Disney is about to own all of Hulu | Disney’s paying more than $8 billion for Comcast’s stake in Hulu.::Disney and Comcast have reached a deal on Hulu’s buyout. Disney expects to pay about $8.61 billion to get the 33 percent owned by Comcast as a result of their agreement in 2019.

  • joshhsoj1902@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    We’re still looking at a monopoly from the perspective of accessing particular content.

    We would all be more happier if the video streaming platforms operated closer to the music platforms where all platforms had mostly the same content, and we just got to pick the experience we want.

    As is there is no choise if you’re looking for something in particular, which is pretty similar to a monopoly.

    • jacksilver@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The music streaming format would be great, but I’m not sure the TV streaming services is all that different than the channel packages cable used to sell. It’s still somewhat better than cable with on demand access and ability to add and drop whenever you want.

      Not that I think any of this is good, just that I’m not sure its any more monopolistic than broadcast/cable ever were.

    • phillaholic@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Would you rather have 5 services that you can choose which to pay for or have to pay the entire cost of all 5 together?

      • joshhsoj1902@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Neither?

        I would rather have 20 services, all with access to most of the same content.

        Some services give you the option to pick and choose which media packages you want.

        These services are now able to compete on a mostly even ground in terms of content, and instead there is an incentive for them to provide a good user experience.

        This would also encourage the media companies to stop licencing their content exclusively or as upfront large blocks, and instead per/stream style licensing could show up (where a content owner is paid based off how much their content is watched).

        This would then encourage media companies to produce content people want to watch, rather than the last 10 years where the priority is to have larger libraries of exclusive content (even if that content isn’t good).

        None of that is a given if content companies didn’t also own the streaming companies, but it’s is the sort of market that had the best version of Netflix (before they were making content their user experience was much better).

        • phillaholic@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          So you want tech companies to spend money on features completely outside of the content and then also have the content, and expect that not to cost substantially more?

          Producing “content people want to watch” gets you lowest common denominator crap. Say goodbye to prestige TV and hello to reality TV.

          • joshhsoj1902@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You’re sooooo close.

            I want tech companies to create streaming services.

            I want content companies to make content.

            AKA removing the monopoly.

            • phillaholic@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              And somehow you think it’ll be cheaper. It hasn’t made music streaming cheaper. It hasn’t made streaming cable replacements cheaper.

              • joshhsoj1902@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                It has made music streaming cheaper.

                If you don’t like Spotify or feel it’s too expensive, do a google search, there are like a dozen alternatives, most of them cheaper.

                For Spotify you’re paying for one of the better user experiences.

                Like I said, you’re sooooo close to understanding