The other thing is that anecdotally, the biggest viewers of streaming video services are children. Disney is especially strong in content aimed at children.
Disney is going to be very hard to compete against.
Try an external monitor. Kids on tablets and phones are captured by the algorithm.
Place them in front a screen they can't control and they'll watch a full movie.
I also bet they enjoy it much more. They even move and talk while watching!
No more ipad for my daughter.
Yeah...I've been introduced to that song with my niece. It is the most played youtube video by far in my house. The original has 3 billion views.....If I was to go postal that song would probably be the one humming in my head.
YouTube content has to be monitored I don't have kids myself but my sisters 4 year old watches a lot of of YouTube video she has gotten him interested in insect science etc so most of his recommended videos are science for babies and kids etc
Another way to think about this: huge potential for a competitor. It's not like Disney has a moat for creativity. Blair Witch project cost something like $100K
Blair Witch cost closer to $30k to film (and could be done for a fraction of that today) but the real costs were in the marketing/advertising blitz that made it a phenomenon.
Compare the number of times you or your kids have sat down in front of your TV and wanted to watch Blair Witch, vs the number of times you or your kids have wanted to watch Beauty and the Beast, Alladin, Frozen, Lion King, Star Wars, or Avengers.
Are they going to offer their service outside of the US?
One thing I appreciate about Netflix, is they try to offer their services in as many countries as possible. (Unfortunately the availability of content across countries is quite uneven, but Netflix has expressed an intention to improve that over time, and certainly with their original content the situation is much better than with their acquired content.)
Disney+ will be rolling out globally but I can’t see that this bundle will however (at least not in Scandinavia anytime soon) considering the ownership of sports rights outside of the US.
Is there more information about what the Disney+ catalog will include? It says that 2019 and future releases will be exclusive to Disney+ (though of course you can still buy individual movies, just not stream them), but I wonder about the rest of their catalog. Will all Star Wars movies be available? All other Disney-owned movies?
I can't tell whether I'm surprised the price is so low (three things for the price of Netflix!) or just cynically expecting that the price will go up as the value of the Disney/Hulu catalog increases. After all, Netflix has tons more content (much of it junk, admittedly) compared to the Disney catalog. So it would be pretty surprising if Disney thought they could charge very much for just the Disney+ piece. Hulu with ads is hard to value (and they could bloat it out with even more ads...). And are there local restrictions on ESPN+? Seems like there are lots of opportunities for add-on charges, such that a family could end up paying $20 or more each month for ad-free Hulu, ESPN including local, the entire Disney catalog, and multiple simultaneous screens.
Basically, it seems like this price announcement could be primarily meant to scare NFLX investors by making it seem like the be-all, end-all price for the Disney bundle will be 13 bucks. Or perhaps I'm too cynical?
The difference is that Netflix depends on subscription revenue (and a ton of debt) to pay for content. Most of the content on Disney+ has already made millions from being in the movie theatre, home releases/VOD, etc.
Article claims there is no interruption to viewing experience. I disagree. HBO ruins immersion with shows like GoT by having random shitty HBO content promos between each episode. Prime Video does the same thing.
Sure you can skip it, but that breaks the flow of just sitting and immersing yourself in another world. Infuriating that there isn't a setting or option to buy out of promos. I'd gladly pay $X to not have them, with $X being ~20% the sub price.
Sports are a big part of why some people hesitate to cut the cable cord. ESPN+ comes up quite short on some big time sports events and is kind of the 3rd string bench warmer of the sports streaming services because of this. It is almost pointless by itself and is really only suitable as a way to fill gaps in ones primary sports coverage.
(disclaimer without details, I have a horse in this race)
This is a really good deal, frankly. Tons of content on demand on virtually every platform, good quality streaming, and with decent UI/UX.
I know a lot of folks are put off by the consolidation in the media industry, and the whole question mark over how streaming services don't violate the Paramount consent decree, but still. I don't feel like I'm getting had by streaming services when I subscribe, unlike cable.
Hopefully it doesn't turn into cable TV, but for the moment, it's a great time to cut the cord.
I'm realistic and I know that the purchase of Lucasfilm and Marvel gave these studios a new life. But let's fce it: without these two, Disney is just an animation studio from the previous epoch with to attractive content to offer for people who aren't kids.
That said, maybe it's better if small kids watch the newest Lion King rather than hundreds of unboxing videos...
As long as you ignore the theme parks, ABC, ESPN, and the other movie studios under Disney. It’s also because Disney doesn’t screw up acquisitions like most companies do.
I didn't realize that Disney+ would have so much content and honestly that somewhat puts me off. Coupled with Hulu, my kids would never get away from the TV. Yea yea I know, "restrictions". But still, everything on there seems to be for entertainment only, not much educational.
Hulu has some educational documentaries as well as Netflix. There's also curiositystream if you want all docs and even some on youtube. There's tons of educational streaming online, it's about all I watch.
Don't know about you guys, but I'm back to sailing the high seas. Netflix was terrific when it had a deep backlog of old good content. Now it's mostly junk originals with the sheen of cheap that's hard to qualify. And I won't subscribe to Disney+ on principle haha - I can't see myself supporting and encouraging more power to the huge blob corporation.
Most Disney movies are terrible IMO, minus some of the classics and occasionally good animation. I don't really care for sports. These services are still way cheaper than cable but no where as customizable as I'd like. I think they rely on bored people willing to watch whatever is suggested or available. I'd gladly pay $15 a month for a service that really focuses on quality educational content.
“Quality educational content” is not a mass market. The cable channels that use to focus on educational content like TLC all moved into cheap reality TV.
Will people accept paying for yet another streaming service? The selling point of Spotify is that for a low price you get everything in one place. Netflix was like that (from what I heard), but now you have HBO, Disney, CMore etc. Do you want to subscribe to (and use) multiple services (provided you can afford it)? Or will there be a backlash soon?
if you can afford one, you can afford to rotate between them every couple months. at least until they start fudging around with contract and yearly discounts.
I always thought they should have spent some of those billions to acquire some existing entertainment companies and get some more back catalog. Not everyone likes to watch new stuff. (And even when it comes to making new stuff–a lot of what Disney is doing is building on stuff they already own rather than totally new content-easy for Disney when they own outright so much back catalog.)
You are right in regards to building on stuff that they already own. All the movies this year that have grossed over $100 Million have been based on older content.
You don't just get free back catalogue if you buy someone else. Residual agreements often force you to sell to the highest bidder regardless, there are hosts of pre-existing deals for multiple years, and your shareholders will ask why you paid so much money for a company and then took away the way they make revenue (selling the shows to other people).
I wonder how this decision was taken. You can't fool people you have a rich catalogue if most of it is the bland N-marked pulp. Shouldn't they be doing some research and base their decisions on the needs of their customers? It's not rocket science, almost everyone is telling them the same thing, but they persist in producing content few people want, in spite of their pervasive marketing efforts.
I'd say it was when they decided to get rid of star ratings for thumbs up thumbs down ratings, but I think that original content was close to the same time.
ESPN Player (their not-for-US streaming service) is €11.99 in Europe so I guess if that ever makes it to Europe it will be really expensive + with ads.
According to https://www.boxofficemojo.com/studio/?debug=0&view=parent&p=... Disney was responsible for 38% of all movie gross revenue so far this year!
The other thing is that anecdotally, the biggest viewers of streaming video services are children. Disney is especially strong in content aimed at children.
Disney is going to be very hard to compete against.