The real problem IMHO with the streaming services is each of them is basically trying to recreate a "mini cable system." What I mean is that few of the viable ones are specializing, instead trying to be all things to all people. This is the same issue cable had, where if I wanted access to Syfy, I needed to pay a big monthly bill, most of which actually went to pay for ESPN which I would never in a million years turn on.
In contrast, if you narrowcast with streaming - if you set out to be absolutely the best at sports, children's programming, SF/fantasy, or whatever - you have a built in customer base who will always pick you.
Agree but things have been moving away from niche channels even on cable. We used to have court TV, The Nashville Network, and so forth but they all either rebranced or just became something like "TNN" which didn't stand for anything. That s how we get wrestling on SyFy. The trend for a while has been channels moving to be more generalized and less specilized.
On streaming, I think you are hitting the fact most people are saying they are going to only pay for 2-3 streaming services. If that is what users want they are only going to sub to services with lots of different content and not use one of those slots for a real niche channel. We do have some niche services like WWE Network, DC Universe (though that may get pulled into warner's service) but the niche of the niche which was stargate command just shut down. I'm not sure the market really wanted extremely niche streaming services.
I think what is needed is a streaming aggregator. You pay a bill to one company and select which services you want (yeah would be kinda like odl cable packges) but you only have one bill to one company. Also what would be required is a UNIFIED GUIDE. That is my biggest gripe on streaming - figuring out what show is on what service. If I am subed to 4 services I want to be able to just search for "friends" and then get directed to the correct service without me needing to know.