Skip to main content

Will the ViacomCBS and Disney/Fox Merger Affect Cable TV Prices?

Yes it will, but the reason I ask this question is not from a traditional cable TV perspective, but from a vMVPD, like Sling, and YouTube TV for example.

With Sling, they have three base packages: Sling Blue, Sling Orange, and Sling Blue+Orange. Once upon a time, the difference was essentially if you want Disney channels like ESPN, Freeform, and Disney Channel, those were on Sling Orange, and Sling Blue had the Fox and Comcast channels. Or get both Orange and Blue. Also, the Viacom channels were included on either package, but the CBS channels weren't. Now that it's 2020, the combined entity that is ViacomCBS has stated they have some renewals this year, especially with vMVPDs, which is what made me question how a service like Sling will change, seeing that Disney now owns the FX networks, will they move into the Sling Orange package? Seeing that CBS's cable channels aren't on Sling, will ViacomCBS force their carriage with their renewal? How will this affect the pricing of the packages?

More than Sling, other services like YouTube TV and Hulu Live carry the CBS cable channels, but not the Viacom channels. Will ViacomCBS force the Viacom channels into the next renewal, and how much will this raise the prices? We're certainly seeing a downturn in cable subscribers, and while a giant mega-conglomerate is great for creating a streaming service, I can't imagine this will work out well for cable TV services, or consumers. 

One last note: Hulu Live and YouTube TV are horrible names. Dish Network had the right idea by naming Sling its own separate name (Aside from the fact it shares a name with Slingbox, but I'm sure I'm the only one that knows that). PlayStation Vue died a slow painful death due to essentially non-existent marketing, and the fact that it shared a name with the video game console. This confused consumers into thinking PSVue was something you needed a PlayStation for, much like Microsoft's attempt at positioning the Xbox name as their complete entertainment brand for games, videos, and music. It didn't work because it was confusing; the same reason PSVue died. PlayStation Vue probably had the highest quality stream too, with some innovative features, like a nice multi-screen view for sports fans, but Sony had to screw it all up by confusing consumers. The same goes for Hulu Live, and YouTube TV because it confuses everyone I talk to that Hulu and Hulu Live, and YouTube and YouTube TV are different services. Even AT&T continues to screw this all up, first with DirecTV Now, and now AT&T TV Now, which is a lot of syllables. Just make it easy like Sling and Philo ave done. Thank you very much.


Popular posts from this blog

Pluto TV: Viacom's Different Answer to Streaming

First, Some Context and History All the major media conglomerates are beginning to reign in their content from Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon, and are bringing them to their own streaming services for maximum profits. AT&T, who owns WarnerMedia, Comcast, who owns NBCUniversal, and Disney, who also own Marvel and 21st Century Fox, have all announced that they are developing their own streaming services to house all of their valuable content available for a monthly fee. Want to watch Friends? You'll have to subscribe to AT&T's thing. Want to watch The Office? You'll also have to subscribe to Comcast's thing. They'll both probably cost around $10 a month, and you're also going to want Disney+, the home to Marvel. All of these companies are taking a non-linear subscription approach to delivering content, something that we first fell in love with when Netflix introduced their instant streaming service back when they were better known for delivering DVDs through …

Why I Cancelled YouTube TV

I made an article a week or so ago in defense of YouTube TV’s price increase, a stance I still stand by. Many users online are understandably upset about the new price, and that’s reasonable. Some articles are taking the discussion a bit further by suggesting that the price increase betrays the initial goal of YouTube TV and cord-cutting as a whole by offering content at remarkably low prices, which I disagree with.

YouTube TV’s goal was to make live TV better, and they succeeded. The service is generally regarded as the best online live TV service because it has the local channels, the guide is customizable, the DVR is at least as good as a traditional DVR in functionality (something no other online live TV service can say) and gives you unlimited storage with individual recordings lasting for 9 months, and the experience is at least as good as your cable service and probably even better. I call that a success.

The problem comes with the channel lineup. The service initially cost $35, …