News The Disney+ (The New Streaming Service) Thread
- Thread starter JD
- Start date
I have to say that there is nothing there that will get me subscribing day one. Other than Rebels (I missed season 3 and most of 4. Specifically, I've seen all of S 1-2 and the final two episodes), I'm willing to wait until I can see all of both The Mandalorian S1 and Falcon and Winter Soldier before paying for the service.
I already own all of the Star Wars and Marvel movies, and while there is a lot of content of interest, I prefer to wait until I have some new material to devour before paying up.
I already own all of the Star Wars and Marvel movies, and while there is a lot of content of interest, I prefer to wait until I have some new material to devour before paying up.
Deadline is reporting that a bundle of Hulu (the plan WITH commercials), Disney+ and ESPN+ will cost $12.99 per month. That's $1 more than Hulu's commercial-free plan.
Or think of it as Hulu WITH commercials ($5.99) and Disney+ ($6.99) with ESPN+ thrown in for free.
Or think of it as Hulu WITH commercials and Disney+ with ESPN+ for the price of Netflix's standard HD/two-screen plan.
Or think of it as Hulu WITH commercials ($5.99) and Disney+ ($6.99) with ESPN+ thrown in for free.
Or think of it as Hulu WITH commercials and Disney+ with ESPN+ for the price of Netflix's standard HD/two-screen plan.
I still think it's all a plan to keep people from service jumping. Why drop Hulu while I subscribe to Disney+ to see that content when I can bundle? Sorry, unless bundling comes with a significant discount, I still will only pay for one service a month.
That sounds like a good deal.... but, fuck ESPN, don't give a shit about that.
That maybe worth discussing with the wife...
Oh... wait. Just reread... with commercials... I've become so commercial free... ugh.
I mean, the only good thing about how things are shaking out with the competing streaming services is that unlike cable, non-sports watchers aren't forced to subsidize sports fans any longer.
I hate that they have two options, one with ads and one without. That's capitalism for you. 
If I'm paying for streaming service, I shouldn't have to see any damn commercials. I don't with Netflix or Amazon, why the hell should I with anyone else?
If I'm paying for streaming service, I shouldn't have to see any damn commercials. I don't with Netflix or Amazon, why the hell should I with anyone else?
I'm glad to have all the Disney stuff available under one roof. Makes it easier for my kids to find what they like.
I'm probably going to cave and get the bundle. For a dollar more than I'm already paying for the commercial-free plan I get Disney+ (and, once all the cable/streaming contracts expire, the entirety of the Disney, Pixar, Marvel and LucasFilm libraries) plus ESPN+ for my little brother. I personally don't give a fuck about sports beyond football in general and the Eagles in particular.
EDIT: Hulu, CBS All Access and Comcast do need to get the fuck over the ads, though. Yes, we get it. Traditional TV is slowly dying, and you're freaking the fuck out about lost ad revenue. But streaming isn't the new broadcast/basic cable. It's the new premium cable. Except you can now take it worldwide yourself without having to give other parties a piece of the pie to do so. You'll be fine.
EDIT: Hulu, CBS All Access and Comcast do need to get the fuck over the ads, though. Yes, we get it. Traditional TV is slowly dying, and you're freaking the fuck out about lost ad revenue. But streaming isn't the new broadcast/basic cable. It's the new premium cable. Except you can now take it worldwide yourself without having to give other parties a piece of the pie to do so. You'll be fine.
Last edited:
ESPN+ sucks. Unless they've really improved their buffering recently then it is not worth it. If I want live sports then I want the "real deal" and not just whatever game ESPN decides to show me today. I'm still hanging on to HULU despite the fact they have lost a lot of content I really enjoy (CW), and this past year I have really only used it to watch SNL, The Runaways, and Cloak and Dagger.
This is true. And it is stupid for smaller streaming services NOT to release worldwide. I guess traditional tv-channels worldwide, and Netflix + HBO that have strong global presence, still buy content at high enough prices that it's not worth opening CBSAA/Hulu to a global audience.
ESPN+ is something I don't fully understand. It doesn't feel like I can use it to finally cut the cable but, if I could use it as a substitute for ESPN, I would.
I'm not sure how that would work with CBSAA since it's spun-off of an American network.
I just remembered that I was probably going to go with the annual subscription for Disney+, so if there's not an annual option for the package I'll stick to the standalone services. I don't care about ESPN so that have no real impact on my choice.
When it comes to this kind of stuff I prefer annual options if they're available so I can spread things out through the year, instead of having to deal with them every single month.
This is the problem with the service. It provides a selection of games and events, but does not actually replace the channel itself.
If it provided the actual channels, I would think about getting it. There's some hockey content they have, but now it's basically a supplemental to what the channels provide.
Considering that the cost ESPN bills cable companies for access is exorbitant - so exorbitant that the cable companies decided the only way to deal with it was to force everyone to get ESPN and subsidize the cost for sports watchers - I don't think you'd be willing to pay what ESPN+ would want to charge for full service.
ESPN+ was never marketed as a replacement for the channel. It's a different avenue for content distribution. What do you get with ESPN+? A LOT of soccer, some good PPV level boxing, some lower tier UFC fights. A little bit of other stuff, but those 3 are (really mostly soccer and boxing) what you are likely paying for. It's selling to a large(ish) niche, and it provides VERY good content for the people who care about that niche.
If you don't care, it's not for you, so why are you bitching about it. They never sold it as anything else.
EDIT: I forgot to mention that you get to watch all those sports live + on demand, and the subscription also comes with every 30 for 30 ever, which is enough to get many people to pay $5 on it's own.
SECOND EDIT: I guess since we're getting specific, I can talk about what ESPN+ actually has. Canadian Football League, Top Rank Boxing, Ivy League sports, US Open Cup tennis, cricket, tons of soccer properties including out of market MLS games (this used to cost more on its own than all of ESPN+), Open Cup, Copa America, Serie A, and many more. Also, lots of rugby. They also offer most of ESPN's original programming like 30 for 30 on demand, and occasionally before the main channel gets it. It's one of the best deals in all of streaming if you care about just a few of those things.
If you don't care, it's not for you, so why are you bitching about it. They never sold it as anything else.
EDIT: I forgot to mention that you get to watch all those sports live + on demand, and the subscription also comes with every 30 for 30 ever, which is enough to get many people to pay $5 on it's own.
SECOND EDIT: I guess since we're getting specific, I can talk about what ESPN+ actually has. Canadian Football League, Top Rank Boxing, Ivy League sports, US Open Cup tennis, cricket, tons of soccer properties including out of market MLS games (this used to cost more on its own than all of ESPN+), Open Cup, Copa America, Serie A, and many more. Also, lots of rugby. They also offer most of ESPN's original programming like 30 for 30 on demand, and occasionally before the main channel gets it. It's one of the best deals in all of streaming if you care about just a few of those things.
Last edited:
Similar threads
