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

YouTube TV loses ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels in fee dispute

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 225 posts

Re: YouTube TV loses ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels in fee dispute

#81

Post by syki »

adamcstephens wrote: post #40
BrazzVuvuzela wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> YouTube TV is basically cable TV delivered via the internet And the sooner that dies, the better. Cable TV is crap and I don't want to see that model of media succeed into the internet era.

Is it really much better to have five $15 services to get the same content?

At this time it is much better. I can sign up for a service for a month and binge some shows. Then cancel the service and repeat for another offering. By rotating the services I subscribe to each month I’m effectively watching the content on all the services for a low monthly rate. Eventually these companies will charge an annual rate but right now it’s much better financially and otherwise than cable tv.

Re: YouTube TV loses ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels in fee dispute

#82

Post by phil21 »

paxys wrote: post #48
technofiend wrote: post #3

Personally I'm delighted to trade ABC, ESPN, etc [1] for a $15 reduction in my YouTube TV bill. It just makes me wish Google would unbundle all their different providers so I could choose only the ones I want. [1] Your local ABC channel, ABC News Live, Disney Channel, Disney Junior, Disney XD, Freeform, FX, FXX, FXM, National Geographic, National Geographic Wild, ESPN, ESPN2, ESPN3 (by authentication to the ESPN app)…

Curious what the remaining value of YouTube TV even is then. With most sports cut out is it really worth $50/mo?

Zero value to me now that ESPN (Monday Night Football) is off the platform.

I hate it, but I really do pay that much per month to watch a single game a week plus have the convenience for guests having access to "regular TV".

Re: YouTube TV loses ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels in fee dispute

#83

Post by awb »

paxys wrote: post #59

This is some weird corporate game theory at play. Signing a deal is the ideal outcome for Disney, Google and all their mutual customers, but in pursuit of that extra dollar both sides shoot themselves in the foot and end up with nothing.

I think Disney is hoping it’ll drive people to sign up for Disney+ which cuts out the middleman at the cost of not being able to channel surf but instead opening an app.

Re: YouTube TV loses ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels in fee dispute

#84

Post by ByteJockey »

hashimotonomora wrote: post #66
zzzeek wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the youtube TV model (which is also the Sony Vue (they're gone! heh) / Sling model) is nothing like the cable TV model, because these companies do not provide any last mile physical infrastructure. therefore you can switch between any number of providers with no effort. Assuming the other providers can get their fucking act together techinically/user-experience-wise (YTV is like vastly better UX-wise, looks like PS V…

Wouldn’t a liberal naturally be in favor of individual liberties and freedoms, and by extension of the free markets?

Outside the US, yes.

Inside the US, the term swapped to refer to social-liberalism rather than classical-liberalism during the great depression.

Re: YouTube TV loses ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels in fee dispute

#85

Post by ende »

ipaddr wrote: post #77
hashimotonomora wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn’t a liberal naturally be in favor of individual liberties and freedoms, and by extension of the free markets?

Liberal means progressive which means giving up individual rights while controlling the market to protect individuals from bad choices.

Liberal does not mean progressive.

Re: YouTube TV loses ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels in fee dispute

#86

Post by hazelnut »

auspex wrote: post #72

Great… all the shows my kid watched just got removed from the DVR. Even if they make a deal tomorrow, we had so much recorded that just disappeared. Going to be lots of crying kids in the morning

Sling keeps the recordings even if you don’t have the channel anymore.

Though, quality of recordings is lower and we had some random losses over time.

Re: YouTube TV loses ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels in fee dispute

#87

Post by jayknight »

awb wrote: post #83
paxys wrote: post #59

This is some weird corporate game theory at play. Signing a deal is the ideal outcome for Disney, Google and all their mutual customers, but in pursuit of that extra dollar both sides shoot themselves in the foot and end up with nothing.

I think Disney is hoping it’ll drive people to sign up for Disney+ which cuts out the middleman at the cost of not being able to channel surf but instead opening an app.

Disney+ doesn't have live sports.

Re: YouTube TV loses ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels in fee dispute

#88

Post by Retric »

adamcstephens wrote: post #40
BrazzVuvuzela wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> YouTube TV is basically cable TV delivered via the internet And the sooner that dies, the better. Cable TV is crap and I don't want to see that model of media succeed into the internet era.

Is it really much better to have five $15 services to get the same content?

There’s only so much time in the day so people actually wanted a tiny fraction of that content. Basic cable was setup to be mandatory even if you wanted nothing in it and the money was to be made via advertising. Thus MTV added Real World and the history channel had Ice Road Truckers. Both popular shows, but seemingly out of scope except the audience was anyone flipping channels. This ends up being a quest for the cheapest content that still attracts an audience.

HBO on the other hand was constantly fighting for subscribers not just viewership. For them every viewer was worth more money so they had a high bar without much filler.

Re: YouTube TV loses ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels in fee dispute

#89

Post by tyingq »

managerclass wrote: post #65
foxhop wrote: post #32

If you just want TV on in the background and don't want to pay anything, checkout "Pluto TV" and "Tubi TV", both have apps and may cast to Chromecast or SmartTVs. https://pluto.tv/ https://tubitv.com/ Friends help friends cut cords.

I guess buying a TV antenna isn't completely free but it gives you the same benefit as these online channels, doesn't consume your data cap, and lets you watch sports and local news. I bought a $10 antenna from channel master and it's been a great investment.

To be fair, there's plenty of places, even in suburbs, where you need a $100-$200 antenna, and maybe $200 worth of parts, labor and stuff to put it somewhere where it works.

Re: YouTube TV loses ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels in fee dispute

#90

Post by User23 »

syki wrote: post #81
adamcstephens wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it really much better to have five $15 services to get the same content?

At this time it is much better. I can sign up for a service for a month and binge some shows. Then cancel the service and repeat for another offering. By rotating the services I subscribe to each month I’m effectively watching the content on all the services for a low monthly rate. Eventually these companies will charge an annual rate but right now it’s much better financially and otherwise than cable tv.

Cable TV was a screaming deal, so long as you could always stay on the promotional rate. I haven't had it in a while, but I used to call and "cancel" my service every 3 months to get 3 months of free premium channels and a reduced basic rate. It was pretty funny when I moved and had to actually cancel my service because obviously it was on my file and the support person was like sure no problem here you go and I had to clarify no I actually needed to cancel because I was leaving their service area.
Post reply on HN