$2/month for 12 months of Peacock, last year it was $1/month for 12 months. $11/month for ESPN+. Paramount+ has been free for over 5 months now, I have no idea how I got that, but I'm not complaining or cancelling lol. Total - $13/month I pay for NBA League Pass some months, that's $15/month. Even if I had to pay full price for Peacock and Paramount, that's just another 9-10$ per month. I also cancelled my other subs like Netflix and Amazon so I really save a lot now. My old DirecTV bill was always at least $90/month. SlingTV was $55-60/month.
I'm at the point that between my phone and internet I get Netflix w/ads, Apple TV+, and Max for free. I'm about to get MLB.tv for free as well. I got a deal last fall for Paramount+ w/Showtime for a little over $60 after taxes for the full year. Once that's gone just Paramount+ is free with Walmart+. I'm grandfathered in to an old Disney bundle but I'll be getting rid of that and going with either just ESPN+ or the new Fox/ESPN/WBD sports streamer. I also typically pick up the 1 year Peacock deal since I'm an IndyCar and WWE fan. At most I'm paying $40/mo now. Even with YouTube TV factored in I save about $35/mo from what my local cable company would charge to get the same channels.
Here's a thought I just had: People complain about clunky UIs. I generally don't have a problem with them, but why Paramount+ went from one where the season numbers were listed along the side to listed along the top is anyone's guess. With that said, I wonder if: The AppleTV app is designed for the AppleTV device/remote. The Amazon app is designed for the Amazon Firestick device/remote. Anyone using those apps on the device not made by that company is a lost cause in the minds of the company. GoogleTV is obviously designed for the Chromecast and IDK if it's available elsewhere. Or am I totally wrong here?
Google TVs are now being manufactured as actual TV sets. They've got Hisense, Philips, Sony, and TCL sets.
Wasn't there a Chromecast TV at one time or was that a Google TV? I feel like Google actually made a TV at one point.
Apparently so, back around 2010, but that was Google TV before Android TV which is the predecessor to the current Google TV. Technically I think Android TV is still the OS but Google TV is now the UI.
Indeed there was. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_TV_(operating_system) Hell, I remember Web TV. Somehow, I ended up on an email list (probably because someone mistakenly typed in a wrong email address) where the sender used a webtv email address...this was back in 2009 or thereabouts. I got some very interesting emails because people mistakenly typed in email addresses. From 2017-2019, a group of guys kept planning a golf trip to Saratoga and they were trying to coordinate dates. The other one was some class. They got upset that I never responded with whatever "I" was supposed to contribute.
Here's the problem with the word "cable." https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/21/espn-executives-talk-streaming-plans-in-cnbc-documentary.html "Since 2013, tens of millions of Americans have canceled their cable TV subscriptions" But if they're canceling Spectrum, Cox or Comcast and going to YTTV, Hulu or DirecTV Stream, they're still paying for ESPN. If they went from Time Warner to DirecTV back in 2005, it was the same effect as someone swapping Comcast for Sling in 2025. (Sling, of course, is owned by Dish Network.) (I went from Time Warner to U-Verse in 2008. I haven't had cable in 16 years. Yes, I have a remote with channel numbers and physical receivers, but IPTV is a streaming technology. Because my receivers don't have tuners, I've never had the ability to set a notice to tune in to a channel at a specific time because that show is about to start. I can tune in to four different streams at the same time, however.) So is this article misleading? I think it is somewhat. But, as we know, people are also going directly towards "pay direct" apps like Paramount+ and Peacock. (If they're paying for the ESPN app, they're getting some of the content, of course.) They're also going towards FAST which, I guess they seem to like reruns of old shows. Oh well. And you wonder why people post stuff like "YouTube cable" or "I get my cable TV through Hulu."
FAST is in an interesting space right now. You've got the main ION channel through both Google TV and Tubi, which means an OTA network with live sports (WNBA & NWSL) as well as the Golazo Network through Pluto which carries simulcasts (and occasional exclusives) of several leagues that CBS has the rights to as well as a couple of daily soccer talk shows. Sure, reruns are there but Fox is producing a ton of original content for Tubi now. There are also some exclusives like the pre 2005 Dr. Who only being on Tubi and a show like Home Improvement that is only on Roku Channel if you don't want to pay for Disney+ or Hulu.
What I find interesting is the price difference. The channels are virtually the same with the differences of RSNs, Music Choice (or similar) and the religious/shopping channels. Of course the religious/shopping ones pay to be on...so that's basically a wash if they don't essentially lower the bill. Let's be real too. Whoever owns Music Choice, it's probably only $5-6mo at most. Assuming most of the other expenses (greed/profit, employees) are the same, the infrastructure costs must be crazy. A lot of the cable/satellite bill goes towards the physical network and with streaming, they're obviously piggybacking off someone else's infrastructure.
They're also pulling in good advertising dollars. Pluto has been over $1 billion in ad revenue the last two years.
https://deadline.com/2024/03/espn-streaming-nesn-regional-sports-networks-1235865845/ ESPN is going to start integrating RSNs into the ESPN app. This is going to confuse people. "I have the ESPN app *AND* I pay for ESPN+! Why can't I get NESN in Kansas City? I understand how blackouts work, but I shouldn't be blacked out of a team I'm hundreds of miles from!"
You may have missed this sentence in the article: "The offering will be geotargeted so that only those located in specific areas of the U.S. will see the option to watch their local games."
I'm hoping that it is indeed an option and we don't get the RSNs involuntarily. As we know, Fubo forces you to add them for something like $14/month. To me, those channels are useless so if ESPN makes us pay for them I will have to say 'goodbye' to ESPN.
Yeah, I saw that. But there ARE people out there who think they can pay for something like the DirecTV Sports Pack, get 27 (or whatever) RSNs and have access to everything those RSNs show. With that said, I have heard if someone pays for MLB Extra Innings AND pays for the DirecTV Sports Pack, they'll get the games on the proper RSN channel. -- Example: A Yankees fan in Tampa with MLB Extra Innings and the DirecTV Sports Pack could be able to watch the pregame show, game and postgame on YES without having to flip over to the MLB Extra Innings channel. There's also a number of people out there who think regional blackouts only apply towards home games...not true. They're there to make people watch the TV channel, thus boosting ratings which makes the businesses happier when it comes time to renew contracts between TV channel and team.
Yeah, I saw that later on...I'm not sure how to break the news to an individual who is convinced that teams will develop their own apps/channels which will be available nationally. -- Example: A Brewers fan in Ohio could be able to watch all Brewers games on this app/channel without subscribing to the local RSN. According to this person, the Brewers are playing the Reds ...anyone with the Brewers app will be able to watch these games. The problem being that if you live on the extreme fringe of one team's exclusivity area, you're blacked out from all games involving that team...think a fan in Montana who might be blacked out of Seattle games. Maybe they're not a Seattle fan, but their team is in Seattle's division. There might be 7-8 different providers in that city, but the Seattle MLB channel might be on just 1-2 providers. And yep, you'll still need to subscribe to that channel for the ESPN app link to work. (I thought it was "games available via those channels through the ESPN app to everyone in the broadcast area." Whoops.)
Has anyone signed up for the $5/mo Sling Soccer Pass? What channels are included with it? (I am not a Sling subscriber, so I would just be interested in the standalone soccer pass) I know you can get the BeIn channels with it, but I can't find anything else. I'm really wondering if Tyc Sports is part of the pack?
.https://www.whattowatch.com/news/sling-soccer-pass beIN Sports (+ spin-offs) ON Sports NBC (select markets) USA TNT CNN TBS Fox (select markets) FS1 ... and many more. So that's $5 for what appears to be WB and Fox, but this new coming app is gonna be upwards of $40. Hmmm....
That article seems to indicate that it only shows the live soccer content from those channels? But it's a poorly-written clickbait/SEO article, probably AI, so who knows. Sling's website doesn't explain well what it offers. I'd be skeptical of it other than as a way to get beIN if you want it.