Will CBS All Access Remain Viable in the Streaming Wars?

[The Overlord]

Guessing a lot of folks have learned that the grass isn't always greener on the other side. Me? I pay for what I want and am happy with having options that are incredibly flexible.

I wonder if the streaming bubble will burst and some of the losers in the streaming Wars will have to band together to thrive.

Good for them. It's almost as if they know how to plan things out.

Like I said before on this thread, this is the move they would have had to make. Combining all the assets into one streaming service is the move they needed to be competitive. I am curious how this affects Viacom's deal with Netflix.

Now CBS All Access will have will a larger back catalog in its library. This makes something like Apple TV+ look really bad, they are the cheapest of the streaming services, but they got hardly anything. It's why I heard Apple and Netflix were trying to buy MGM, to get some properties of their own.

 

[Alan Roi]

I wonder if the streaming bubble will burst and some of the losers in the streaming Wars will have to band together to thrive.

Like I said before on this thread, this is the move they would have had to make. Combining all the assets into one streaming service is the move they needed to be competitive. I am curious how this affects Viacom's deal with Netflix.

Now CBS All Access will have will a larger back catalog in its library. This makes something like Apple TV+ look really bad, they are the cheapest of the streaming services, but they got hardly anything. It's why I heard Apple and Netflix were trying to buy MGM, to get some properties of their own.

Disney+, Hulu, Peacock, HBO Max and CBSAA+ are likely fine as they have a combination of back catalog and vast ongoing product being produced for the forseeable future. Netflix and Amazon are likewise OK. With Miramax gobbled up there remains Sony and MGM as the big fish and the likes of Lionsgate and AMC as smaller but still sizeable acquisitions. I would think that Apple might hold off any major acquisitions until they see how successful Quibi is, since I would imagine it is more in their wheelhouse when compared to legacy product and libraries would be going forwards and they might be better off looking to the future as well as in mobile entertainment as opposed to the past as it better suits their brand.

 

[fireproof78]

Like I said before on this thread, this is the move they would have had to make. Combining all the assets into one streaming service is the move they needed to be competitive. I am curious how this affects Viacom's deal with Netflix.

Yes, and I figured they would have strategies in place to improve their marketability.

 

[BillJ]

Now CBS All Access will have will a larger back catalog in its library. This makes something like Apple TV+ look really bad, they are the cheapest of the streaming services, but they got hardly anything. It's why I heard Apple and Netflix were trying to buy MGM, to get some properties of their own.

They were already making AppleTV look bad.

 

[fireproof78]

Like I said before on this thread, this is the move they would have had to make. Combining all the assets into one streaming service is the move they needed to be competitive. I am curious how this affects Viacom's deal with Netflix.

Yes, and I figured they would have strategies in place to improve their marketability.

 

[The Overlord]

Disney+, Hulu, Peacock, HBO Max and CBSAA+ are likely fine as they have a combination of back catalog and vast ongoing product being produced for the forseeable future. Netflix and Amazon are likewise OK. With Miramax gobbled up there remains Sony and MGM as the big fish and the likes of Lionsgate and AMC as smaller but still sizeable acquisitions. I would think that Apple might hold off any major acquisitions until they see how successful Quibi is, since I would imagine it is more in their wheelhouse when compared to legacy product and libraries would be going forwards and they might be better off looking to the future as well as in mobile entertainment as opposed to the past as it better suits their brand.

What is Apple brand in terms of streaming content? It seems like they just made a couple of mediocre shows and claimed they were quality content.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fo...1/27/its-time-for-apple-to-kill-apple-tv/amp/

I think Peacock and CBSAA are the 2 I would be a bit iffy about, but I think Netflix may be a paper tiger, they are deeply in debt and soon almost everyone will pull their content from Netflix.

I still think CBS\Viacom is small enough to be bought by another player though.

Yes, and I figured they would have strategies in place to improve their marketability.

Fair enough. I guess we both get what we want.

They were already making AppleTV look bad.

Yeah, it looks bad.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fo...1/27/its-time-for-apple-to-kill-apple-tv/amp/

 

[Alan Roi]

What is Apple brand in terms of streaming content? It seems like they just made a couple of mediocre shows and claimed they were quality content.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fo...1/27/its-time-for-apple-to-kill-apple-tv/amp/

I think Peacock and CBSAA are the 2 I would be a bit iffy about, but I think Netflix may be a paper tiger, they are deeply in debt and soon almost everyone will pull their content from Netflix.

I still think CBS\Viacom is small enough to be bought by another player though.



Fair enough. I guess we both get what we want.



Yeah, it looks bad.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fo...1/27/its-time-for-apple-to-kill-apple-tv/amp/

Apple is primarily in the phone-tablet business and more known for moble apps and entertainment. Quibi is a mobile entertainment startup which looks to produce a thousand hours a year of content for phones etc. Comcast owns SKY, NBC and Universal Pictures, so they have a huge amount of content to plug, as does ViacomCBS. Netflix produces more new content than anyone and has 140 million subscribers worldwide. And yeah, if Fox can be sold any studio smaller than Disney can be sold. But it has to be for sale first.

 

[The Overlord]

Apple is primarily in the phone-tablet business and more known for moble apps and entertainment. Quibi is a mobile entertainment startup which looks to produce a thousand hours a year of content for phones etc. Comcast owns SKY, NBC and Universal Pictures, so they have a huge amount of content to plug, as does ViacomCBS. Netflix produces more new content than anyone and has 140 million subscribers worldwide. And yeah, if Fox can be sold any studio smaller than Disney can be sold. But it has to be for sale first.

Does Apple treat streaming seriously or is this just a lark to them?

If they are serious, they going to have to do something different, a handful of mediocre shows is pretty poor for a serious streaming service.

Disney is a huge player by itself, Universal and Warner Bros are owned by huge corporations as well, none of those will be for sale any time soon.

That leaves AMC, MGM, Lionsgate, Sony Entertainment and Viacom/CBS as the ones that could be bought. The first 3 are smaller, less expensive but have some value, the last 2 cost more, but have more content.

 

[Steven P Bastien]

What game? CBS is beholden to its shareholders to get the best bang for its buck. They see All-Access with Star Trek as its flagship doing that. I can see not wanting to shell out cash for it, fuck I don't want to shell out cash for it. But it is what it is.

Heck, in three or four weeks, you could order a month of All-Access and have access to three different "new to you" seasons of Star Trek.

It's not an issue of money. One aspect is that the CBS strategy bothers me on principle, because they not only keep the 2 shows I would want to watch off TV, but they don't let me buy it, even though people in other countries can buy it. It just bugs me. Is that irrational? Yes, I think so. But, need I be logical always? In general I'm very logical and rational, so I say, "no I don't need to be".

By the way, if CBS offers Picard and Discovery for purchase ( on Amazon for example), I'd happily buy them to own them and support the making of Star Trek. That may happen in the future. I'm not opposed to buying a good show and I own many series on DVD/BR.

But, more practically on the streaming service, I have very limited time to watch "TV" and CBS's strategy ( that's what I mean by "game") does not entice me to patronize them. I end up watching NBC because I see it on TV and pick a couple of shows to watch. I like having a time to tune in to see a show, which is just my preference. If I do miss a show, I can still see it on NBC's free access.

Basically, the CBS strategy does not appeal to me at all. I do understand if they do it to make more money, and if everyone else is happy, then maybe they are smart. Still, I question if they have picked the best strategy to do that. That is their decision and time will tell if they are right. (EDIT: the following statement I made was challenged by Alan Roi below. Please read that and consider that my opinion may be wrong, or at least premature. ) NBC is taking a different strategy with their new service and I believe that is the better one, but I'm biased because theirs appeals to me personally. I do realize that I'm not a typical person in this market because I don't watch a lot of TV and I'm older and biased in certain ways.

 

[Alan Roi]

It's not an issue of money. One aspect is that the CBS strategy bothers me on principle, because they not only keep the 2 shows I would want to watch off TV, but they don't let me buy it, even though people in other countries can buy it. It just bugs me. Is that irrational? Yes, I think so. But, need I be logical always? In general I'm very logical and rational, so I say, "no I don't need to be".

By the way, if CBS offers Picard and Discovery for purchase ( on Amazon for example), I'd happily buy them to own them and support the making of Star Trek. That may happen in the future. I'm not opposed to buying a good show and I own many series on DVD/BR.

But, more practically on the streaming service, I have very limited time to watch "TV" and CBS's strategy ( that's what I mean by "game") does not entice me to patronize them. I end up watching NBC because I see it on TV and pick a couple of shows to watch. I like having a time to tune in to see a show, which is just my preference. If I do miss a show, I can still see it on NBC's free access.

Basically, the CBS strategy does not appeal to me at all. I do understand if they do it to make more money, and if everyone else is happy, then maybe they are smart. Still, I question if they have picked the best strategy to do that. That is their decision and time will tell if they are right. NBC is taking a different strategy with their new service and I believe that is the better one, but I'm biased because theirs appeals to me personally. I do realize that I'm not a typical person in this market because I don't watch a lot of TV and I'm older and biased in certain ways.

You seem unawares that ViacomCBS runs Pluto TV which is the model NBC will using for Peacock's free tier. And very much like Pluto TV/CBSAA, run of the mill stuff on Peacock will be free and ad supported while premium/expanded content, very likely the new Battlestar Galactica will be on the pay tier just like Star Trek is being positioned by ViacomCBS. So sure, convince yourself that NBC's strategy is somehow different or better because you have an axe to grind with CBS beacuse they are using Star Trek in a way you don't like, but in reality NBC's model is set up to be exactly the same as CBS's.

 

[Steven P Bastien]

You seem unawares that ViacomCBS runs Pluto TV which is the model NBC will using for Peacock's free tier. And very much like Pluto TV/CBSAA, run of the mill stuff on Peacock will be free and ad supported while premium/expanded content, very likely the new Battlestar Galactica will be on the pay tier just like Star Trek is being positioned by ViacomCBS. So sure, convince yourself that NBC's strategy is somehow different or better because you have an axe to grind with CBS beacuse they are using Star Trek in a way you don't like, but in reality NBC's model is set up to be exactly the same as CBS's.

OK, thank you for this information. I haven't really looked at the details of NBC, but based my thoughts on what was presented on the Today show which described it. I'm sorry if I misrepresented it and put out bad information. Anyway, it sounded better matched to what I would like, but I could be wrong. When it comes out, I will see what it really is and decide whether or not to use the free part, or pay for a higher tier if it is something I want.

 

[CaptainXaviOfEarth]

By the way, if CBS offers Picard and Discovery for purchase ( on Amazon for example), I'd happily buy them to own them and support the making of Star Trek. That may happen in the future. I'm not opposed to buying a good show and I own many series on DVD/BR.

After each season’s release, they are available to purchase, digitally on Amazon, iTunes and other platforms, and on home video everywhere.

 

[CaptainXaviOfEarth]

Does Apple treat streaming seriously or is this just a lark to them?

If they are serious, they going to have to do something different, a handful of mediocre shows is pretty poor for a serious streaming service.

Speak for yourself mate. The Morning Show, Servant and Little America are great. I get Apple TV+ free with my iPhone but when that offer expires, I’ll probably stay subscribed. Their shows are different. Remind me of early days Amazon Originals but a bit more focused.

 

[CaptainXaviOfEarth]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fo...1/27/its-time-for-apple-to-kill-apple-tv/amp/

This article was written by a fucking idiot.

 

[Steven P Bastien]

After each season’s release, they are available to purchase, digitally on Amazon, iTunes and other platforms, and on home video everywhere.

Awesome! Thank you. In the past I tried Discovery and couldn't buy it and recently I tried Picard and couldn't buy it, But, I figured they would be available eventually, and now I know they are and when.

 

[JD]

You seem unawares that ViacomCBS runs Pluto TV which is the model NBC will using for Peacock's free tier. And very much like Pluto TV/CBSAA, run of the mill stuff on Peacock will be free and ad supported while premium/expanded content, very likely the new Battlestar Galactica will be on the pay tier just like Star Trek is being positioned by ViacomCBS. So sure, convince yourself that NBC's strategy is somehow different or better because you have an axe to grind with CBS beacuse they are using Star Trek in a way you don't like, but in reality NBC's model is set up to be exactly the same as CBS's.

Damn, I was really hoping at least a few of the new shows on Peacock would be on the free tier.
So is the new CBS/Viacom streaming service just going to be an expanded version of CBSAA? The clear articles I read where a little vague in that regard.
I'm curious how it's going to effect the price. I'm already pushing it financially with the current price, so I might have to get rid of it if it gets to much more expensive.

 

[Alan Roi]

Damn, I was really hoping at least a few of the new shows on Peacock would be on the free tier.
So is the new CBS/Viacom streaming service just going to be an expanded version of CBSAA? The clear articles I read where a little vague in that regard.
I'm curious how it's going to effect the price. I'm already pushing it financially with the current price, so I might have to get rid of it if it gets to much more expensive.

that was my educated guess based on what I've read. We'll only know what exactly is going to happen with both Peacock and whatever CBS comes up with when it happens.

 

[The Overlord]

This article says ViacomCBS needs a more comprehensive streaming strategy to thrive in the streaming wars:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vu.../viacomcbs-all-access-streaming-strategy.html

 

[FederationHistorian]

No. There’s Netflix, Disney+, Amazon Prime, Hulu, and HBO. There are international services like the BBC, and Crave in Canada. There are the various sports based streaming services like ESPN+, UFC, and WWE. There’s stuff like Funimation and Crunchyroll for cartoons/anime. And there are social media streaming sites like YouTube and Facebook Watch. Competition is good, but there are too many of them in existence, and there's bound to be a pushback at some point. I don’t think any streaming network linked to a major tv broadcaster (CBS, NBC, ABC, etc) is long for this world. Your local newspaper has a better chance at surviving.

The one to really watch for is Netflix. They cancel shows like Daybreak after one season without giving them time to find an audience like other hit shows on their service, when they are also losing their library to NBC and Disney. And that may frustrate people, especially considering Netflix was the once the main go-to streaming service, since they used to have a lot of shows and movies from Disney, NBC, CBS, etc. They are slowly getting superseded though and it becomes harder to justify remaining subscribed. Although, I’d like to think they’ll still be around for years to come. It was preferable that Netflix was the major place to go for tv and movies. They just needed to stop rotating their library out of service.

 

[EnderAKH]

CBS All Access is rebranding as Paramount+
https://deadline.com/2020/09/viacom...streaming-name-for-cbs-all-access-1234576956/