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

Disney, Warner, Comcast, and Paramount are contemplating cuts, possible mergers

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 330 posts

Re: Disney, Warner, Comcast, and Paramount are contemplating cuts, possible mergers

#251

Post by jghn »

kranke155 wrote: post #245
edgyquant wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weird, I couldn’t tell at all since they both have converged on the exact same format.

Are you serious? TLDR: They feel pretty different to me. SW has nowhere to go and is trying to go nowhere. Marvel continues doing its thing, within the level of competence they've always demonstrated. I find that SW has declined to a level previously unimaginable, they are effectively stuck doing live action versions of children's animated TV shows. The mild incompetence of Clone Wars is now a distant memory, the low…

Meanwhile I loved Clone Wars & Rebels, as well as Rogue One. Thus I'm digging shows like Ahsoka & Andor. I'm less excited about the shows tied to the main movies like Boba Fett & Kenobi.

Re: Disney, Warner, Comcast, and Paramount are contemplating cuts, possible mergers

#252

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

geodel wrote: post #153
ren_engineer wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everybody wanted to control the entire pie, when in reality almost all of them would have been better off just licensing their content to Netflix and not worrying about streaming distribution

Well of course they'd have been. But prevailing wisdom just few years back was Disney's of the world can just steamroll Netflix of the world because they own all the content. Developing streaming system is only some low level implementation detail in larger scheme of things.

Well to be fair, Netflix got free money for years on the premise of future profits, whereas Disney are valued on quarterly earnings.

Re: Disney, Warner, Comcast, and Paramount are contemplating cuts, possible mergers

#253

Post by smileysteve »

jmyeet wrote: post #48

I remember groaning when all the "me too" streaming platforms were announced. Netflix was good when it had what I called "remnant content" like full ad-free seasons of TV that I could finally catch up on. And at $8 (or even $10/month) I basically kept it forever even if I didn't watch it for a few months. But now all these services are rapidly pushing towards $20/month. My usage pattern is to sign up for Netflix abou…

Disney likely needs to consider "straight to Disney+ pay per view" like they did during the pandemic for Mulan, Jungle Cruise.

There may even be a pricing structure potential for new series or legacy rentals.

Re: Disney, Warner, Comcast, and Paramount are contemplating cuts, possible mergers

#254

Post by kshacker »

clwg wrote: post #205
tom_walters wrote: post #29

I think this primarily comes down to a fundamental misunderstanding of where the value in streaming services lies from the perspective of old world media giants. The majority of people who buy streaming, I suspect, are interested mainly in the conveyor belt of diverse and engaging content. Sure I whack an episode of Rick and Morty on via Netflix once a month, but 90% of viewing is of new serialized content. Disney na…

On the flip side, the old content is exactly what I want. I'm a big fan of Star Trek, including TNG, Voyager, DS9, and even Enterprise. If I play music while I work, I find myself getting distracted by it. So, I prefer to have Star Trek playing in the background since I've seen every episode multiple many times it's really just comforting background competence porn. Other than that, I don't really watch much TV but i…

Voyager was one series I never completed before the streaming roulette started. Not sure how I started looking for it but I finally said no thanks to subs and bought a box set for 50 bucks. I can watch at my own pace and don't have to shell out 10-25 bucks every month. Have seen DS9 but may do the same there since the price (50 bucks) is so compelling as compared to streaming monthly costs, and you get to keep it forever (forever defined by some arbitrary parameter and not equal to infinity)

Re: Disney, Warner, Comcast, and Paramount are contemplating cuts, possible mergers

#255

Post by ryaneager »

GaryNumanVevo wrote: post #246
geraldwhen wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disney could have done that and I would have paid. But they don’t make shows people want to watch any more. Live action Mulan could have been awesome! But they destroyed the themes of family honor and removed the music and comedy. Pander fatigue is real. I’ve got kids but I’m letting my Disney sub lapse. Anime is way better than the schlock Disney puts out.

Not to backseat parent or anything, but I would never let my kids watch Anime unsupervised. Disney is fine, and they aren't going to sexualize minors like anime often does.

Where was unsupervised consumption mentioned? Quit your pearl clutching.

Re: Disney, Warner, Comcast, and Paramount are contemplating cuts, possible mergers

#256

Post by strunz »

dom96 wrote: post #108
tom_walters wrote: post #29

I think this primarily comes down to a fundamental misunderstanding of where the value in streaming services lies from the perspective of old world media giants. The majority of people who buy streaming, I suspect, are interested mainly in the conveyor belt of diverse and engaging content. Sure I whack an episode of Rick and Morty on via Netflix once a month, but 90% of viewing is of new serialized content. Disney na…

> The majority of people who buy streaming, I suspect, are interested mainly in the conveyor belt of diverse and engaging content. I'd love to see this backed up by sources. I for one recall seeing streaming stats from Disney+ and old series like X Files are up there as some of the most streamed. Anecdotally, I watch and rewatch a lot of old series. Like I'm rewatching Breaking Bad on Netflix right now.

Isn't Suits - a long since lapsed cable series - like the most popular thing on Netflix? So was Friends, Seinfeld, and The Office for a time too. People love to think they can generalize all streamers into a bucket when in reality it's not as simple as anyone thinks. Viewing trends change all the time and can be unpredictable, even horrible stuff gets tons of views.

Re: Disney, Warner, Comcast, and Paramount are contemplating cuts, possible mergers

#257

Post by graphe »

game_the0ry wrote: post #229
graphe wrote: post #14

Tim Dillon talked about this recently. He said they want to be too big to fail, merge and get bailouts and handouts like sports get, since they own lots of revenue streams. He mentioned it's dead too, this article says the same thing. Once it's too big to fail this happens, they can push any agenda they want, not be any "good" and when people wonder how are they still around making nothing but pushing agendas in not…

> He said they want to be too big to fail, merge and get bailouts and handouts like sports get That is observation I can agree with. Same can be said with finance and airlines - both business models cant stand on their own with out help from the tax payer. > But no deals emerged, leading some investors to conclude there is little appetite among private equity or tech companies for acquiring legacy businesses. Probabl…

That's a good point about airlines and finance, they can't afford to fly so they tried to expand and now it makes most of their income, pilots aren't paid much either. Samsung is probably the finest example of these corporations, it pretty much owns the government with the power it holds along with the other chaeobols.

Re: Disney, Warner, Comcast, and Paramount are contemplating cuts, possible mergers

#258

Post by BobaFloutist »

abracadaniel wrote: post #207
apwell23 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think this primarily comes down to a fundamental misunderstanding of where the value in streaming services lies from the perspective of old world media giants. > Meanwhile Netflix has built some of the most sophisticated production tooling in the world, and leveraged cross-country content like no old-world provider ever has. If it was so fundamental and obvious like you state wouldn't you have been super rich by…

Everything was doom and gloom for Netflix as I remember it. They were wholly dependent on the licensed content that they will inevitably lose. I guess it turns out that becoming a studio is easier than becoming a streaming platform.

Either that or Netflix just did a better job than the studios did.

Just because someone was more successful with one strategy than someone else was with a different strategy doesn't mean that the strategy is superior, they could just be a better overall player or even a worse player that happened to outmaneuver a better player, or, even, in the massive multiplayer battle royale that is our economy, a worse player that made bad decisions but happened to luck into ideal market conditions.

I don't think Zoom did anything particularly revolutionary, their product just happened to be the exact right balance at the exact right time.

Re: Disney, Warner, Comcast, and Paramount are contemplating cuts, possible mergers

#259

Post by frutiger »

hattmall wrote: post #72
frutiger wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to compare any growth against a benchmark index which reflects what would’ve happened if the company had simply invested its assets in that index fund instead.

Eh, not really, especially with the extremely dangerous weighting of the S&P.

You have to carefully choose the benchmark but you need to benchmark against something.

Re: Disney, Warner, Comcast, and Paramount are contemplating cuts, possible mergers

#260

Post by erellsworth »

graphe wrote: post #242
erellsworth wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WTF does religion have to do with this? I have no idea what you're trying to say.

You don't wring anything by making more media. It is a ridiculous idea to think.

You absolutely can wring something out by making too much of it. There's a reason "superhero fatigue" is a thing.
Post reply on HN