Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AT&T’s Troubling Plan to Change HBO

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 111 posts

Re: AT&T’s Troubling Plan to Change HBO

#31

Post by danso »

wil421 wrote: post #17
forapurpose wrote: post #13

I've wondered about HBO's future. I see a few problems: First, it used to be the only source for intelligent programming. Now I can get as good or better content from Netflix, Amazon, and smaller arthouse-oriented channels. HBO doesn't stand out to me. Second, streaming channels are a la carte, not bundled, and I'd have to pay cable TV-sized bills to subscribe to 100 channels. HBO doesn't seem to offer enough to be w…

Netflix takes the shotgun approach, put out as much programming as possible and something will stick. Amazon has yet to provide anything but a bad UI/UX on top of tv or music I can find from a much better competitor. Silicon Valley, Westworld, Vice, and Game of Thrones are worth it plus a steady stream of new movies. Not to mention their older shows. HBO’s quality is much higher than Netflix and Amazon doesn’t even c…

I do agree that HBO's original series are yet unmatched, and that Netflix's and Prime's efforts have not yet reached the same level (I'm personally not a huge fan of "House of Cards"). But HBO as a paid service isn't just competing with exclusives, but with 3rd-party content that Netflix/Prime can license. On Prime, not only is there the soon-to-be exclusive "The Expanse", but they have USA Network's "Mr. Robot", SyFy's "BSG", all the Star Treks (sans "Discovery"), BBC's "Downton Abbey" and "Peep Show". They even have the best of HBO's classics, e.g. Sopranos, Deadwood, Curb Your Enthusiasm, and the remastered version of The Wire.

I used to subscribe to HBO but now only do so when their big drama exclusives are in season (GoT and WW).

Re: AT&T’s Troubling Plan to Change HBO

#32

Post by stcredzero »

gamechangr wrote: post #5

HBO is too great to be ruined by AT&T. Wiki says "HBO is the oldest and longest continuously operating pay television service (basic or premium) in the United States". I'm not under estimating HBO. like the rest of the fear mongering I hear from my friends :) AT&T doesn't' have what it takes to ruin it.

AT&T has a history of buying companies, then specifically lobotomizing the factor that made them special.

Re: AT&T’s Troubling Plan to Change HBO

#33

Post by throwawaymath »

SquirrelOnFire wrote: post #26
throwawaymath wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess this is a matter of opinion, but I’ll bite anyway. What content do you watch from Netflix or Amazon that you find to be comparable to HBO’s tentpole programming? To be honest with you, I find Amazon’s content to be...well, bad. On the other hand Netflix has a few good shows, but the company is clearly prioritizing quantity over quality. Not only does its content not have the awards or acclaim HBO’s garners, b…

House of Cards (First 2 seasons at least), Stranger Things, Orange is the New Black, Marco Polo, Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt, Dear White People, Bojack Horseman, and to a lesser extent some of the Marvel shows (Jessica Jones, Daredevil, Luke Cage, Punisher), not to mention how much amazing standup comedy Netflix puts out. Sure, there's a lot of junk, but Netflix is succeeding in becoming HBO faster than HBO is becoming…

I'll give you the standup comedy selection because I agree it's really quite good. I also like Stranger Things but can't comment on the others. But I actively dislike the Marvel content on Netflix. I find its characters one-dimensional and its plot unmotivated. Some of this is probably the transition from comic books to TV, but on the other hand I love almost everything from the cinematic universe.

I think the biggest problem is that the Marvel cinematic universe seems to have better acting, better writing, superior interconnectedness overall and stakes that are well calibrated to its cast of heroes. In contrast, I find most of the characters' hyperfocus on specific neighborhoods in Marvel's Netflix shows to be frankly ridiculous and annoying. I also find myself wishing the main characters would just kill the villains a few episodes into each series. It boggles my mind how much waffling and angst goes on.

As a followup to your last comment though, my point had nothing to do with HBO becoming Netflix. I don't even think HBO should try to become Netflix at all. I would prefer for HBO to remain the curated content space that it is, precisely because I'm concerned with the quality of content. Strictly speaking, the ratio of quality content to junk on HBO is far, far higher than Netflix's. It's not really about HBO or Netflix being more successful in becoming the other, it's about quality. Regardless of whether or not HBO is close to becoming Netflix, Netflix is so far from becoming HBO I don't even think they could recognize an interstate map outlining the route.

Re: AT&T’s Troubling Plan to Change HBO

#34

Post by tptacek »

MBCook wrote: post #10
matte_black wrote: post #6

Can someone explain why it’s obviously doomed?

They bought a niche diamond mine and want it to be a giant aluminum recycling company. HBO makes a few REALLY good series. That’s what they do. They are not setup to produce 10x as much content. If they do they may not have the people who can do that with reasonable quality. They’re used to polishing gems. You wouldn’t buy Nintendo and order them to make a console more powerful than the XBox One X. That’s not what th…

HBO doesn't make money by producing really good series. They make money by producing series that get people attached, to pay them for years at a time. Bored To Death might have been a fine show, but to a first approximation nobody signed up for HBO just to see it. They can churn out Vice Principals and Barry's and Young Popes, but if they can't reliably keep a Game Of Thrones or (bleh) True Blood in the pipeline, they'll have a hard time justifying their cost.

Re: AT&T’s Troubling Plan to Change HBO

#35

Post by adjkant »

SquirrelOnFire wrote: post #26
throwawaymath wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess this is a matter of opinion, but I’ll bite anyway. What content do you watch from Netflix or Amazon that you find to be comparable to HBO’s tentpole programming? To be honest with you, I find Amazon’s content to be...well, bad. On the other hand Netflix has a few good shows, but the company is clearly prioritizing quantity over quality. Not only does its content not have the awards or acclaim HBO’s garners, b…

House of Cards (First 2 seasons at least), Stranger Things, Orange is the New Black, Marco Polo, Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt, Dear White People, Bojack Horseman, and to a lesser extent some of the Marvel shows (Jessica Jones, Daredevil, Luke Cage, Punisher), not to mention how much amazing standup comedy Netflix puts out. Sure, there's a lot of junk, but Netflix is succeeding in becoming HBO faster than HBO is becoming…

To add to this, Sense8, Queer Eye and A Series of Unfortunate Events. Just shows how far deep the solid content goes. I'm still a fan of HBO and I don't think the transition makes sense, but Netflix absolutely has a lot of good stuff of similar quality. I think the transition is a bad move because if they go the other way, the production of junk may result in a net loss of top content which is what makes them good, regardless of how little/much junk they produce.

Re: AT&T’s Troubling Plan to Change HBO

#37

Post by stcredzero »

homero wrote: post #14
wolco wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I subscribed recently and watched silicon valley, entourage, ballers, veep and watching the wire now. What do you recommend, as most of the other series I haven't heard much about them and hbo shows for some reason seem a little bit harder to get started with.

I loved ballers. Vice news is great. Generation kill is incredible but very old, it should be on streaming. Watch the last season of curb your enthusiasm.

Vice news is great

Some of what they do is great. Some is biased in a disturbingly pointed way.

Re: AT&T’s Troubling Plan to Change HBO

#38

Post by robterrell »

adzm wrote: post #16
wolco wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I subscribed recently and watched silicon valley, entourage, ballers, veep and watching the wire now. What do you recommend, as most of the other series I haven't heard much about them and hbo shows for some reason seem a little bit harder to get started with.

Sopranos, Westworld, Six Feet Under, Curb Your Enthusiasm

Deadwood.

Re: AT&T’s Troubling Plan to Change HBO

#39

Post by stcredzero »

tptacek wrote: post #34
MBCook wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They bought a niche diamond mine and want it to be a giant aluminum recycling company. HBO makes a few REALLY good series. That’s what they do. They are not setup to produce 10x as much content. If they do they may not have the people who can do that with reasonable quality. They’re used to polishing gems. You wouldn’t buy Nintendo and order them to make a console more powerful than the XBox One X. That’s not what th…

HBO doesn't make money by producing really good series . They make money by producing series that get people attached, to pay them for years at a time. Bored To Death might have been a fine show, but to a first approximation nobody signed up for HBO just to see it. They can churn out Vice Principals and Barry's and Young Popes, but if they can't reliably keep a Game Of Thrones or (bleh) True Blood in the pipeline, th…

So the argument is that level of hit-making is unsustainable? Would Apple's practice of coming out with market-defining new products be another example of this hit-making practice? Perhaps the strategy to "reliably keep a Game Of Thrones or True Blood in the pipeline" isn't viable long term? Eventually, everyone is going to miss a beat then go bankrupt.

Re: AT&T’s Troubling Plan to Change HBO

#40

Post by mortdeus »

tptacek wrote: post #25

I don't buy the logic here, and I'm not sure David Sims does either; this strikes me as one of those headlines that was written by an editor, independently of the article. For as much as anybody here likes HBO, the diagnosis Stankey (and, I think, Sims) has of it seems apt. HBO has a sterling reputation. But so what? Even today, they're no longer distinctively good; in fact, there are basic cable channels (AMC and FX…

I wouldn't say that premium cable is over. Rather before you used to pay $60 + premium channels a month to have cable tv. Now you pay $15+15+15+15+15+15+15 ... + 75 for internet connection that doesn't have data caps.

Personally I think the de-bundling of cable TV and the getting rid of ads (i seriously never understood how we can pay for cable tv and still be forced to watch ads) is a great way for the market to move forward. It shows you that the consumer does ultimately get the final say so.

However, I do not believe that costs are getting cheaper. If anything they are just going to keep going up and up.

Also the crazy level of competition going on right now to produce "service selling" original content, is in my views creating a situation where we keep getting a sub par product out of the deal.

Post reply on HN