other  broadband bully that dug those trenches, laid that fiber, and go out and repair it all are not going to go anywhere, even with content delivery networks helping defray the costs. 

[Admiral Yi]

The SC hasn't looked at an antitrust case in, what, 50 years?

There are natural monopolies folks, get used to it.  But one of the truly magical things about the US market is that there are a million greedy peckerheads out there, who are looking to eat the lunch of any corporation that is extracting monopoly rents.

Microsoft was the big bad bear in the 1980s.  They were going to drive every other software company in the world into extinction by bundling goodies free with the operating system.  Now the only people in the world who use IE are semi-retarded Somali layabouts. 

Greed is good.  Greed is the power that will protect you all from the big bad wolf.  There will *always* be a competitor.