Fair enough, but I think I am combining my opinions with trends I see and articles I have read. Neither of us are unbiased.
But why wouldn't having that extra content not up their chances of success?
Will CBS All Access Remain Viable in the Streaming Wars?
- Thread starter The Overlord
- Start date
Fair enough, but I think I am combining my opinions with trends I see and articles I have read. Neither of us are unbiased.
But why wouldn't having that extra content not up their chances of success?
Because that extra content wouldn't be free, it would increase the cost of the service.
How big is Netflix's library? How big is Disney's library? What are they charging? How big is CBS' library and what is their asking price again?
Ask CBS. I don't think they just shit out how they were going to stream in an afternoon. They balanced cost vs. content. They decided what to charge and how to distribute. They are the ones having both services hitting the targets they set for them.
You need to take your vendetta elsewhere...
It would add to their cost. Common business equation is cost/benefit analysis. They started where they felt would get them in to the market without so much overhead that it would require more cost and increased price.
To my knowledge, I am not breaking any rules. I do not have a vendetta, I like Star Trek and I think CBS does not have a good plan to handle it in the streaming area and I do not like most of their network content, rankly I do not like most network TV or think it is worth paying for by itself in a streaming service? I wouldn't want to pay for a bunch of shows I wouldn't like just to get Star Trek. Paramount tried to use Star Trek to prop up UPN, how did that work out?
It seems like your premise is there are enough Star Trek fans/CBS content fans to make this service viable, my contention I do not think that is enough to compare to what other streaming services
What does CBS All Access offer for kids? What do they offer for adults who like movies or HBO style content? If I wanted to CBS, Viacom and Showtime content, how much would that cost and would it be less then HBO Max that has everything
For people who are not fanatics of Star Trek or CBS' library, what would convince them to buy it? Because of there some reviews out there that say it's not worth it:
https://www.techjunkie.com/how-much-cbs-all-access/
And would CBS be fine if other companies made way more money then they did at this market?
How much content does CBS offer compared to other streaming services and how different is their price points?
People here seem to think Star Trek/CBS content fans are enough to keep this service going, what is that assumption based on? How is this different from when Paramount tried to use Star Trek to prop up UPN?
If someone is not a Star Trek fan or a fan of CBS' back library, is there any reason for that person to get this service?
How much would it cost to get access to CBS, Showtime and Viacom's library and would that cost more or less than HBO Max? Heck would CBS/Showtime cost more or less then HBO Max?
Other people are accusing me of bias, but maybe some people have rose-tinted glasses for CBS All Access because of Star Trek and them happening to like CBS's content and not realizing it serves other demographics rather poorly (I.E: kids, adults who like movies and something more adult then network-level content), and that underserving these demographics costs them in the long run.
Disney has the kids demographic locked up and HBO Max is going for the adult market, what is CBS' angle here exactly?
You keep on saying CBS is specializing rather than having trying to appeal to a wide market but is their specialization, network-level content that both Disney and NBC Universal have in spades to compete with? It does not seem like they are specialized the same way Shudder or Crunchy Roll is.
Last edited:
Email CBS and ask them...
That's your contention which is not born out by the fact that CBS is willing to keep putting money into it and produce more content. Here's the thing-only the consumer can decide if it is worth it. You have decided it isn't for you, which is fine, since it doesn't actually impact your life one way or the other. Others have demonstrated a willingness to pay the money for the content, including several in this thread.
It isn't important what the trends are-it's important of what CBS does.
Sure, why not? If they are making a profit then why would they worry about it?
If someone isn't a fan of Disney's content why get that service? Or perhaps ESPN? Or maybe HBO?
The thing is, the same logic cuts both ways. The whole point of streaming is to allow people to pick what they want to watch, rather than paying for a bunch of stuff they don't want. In my house, CBS is for me. Netflix is for my girls. Amazon is for my wife. We all get what we want.
That's the beauty of this system. It doesn't have to beat everyone. It just has to make money. The companies that succeed recognize that being profitable is enough.
So if someone likes Star Trek and does not like CBS's other content, they should support this service if they think most of the content is bad? Really that is a bad deal and many fans wouldn't like it, there is nothing to sweeten the pot besides Star Trek and for some people, that is not enough, why not wait till all the episodes are online, binge them and then ditch the service? Because I am not sure how people want to binge ''God Friended Me'' (that sounds awful).
Depends on what you think has the most mass-market appeal, CBS, Disney or HBO?
And how many shareholders would fine with a company that does okay vs. one that makes money hand over fist? I do not like the system, but that's what it is, shareholders always want a greater return and if some other company has a better return, they will ask ''why don't we have that level of return''?
Why assume this all part of CBS' plan rather than poor planning on CBS' part? Plus wasn't this service really buggy?
If I talked to my friends and family and they thought this service was not worth the price, would that be useful anecdotal evidence?
Look at this Reddit thread that says CBS All Access is too expensive for the cost it's asking, maybe there are people out there who think this service is not worth it is more then you think:
https://www.reddit.com/r/television/comments/734nks/dont_buy_cbs_all_access/
Maybe some people here are letting their CBS towards cloud their judgment eh?
Last edited:
And what these people who think this service over charges for the amount of content it offers?
https://www.reddit.com/r/television/comments/734nks/dont_buy_cbs_all_access/
Maybe there are a ton of people outside of this thread who agree with me and think this site is not worth the price. There is a lot of people there who want the most for their money and will think CBS All Access is vastly overvalued by CBS.
And likely that is what some people are doing, with a lot of different services. I don't see anyone arguing "Hey, if you don't like this product keep buying it!" That seems rather dumb.
Disney and HBO, but that's been true for years, long before streaming. But, different tastes will appeal to different audiences. Certainly, my grandmother didn't pay for HBO and Disney, but did have CBS because that was her preferred content.
Again, audience tastes will vary.
Good for them. Go for it. If they are asking this question that means they will invest more into it.
But, that's an internal CBS decision, not one I can influence.
Disney+ had bugs. Lots of systems have bugs. That's part of doing business with new technology. I can recall from my retail days when the chip cards rolled out on Black Friday and the system crashed multiple times because it hadn't been load tested for that much traffic.
It happens.
You're the one who dismissed anecdotal evidence out of hand. I'll leave that to you.
Thus far, all the arguments I'm seeing are things that all streaming platforms must deal with, but only CBS is being accused of poor planning. Again, it's hard not to see vindictiveness and vendetta here. Personally, if AA fails then its no cost to me. Too bad, didn't work, CBS joins businesses that don't succeed in a new market...sucks for them, I guess...
But, I have watched businesses expand too rapidly too fast and then collapse. Other companies, who employ more conservative approaches, are able to fine-tune and make adjustments. I know which approach I prefer. And not all entertainment companies are built on the same model. So, what Disney does is good...for Disney. Doesn't make it good for CBS.
Except this seems like an online UPN, where they got Star Trek and very little else that would make this service worthwhile.
And frankly, CBS has a reputation as a channel that mainly appeals to the elder, nothing wrong with that, but its hard to make a streaming service that appeals mainly to the elder.
CBS barely having anything for kids is black mark against it in this market.
I am using that to make anecdotal evidence to say anyone can use it to support any position.
I do not want Disney+ either, because I am not a kid, but how long has CBS All Access been around vs. how long Disney+ has been around?
And yet, I could find people who think CBS overcharges for what they offer:
https://www.reddit.com/r/television/comments/734nks/dont_buy_cbs_all_access/
Ever thought there are ton people who think CBS overvalues CBS, if CBS is trying to gouge fans with a substandard service, is that not a fair thing to complain about? Ever thought that CBS has overvalued its library and is charging too much for too little content? You love CBS content, but I am not its super beloved by the general public to fork over 6 bucks a month plus commercials for shows that have been airing on TV for years?
I think CBS is arrogant to think their library is worth the same price as streaming services with way bigger libraries and I think a lot of people agree with me, I think people are being soft on this thread towards CBS, but a lot of people outside the fandom would think this service is a rip off.
If that is so then it will fail. That is the nature of the market. Too bad, so bad, bye-bye.
Yup, you are quite right. That's why I don't worry about what CBS and their choices.
I don't agree. As I said, there are plenty of options for my kids, and I don't even need to subscribe to Disney+ or have cable. Again, let the consumers decide and make up their own mind.
I'm not "being soft" on CBS. I flat out want them to do their own thing and make up their own mind. I have no say in their business affairs or the day to day running of AA. We don't have all the information to make judgement calls, beyond what us, as individuals, will pay for the service. You wouldn't. I would. Others will do the same as us. And the market will decide.
If it fails, it fails. I see no problem with that.
Well I actually like Discovery and I am actually looking forward to Picard, I just wouldn't want these shows to get canceled because CBS overvalued their library and could not get their act together when it comes to streaming. Yeah its a first world problem, but it's fun to discuss on a Star Trek. I am not wishing these shows harm or hoping CBS fails, but I am questioning their business plan and I think they have overvalued CBS All Access, I do think they would be better off teaming up with someone else at this point. I think a lot of people think like in much they want from a streaming service, they want the most bang for their buck and a lot of people will think All Access does not provide that.
I am not rooting for them to fail, but I don't want Star Trek to fail and I think if they had a better plan, that would be less likely to happen. That's my 2 cents.
Last edited:
No, just convinced that they will fail. Six of one, half dozen of the other, the result is the same.
Likely as not, CBS is analyzing it constantly, and once the merger is done each department will be reviewed. Pretty standard with businesses, and if there is a change in board of directors expect more reviews.
My point? It's too soon to tell, much less declare it doomed.
ETA: Value is in the eye of the beholder. It is not an absolute.
Last edited:
CBS has existed since the 1920s. They wouldn't invest in CBSAA if they thought it would fail. And they wouldn't have lasted almost 100 years if they were in the business of investing on balance in failing enterprises. They can afford to play the long game. Even if it doesn't become the #1 streaming service, it doesn't have to. The US keeps going back and forth between political parties that are moving further in opposite directions, so eventually we'll have a President who'll want to break up monopolies. It's just a question of when. If CBSAA can last long enough, it won't have to give way to a giant who temporarily wins it all.
And Disney was convinced releasing a Star Wars movie every year was a good idea. Was it? Or did not work and put the movies on hiatus? Did a bunch of people assume that Disney had had a plan and knew it was it doing? And a bunch of other people thought was a bad idea.
If Disney overvalued Star Wars at the box office and overexposed it, why couldn't someone make the argument that CBS is overvaluing Star Trek and its library to prop up a streaming service? Sometimes people can see a bad business plan better then the suits can.
Paramount thought it was a good idea to make another Terminator sequel, was that a good idea? I thought I was bad idea and I guess I was right. Ever thought these companies can just be wrong sometimes?
See my answer above regarding Disney's decision to release a Star Wars movie every year and Paramount's decision to make another expensive Terminator film. Still, think these companies do not make huge mistakes sometimes and their well thought out plans turn out to be wrong?
The only Star Wars film to flop was the Solo film, which is oddly enough the only one I didn't see. As for Terminator 6 (which I also haven't seen), it's one film and that's why I said "on balance". Two key words.
Disney took a bath on Solo and is canceling all the films after the next one, the films are going into hiatus. Paramount also made Gemini Man this year, another stinker. Also, remember all the money Warner Brothers lost on Justice League?
These corporations are not all-knowing, they screw up a lot. Saying CBS thinks its a good idea does not fill me with confidence, I think they have overvalued their library and how much it's worth.
Hmmm...let's think about it. Star Wars was doing fine for Disney until they went from every year to every 6 months.
Oops, they changed the plan and it didn't work. So, they adjusted. They didn't stop making SW movies or content.
You can argue it all you want. I just have watched business long enough to wait and see rather than judge at first blush.
Who said they couldn't be wrong? Certainly not I.
They can be wrong and AA can fail. That's OK with me. I've stated that multiple times.
You don't have to think its valuable since you are not paying for it. Others have decided it is worth it. Let the market decide.
No, corporations are not all knowing. I don't care. It can fail, for all I care. I can't make them change their mind. So, what's this doom and gloom discussion accomplishing exactly?
Similar threads
