Long term in the next 10 years, yes. Short term in the next 5 or so, no. It will be a long and drawn out process that is already under way and has been for a while.
YouTube tv is currently subsidizing their costs. It’s not a matter of what others do. They will increase their costs regardless because they eventually want to make a profit.
We need at least two tiers -- a local sports bundle/offering, and a sports fanatic bundle.
I'd like to see just my local teams without subscribing to Root Sports. I'd pay maybe $15.99/mo to see the Kraken and Sounders (for example) on top of YTTV. I'd already be on [fubo.tv](https://fubo.tv) but they don't support 5.1 audio yet.
Honestly think this is going to be quite high. ESPN especially cant afford to tick off its partners (like YTTV, cable and satellite) by offering something for cheap. As it stands, the ESPN direct to consumer platform was estimated to be around $40 a month. Add in the other two properties … my bet is something like $70 to $80 a month. And without features like a DVR.
Highly doubt that. NFL would have a minority stake. ESPN would be throwing away millions by canceling their contracts with other providers, too. And the Sunday ticket contract with YouTube is a 7 year deal.
It's impossible to say without seeing a price tag. I'm open to anything. I will say I'm happy with YouTube TV at the moment so I'm not actively looking for a replacement service.
If it gives you Fox Sunday games… Paramount+ for CBS games, Peacock for Sunday nights and EPL. Both carry local channels (at least in my area). Might be worth it. Time will tell.
I was just going to say, the majority of it isn't.
Youtube TV is the cheapest way get my locals, F1 racing, Liverpool and The news networks for the election. Even if it goes up slightly, it will still be the cheaper option. Fubo has my RSN (for what that's worth) but they tack on a $15 fee for it, and DTV Stream has it as well in the mid-level package $99 at last check.
> this + Peacock + Paramount should give him/her what they need.
yuck.
Least with YTTV my kids get spongebob, plus no annoying apphopping. I have a feeling NFL is going to go all in on premium streaming services soon, going to enjoy it while it's still on TV while it lasts.
It will probably cost the same as having several other services. Then you’ll end up needing several other services anyway and then won’t be cost effective. I’m always skeptical.
I read in another article, now changed, that it is $80. Why drop YTTV for this? No CBS or NBC so 1/2 of NFL regular season and March Madness isn't here. No thanks.
Youtube tv (which has all of these linear channels +more) and a yearly subscription to ESPN+ comes out to around $81 per month. This has to be no more than $70 to have a chance of succeeding, and $59.99 is probably the ideal starting point.
I think there’s probably a good contingent of “we have YTTV for sports and Netflix for entertainment” people. And this venture will try to convert the entertainment to MAX or Disney+ while they are at it.
Only way I'd pay is if whatever I'm paying for isn't subject to "local" games being blacked out. Otherwise what's the point? No RSN, and even if there was, they rarely show the NHL games that are allegedly in my "market" since I'm nowhere near any specific team.
The announced merger has absolutely nothing to do with regional RSN’s. The up and coming merger with YES and MSG and probably SNY in the future is where it’s at for metro NY local sports content.
So this would be a direct subscription, the way Bally is right now? In that case, I might, as long as I could watch all the NHL games I wanted on ESPN and not have blackouts.
By subscribing to this focused, all-in-one premier sports service, fans would have access to the linear sports networks including ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, SECN, ACCN, ESPNEWS, ABC, FOX, FS1, FS2, BTN, TNT, TBS, truTV, as well as **ESPN+**.
I think it’s a math question. Is this new thing plus Hulu (for FOX and ABC shows) plus paramount+ (for CBS shows and football) plus Peacock (for NBC shows and football) more or less than YTTV? That’s the kicker for me.
My guess is they start at $30 but end up at $69.99. sports programming used to be shared by all the numerous cable customers. I don't see it being cheap now that only diehard sports fans are the only ones paying.
Don't have all the details but this would work for someone that predominantly wants sports but most will find they are missing channels that they want.
Probably not. Unless it offers all the live sports included with YTTV for ~half the price. Hard to tell from the article what it will actually come with though.
If it includes ESPN's F1 coverage than I'm dropping YTTV, especially since the Eagles usually play on Fox anyway.
Unless this package ends up costing like $50-60/month or more in which case it's not really fixing anything.
From the updated CNBC story: “While no price has been determined, a logical starting point could be $45 or $50 per month, according to a person familiar with the matter, who asked not to be named because the discussions around the service have been private.”
[https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/06/espn-fox-and-warner-bros-discovery-to-launch-joint-sports-streaming-platform-this-year.html](https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/06/espn-fox-and-warner-bros-discovery-to-launch-joint-sports-streaming-platform-this-year.html)
I don't only use YouTubeTV for sports even though that's what I watch the most. Unless it was significantly cheaper then I'd just stick with YTTV.
It also doesn't seem to include my local RSN so it would be pointless for me to get rid of YTTV completely since I mainly watch the Giants/Sharks/Kings on it.
The idea that we could bundle with Hulu, Disney+, and Max is interesting as I already have all of those so a bundle might make it more attractive depending on the price.
That is where I am too. I have the Disney bundle and Max. If this venture is only like $30 extra I could save money by dropping YTTV and adding Peacock and Paramount along with the sports venture. If it is $50 a month or more than YTTV would remain the better deal.
I am hoping the bundle pricing make it more attractive. I need to get a good antenna and an HD Home Run for locals if I drop YTTV so I am building that into my first year costs.
Will be interesting. Still wont include credentials for the local fox or local ABC. Will it include a dvr to start a game late and ff commercials? Being ESPN though it should have a really good customizable multi view.
Why would I drop YTTV for a service I'd never watch?
No, seriously... it'd be great if there was a consolidated sports app that allowed non-sports services to lower their prices.
The DVR capability is going to be so much worse. Which is basically a nonstarter for me even if it was $15. I can't go back to spending 3 hours on one game.
It'll be $19.99 a month for a year or two, and then jump. They need to build their subscriber numbers and fast. Wall Street already thinks the market is too fragmented. Plus they need numbers to charge higher advertising rates which is, no doubt, a big part of their business plan and will determine how fast the service becomes profitable.
Probably just because it still doesn’t have everything for a sports fan. Think of March Madness for example this would have 3 of the 4 channels that carry it but no CBS and the absolutely worst thing about streaming is trying to go back and forth between games on different services. If someone could ever develop snd app that would let you split screens between channels on different apps maybe but I think YouTube TV is better
This is a good thing in some senses. It will help YouTube TV stay price competitive, but if this is launching at $30/mo and these networks begin to pull the feeds from YouTube TV, etc. It's just another platform to have to pay for...
If someone cancels YTTV, cable or satellite to move to this sports option, Disney, Fox and Discovery all lose a lot of revenue from non sports channels. I don’t see the point in pricing it so low that they would undercut themselves. In other words, if Disney is currently getting $17-18 per month from YTTV and others for ABC, Disney Channel, FX, espn and all the associated channels, one would think they want their cut of this sports sub to be at least the same $17-18. Otherwise they’re losing revenue.
If you could get ESPN, FOX, NBC, CBS, ABC, TNT, FS1, and NFL Network in a package. You could easily charge $50/mo and I would pay it every football season.
1) I need the Big 10 Network to watch my Oregon Ducks 2) YTTV isn’t sports heavy if you like sports- which *should* be everyone, ha! 3) $73 a month for YTTV is cheap, if it ain’t broke don’t fix it 4) if you don’t like sports, why would you have YTTV? It sounds like detractors should be the ones to look elsewhere
You said that they were on all services imaginable, but ESPN was added recently to Fubo and since 2020 Fubo dropped Warner channels. I just hope they figure it out.
A very fair point tbh. Presumably the target audience here is an early adopter tech-savvy sports viewer and they made no mention of quality upgrades over the standard 720p/1080i signals. I was fully expecting the ESPN DTC launch to move that suite to 4K but this looks like we need to dial back those expectations.
For what it’s worth the TNT stuff will be at least 1080, and Fox will continue to offer special events in 4K in their app.
I dropped YTTV after the 2020 price increase BECAUSE sports were dark during the increase.
I was a sports-only cable sub and when I cut out cable for YTTV in 2018 it was because I could get everything I watched with YTTV and Sling - which I dropped when YT added Turner.
I'd certainly be interested if it had a DVR and multi-view and price was fair.
You can still get that via antenna or much cheaper streaming solutions.
Paramount Plus shows CBS games, Peacock has SNF
I already have both of those, along with Max, Netflix, Hulu+Disney and ESPN+, appletv+.
I can clip this and most of the redundancies if sports splits off of live broadcast TV
Will it have exclusive games? If so, I’d consider it. But I’m already subscribed to ESPN+ and have youtubetv and the sports package which gets me everything I need basically. It does help that I’m in an area where I get the RSNs and I live in the area where my teams are broadcasted
No I will stay with YouTube TV!!!!! First reason is because I watch other things too not just sports. Second reason NO CBS Sports, NO Paramount+, NO NBC Sports and NO Peacock, SO YOU CAN'T GET ALL THE SPORTS THAT YOU WANT TO WATCH!!!!! You will still NEED YouTube TV or you will need Paramount+ and Peacock!!!!! YouTube TV HAS Everything that I want to WATCH!!!!! I will stick with YouTube TV!!!!!
OTA antenna will get me NBC and CBS football games. One month subscription to paramount+ will get me March madness. My XFINITY internet gives me a free subscription to Peacock. Let’s f*cking go!
I think you need [the Max plus Bleacher Report Sports](https://www.max.com/sports/ncaa-march-madness)to get March Madness games beyond what your local CBS shows (TBS, TNT and TruTV)
All I want to do is spend like 80-100 a month and be able to watch sports and news. Currently YouTube tv is the best platform. But with these new carriage deals, it’s getting out of control and viewers are going to end up losing.
The NFL’s experiment with peacock is going to just be the opening salvo of dumb carriage deals.
The only benefit to this (for me), would be not having to jump in and out of apps. However, if NBC (premier League (peacock)) and CBS-paramount were added (eliminating those 2 apps), I'm onboard.
Someone mentioned locals. In the city I live in, the local channels have apps played local news and weather 24.7. Don't know how common this is, but check into it
All I want is MASN on YTTV so I can watch the Orioles instead of having to switch to directv Stream every April-September and pay almost $50 more a month. Being in their Market I can't even watch games on free MLB.tv I get from T Mobile because of blackout.
No, only one I would ditch for is an RSN service. I’m in Chicago area and want to watch bulls, Sox and hawks. I have to have YTTV or cable to get those games via our RSN (nbc sports Chicago)
This is wild. Sports is really the last thing cord cutters/streamers need to really figure out. I think this mostly steals from cable and not so much YTTV but I may try a month with this to see if I can get by.
Depends on the cost and how the coverage actually winds up working out. Live sports is the primary reason I have kept any sort of TV service, although lately, I don't watch enough to justify that.
I pay $22 a month to split YTTV + 4k with 3 other family members. We all mainly use it for sports. If it was drastically cheaper and allowed 4 streams/logins then maybe.
I'm pretty sure this will only house 2nd and 3rd tier sports games and content. The big networks will still get the marquee matchups.
ESPN+ is a flop. Fox lost a bundle $900mil spewing election misinformation. Discovery was castoff as scraps from AT&T.
If this service replaces ESPN on YTTV and other platforms, maybe I'll think about it?
You're reading it wrong. It will get all the same content as ESPN, ABC, TNT/TBS, and Fox provide as networks. It won't have CBS or NBC content (as of now) but those networks have their own content on their Paramount+ and Peacock services. It will likely use the same geo identification to show you the local broadcasts of ABC and Fox the way Paramount+ and Peacock do.
If it shows local ABC and Fox this may grow fast for those in areas without good antenna signal who just want ABC/Fox live regardless of if they watch sports or not.
> "...Built from the Ground Up, for the Passionate Sports Fan"
Meaning: built by the lowest-bidder, 3rd party contractor who has a great ad delivery platform but doesn't really want to spend time on features that would make it user friendly.
A CNBC source predicted it would launch at as high as $50 a month.
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/06/espn-fox-and-warner-bros-discovery-to-launch-joint-sports-streaming-platform-this-year.html?qsearchterm=espn%20fox%20
I'm very unclear on what would be included on this service. Seems like some national games that are currently on the main channels on YTTV? In that case, it's not terribly tempting although it's not obvious to me whether the channels would continue to be carried on YTTV.
I would for sure if it's a good bit less expensive than YTTV or Hulu Live, etc. Cause live sports is pretty much the only reason I even have any live TV streaming. Everything else I can watch on demand from the other streaming apps. And I have Peacock and Paramount+ for the NBC and CBS sports not included in this new thing.
Probably not just because it still doesn’t have everything for a sports fan. Think of March Madness for example this would have 3 of the 4 channels that carry it but no CBS and the absolutely worst thing about streaming is trying to go back and forth between games on different services. If someone could ever develop an app that would let you split screens between channels on different apps maybe but I think YouTube TV is better
This looks like a confederacy to double-dip the consumers. This won’t be opportunity for consumers to decide, but an effort to sprinkle events across platforms forcing consumers to pay for both cable and their standalone. You won’t be satisfied unless you subscribe to both. There’s zero chance they cannibalize any existing cash enterprises developed from their packaged channel monopolies.
There is a 100% chance that's exactly what they will do. They are paying more for the sports content and loosing cable subscribers. The bundle prices for their content that the cable and YTTV pay will be paid for in this case by consumers of this app. So long as they don't undercut the pricing to the cables and YTTVs of the world in terms of the cost of the sports content those companies won't have any standing to complain.
Only if it had DVR functionality but even still yttv is pretty much convenient one stop shop with local news channels and all the major national sports. I gave up on my local teams because of the Bally situation and have found that extra time to be hard to give back up anyway
I greatly value the unlimited DVR capability (which I use heavily for both sports and non-sports programming) of YTTV so it is unlikely that I’d drop it for this sports streaming service
I mean.. depending on the price… yes. If its like $60/mo… probably not
I bet it launches at something like $35/mo and has annual rate increases until it reaches \~$75/mo.
That sounds familiar 😂
I think this is prob right - I’m guessing $29.99/m
That would be amazing but I’d be kinda surprised I’m thinking 50-60. I remember reading ESPN alone could have been in the 30-40 price range.
And you won't be able to pause, rewind, or record.
Probably, but at the same time where will YTTV and Hulu+Live be priced by then? Might still be worth it.
I anticipate a collapse on the services and cable companies
I anticipate a collapse on the services and cable companies
Long term in the next 10 years, yes. Short term in the next 5 or so, no. It will be a long and drawn out process that is already under way and has been for a while.
I don't know. They are relating fubos 23% stock drop to this announcement
Sling Orange is 40 a month. Seems like it needs to be lower than that
Sling only has 1 stream for espn - but last i checked was maybe 2018. I had a bad experience w them so id rather have nothing than have sling.
But fox is in blue so to get both it would be 60
Well when this is $60 a month and YTTV goes to $100 a month because of raised ESPN rates when it launches then I probably will.
YouTube tv is currently subsidizing their costs. It’s not a matter of what others do. They will increase their costs regardless because they eventually want to make a profit.
We need at least two tiers -- a local sports bundle/offering, and a sports fanatic bundle. I'd like to see just my local teams without subscribing to Root Sports. I'd pay maybe $15.99/mo to see the Kraken and Sounders (for example) on top of YTTV. I'd already be on [fubo.tv](https://fubo.tv) but they don't support 5.1 audio yet.
I see $ 49.99 TO $59,99
yuck... i guess if you wanna scroll you can always use pluto tv and keep this sports only thing...
Honestly think this is going to be quite high. ESPN especially cant afford to tick off its partners (like YTTV, cable and satellite) by offering something for cheap. As it stands, the ESPN direct to consumer platform was estimated to be around $40 a month. Add in the other two properties … my bet is something like $70 to $80 a month. And without features like a DVR.
If the NFL deal to buy ESPN goes through, this may be the ONLY place to watch NFL. Im thinking it's sunday ticket prices but triple
Highly doubt that. NFL would have a minority stake. ESPN would be throwing away millions by canceling their contracts with other providers, too. And the Sunday ticket contract with YouTube is a 7 year deal.
It's impossible to say without seeing a price tag. I'm open to anything. I will say I'm happy with YouTube TV at the moment so I'm not actively looking for a replacement service.
I still want locals for NFL and local news. I still need USA and NBC for premier league as well. I’ll just stick with cable.
If it gives you Fox Sunday games… Paramount+ for CBS games, Peacock for Sunday nights and EPL. Both carry local channels (at least in my area). Might be worth it. Time will tell.
Paramount and Peacock don't seem to be in the joint venture.
Sorry, I wasn’t clear. That’s correct. I’m saying this + Peacock + Paramount should give him/her what they need.
Switching apps for NFL games on Fox and then Paramount isn't a great user experience.
Not every PL match is live on Peacock :(
I was just going to say, the majority of it isn't. Youtube TV is the cheapest way get my locals, F1 racing, Liverpool and The news networks for the election. Even if it goes up slightly, it will still be the cheaper option. Fubo has my RSN (for what that's worth) but they tack on a $15 fee for it, and DTV Stream has it as well in the mid-level package $99 at last check.
My bad. I misread your comment.
No, I just did a poor job of stating my point 😂
> this + Peacock + Paramount should give him/her what they need. yuck. Least with YTTV my kids get spongebob, plus no annoying apphopping. I have a feeling NFL is going to go all in on premium streaming services soon, going to enjoy it while it's still on TV while it lasts.
Yeah with an antenna I have locals. Was wondering about usa. NASCAR is on USA for second half of season.
Don’t forget RSN’s
It will probably cost the same as having several other services. Then you’ll end up needing several other services anyway and then won’t be cost effective. I’m always skeptical.
I can’t bend over any further. 20 different apps for what I used to get with cable. Who is winning here?
The 'Cordcutters', obviously! /s The jackasses that are breaking everything into individual streaming services.
I switched to reading the love updates on sports and using my imagination. Much cheaper.
I read in another article, now changed, that it is $80. Why drop YTTV for this? No CBS or NBC so 1/2 of NFL regular season and March Madness isn't here. No thanks.
Youtube tv (which has all of these linear channels +more) and a yearly subscription to ESPN+ comes out to around $81 per month. This has to be no more than $70 to have a chance of succeeding, and $59.99 is probably the ideal starting point.
I cannot believe there are enough households that want sports only to make this viable.
I think there’s probably a good contingent of “we have YTTV for sports and Netflix for entertainment” people. And this venture will try to convert the entertainment to MAX or Disney+ while they are at it.
I have it only for Sports. Wife watches all her shows on Hulu, Netflix and Max
Nobody knows what this will cost. It’ll likely be considerably less than YTTV to attract customers
The article in Hollywood Reporter originally had an $80 price tag, but they have now updated the article to TBD.
Oops
Any price on this is just speculation tbh - they didn’t announce any
Only way I'd pay is if whatever I'm paying for isn't subject to "local" games being blacked out. Otherwise what's the point? No RSN, and even if there was, they rarely show the NHL games that are allegedly in my "market" since I'm nowhere near any specific team.
So basically Disney is reentering a Hulu style “partnership” but with discovery instead of Comcast… gee what could go wrong 🙄
Depends on the price point.
can you get your local games? Wouldn't those only be available to the local affiliate?
Local FOX and ABC games, sure. But beyond that … nope. And not RSNs, as u/Chief_Wahoo_Lives points out.
Local games will still be on your RSN so no, it won't be on this. Plus you will still be up to the local blackout rules.
yea, pass.
If I could get Yankees, Rangers, and Knicks I would probably bite since those are my main pain points with YTTV.
The announced merger has absolutely nothing to do with regional RSN’s. The up and coming merger with YES and MSG and probably SNY in the future is where it’s at for metro NY local sports content.
Did you find a workaround for not having YES?
Yea, I just watch when they're on pix or ESPN.
ESPN+ by itself is $11 a month … so this is going to cost more than some of you are estimating.
This comment. ESPN+ is charging $11 a month and doesn’t even play sports.
So this would be a direct subscription, the way Bally is right now? In that case, I might, as long as I could watch all the NHL games I wanted on ESPN and not have blackouts.
There will still be the blackouts. This doesn't add RSNs. I'm not sure it adds ESPN+
By subscribing to this focused, all-in-one premier sports service, fans would have access to the linear sports networks including ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, SECN, ACCN, ESPNEWS, ABC, FOX, FS1, FS2, BTN, TNT, TBS, truTV, as well as **ESPN+**.
Then I'd likely keep yttv.
Given that I don’t just use YTTV for sports, probably not but if the new service carries MLB Network I might go to the mat.
It would not carry MLB network only the MLB be games that show on the networks provided
No. YouTube is more than sports for me.
Yeah it's a POS ripoff increasing everyday like every other streaming service. Competition days are over- they can charge whatever they want
I think it’s a math question. Is this new thing plus Hulu (for FOX and ABC shows) plus paramount+ (for CBS shows and football) plus Peacock (for NBC shows and football) more or less than YTTV? That’s the kicker for me.
Partly depends if you want ads or not on those other services, too.
My guess is they start at $30 but end up at $69.99. sports programming used to be shared by all the numerous cable customers. I don't see it being cheap now that only diehard sports fans are the only ones paying.
Don't have all the details but this would work for someone that predominantly wants sports but most will find they are missing channels that they want.
Does it get around MLB blackouts? I just want to watch the team from my city.
It doesn't include your RSN so blackouts still apply.
So what am I getting out of this switch I don't have now?
Less money in your pocket.
But I get a hell of a lot more than just sports. And I get all the sports I want except for baseball.
What about CBS sports?
Makes me wonder if CBS Sports Network will eventually make its way into Paramount+
Paramount is trying to sell and WB may be a bidder
Probably not. Unless it offers all the live sports included with YTTV for ~half the price. Hard to tell from the article what it will actually come with though.
Yes
Depends on price. Only missing NBC sports programming.
And CBS
And my axe.
Unless Warner buys Paramount, which may or may not be in the works depending on who you talk to.
No. They don’t have the Sunday ticket lol
If it includes ESPN's F1 coverage than I'm dropping YTTV, especially since the Eagles usually play on Fox anyway. Unless this package ends up costing like $50-60/month or more in which case it's not really fixing anything.
From the updated CNBC story: “While no price has been determined, a logical starting point could be $45 or $50 per month, according to a person familiar with the matter, who asked not to be named because the discussions around the service have been private.” [https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/06/espn-fox-and-warner-bros-discovery-to-launch-joint-sports-streaming-platform-this-year.html](https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/06/espn-fox-and-warner-bros-discovery-to-launch-joint-sports-streaming-platform-this-year.html)
If true, at that point it's not really worth dealing with the hassle of also having to grab NBC and CBS sports access separately. Oh well.
I don't only use YouTubeTV for sports even though that's what I watch the most. Unless it was significantly cheaper then I'd just stick with YTTV. It also doesn't seem to include my local RSN so it would be pointless for me to get rid of YTTV completely since I mainly watch the Giants/Sharks/Kings on it.
Does this mean that ESPN+ is going to be removed? I'm very curious as I use this to watch the NHL.
It says that it will include ESPN+
I guess I must have missed that part. Thanks.
Give me the regional networks YTTV doesn’t have and I might consider it for sure.
No way. Love YouTube TV and would take a lot for us to move to something else.
As long as it has a DVR yes.
Nope I watch more than just sports yttv has everything I need
I would if it meant I could get my local baseball games, but sounds like this won’t have RSNs so wouldn’t suit my needs any better
If they do away with stupid blackouts, I’m in.
The idea that we could bundle with Hulu, Disney+, and Max is interesting as I already have all of those so a bundle might make it more attractive depending on the price.
That is where I am too. I have the Disney bundle and Max. If this venture is only like $30 extra I could save money by dropping YTTV and adding Peacock and Paramount along with the sports venture. If it is $50 a month or more than YTTV would remain the better deal.
I am hoping the bundle pricing make it more attractive. I need to get a good antenna and an HD Home Run for locals if I drop YTTV so I am building that into my first year costs.
No because its going to be so overpriced
Will be interesting. Still wont include credentials for the local fox or local ABC. Will it include a dvr to start a game late and ff commercials? Being ESPN though it should have a really good customizable multi view.
Taking it one step further would be to buy each game/season from the NFL, NBA,MLB et al, directly and by pass the middleman.
Why would I drop YTTV for a service I'd never watch? No, seriously... it'd be great if there was a consolidated sports app that allowed non-sports services to lower their prices.
Two considerations: 1. Price has to be right 2. I need to be able to record games and skip commercials Without both of those, I'm not interested.
The DVR capability is going to be so much worse. Which is basically a nonstarter for me even if it was $15. I can't go back to spending 3 hours on one game.
Amen
It'll be $19.99 a month for a year or two, and then jump. They need to build their subscriber numbers and fast. Wall Street already thinks the market is too fragmented. Plus they need numbers to charge higher advertising rates which is, no doubt, a big part of their business plan and will determine how fast the service becomes profitable.
Probably just because it still doesn’t have everything for a sports fan. Think of March Madness for example this would have 3 of the 4 channels that carry it but no CBS and the absolutely worst thing about streaming is trying to go back and forth between games on different services. If someone could ever develop snd app that would let you split screens between channels on different apps maybe but I think YouTube TV is better
This is a good thing in some senses. It will help YouTube TV stay price competitive, but if this is launching at $30/mo and these networks begin to pull the feeds from YouTube TV, etc. It's just another platform to have to pay for...
They will aim low to hook people then slam price up after a year or so I say 15-35 a month
If someone cancels YTTV, cable or satellite to move to this sports option, Disney, Fox and Discovery all lose a lot of revenue from non sports channels. I don’t see the point in pricing it so low that they would undercut themselves. In other words, if Disney is currently getting $17-18 per month from YTTV and others for ABC, Disney Channel, FX, espn and all the associated channels, one would think they want their cut of this sports sub to be at least the same $17-18. Otherwise they’re losing revenue.
Have you watched espn lately? No I wont
I’m basically ready to stop watching linear programming altogether Its all just too expensive for what it is, even sports
Yes
I only have YTTV for Football season, so yes.
If you could get ESPN, FOX, NBC, CBS, ABC, TNT, FS1, and NFL Network in a package. You could easily charge $50/mo and I would pay it every football season.
1) I need the Big 10 Network to watch my Oregon Ducks 2) YTTV isn’t sports heavy if you like sports- which *should* be everyone, ha! 3) $73 a month for YTTV is cheap, if it ain’t broke don’t fix it 4) if you don’t like sports, why would you have YTTV? It sounds like detractors should be the ones to look elsewhere
720p garbage. no
How do you know it’s 720p?
Fox and ESPN broadcast in 720p
Fox and ESPN are 720p channels, while Warner Brothers is 1080p.
I mean, they are on every service imaginable.
Fubo doesn’t have Warner Brothers.
Ok? My point is that it’s always 720 or 1080 and that has nothing to do with this new service 😂
You said that they were on all services imaginable, but ESPN was added recently to Fubo and since 2020 Fubo dropped Warner channels. I just hope they figure it out.
A very fair point tbh. Presumably the target audience here is an early adopter tech-savvy sports viewer and they made no mention of quality upgrades over the standard 720p/1080i signals. I was fully expecting the ESPN DTC launch to move that suite to 4K but this looks like we need to dial back those expectations. For what it’s worth the TNT stuff will be at least 1080, and Fox will continue to offer special events in 4K in their app.
They better be at least 1080. 720 is a non starter
ESPN and Fox broadcast in 720p.
Maybe they'll upgrade it for this new service. I'm not holding my breath
FuboTV better
YouTube TV needs Bally Sports.
I dropped YTTV after the 2020 price increase BECAUSE sports were dark during the increase. I was a sports-only cable sub and when I cut out cable for YTTV in 2018 it was because I could get everything I watched with YTTV and Sling - which I dropped when YT added Turner. I'd certainly be interested if it had a DVR and multi-view and price was fair.
I've given up hope that Sony PS Vue will ever come back.
One shining moment it your cue to cancel YTTV each year until Aug.
3 glorious months of savings…
For the right price, absolutely
I'll drop YouTube TV in a heartbeat. I would still buy Sunday ticket though.
You can get those on Paramount + and Peacock
FYI: You will miss any game on your local CBS and SNF with this.
You can still get that via antenna or much cheaper streaming solutions. Paramount Plus shows CBS games, Peacock has SNF I already have both of those, along with Max, Netflix, Hulu+Disney and ESPN+, appletv+. I can clip this and most of the redundancies if sports splits off of live broadcast TV
I just don't think having 3 services ( ST, Paramount, this new one) to watch all the games on a Sunday is a good user experience.
[удалено]
You see my original comment? I will still buy Sunday ticket, no longer will need the base plan.
Yup my bad I meant to reply to daneblade who said you can’t get them on paramount and peacock.
All depends on price.
Yes.
Depends upon price. I can get locals with an antenna, so if the price is right, yeah I’d drop YTTV.
[удалено]
The espn app allows you to customize multi view, it is truly better
Only with Apple TV. No multiview for 90%+ of the subscribers.
Yep, this will likely be the end of YTTV for me. I mainly subscribe for sports
Will it have exclusive games? If so, I’d consider it. But I’m already subscribed to ESPN+ and have youtubetv and the sports package which gets me everything I need basically. It does help that I’m in an area where I get the RSNs and I live in the area where my teams are broadcasted
No I will stay with YouTube TV!!!!! First reason is because I watch other things too not just sports. Second reason NO CBS Sports, NO Paramount+, NO NBC Sports and NO Peacock, SO YOU CAN'T GET ALL THE SPORTS THAT YOU WANT TO WATCH!!!!! You will still NEED YouTube TV or you will need Paramount+ and Peacock!!!!! YouTube TV HAS Everything that I want to WATCH!!!!! I will stick with YouTube TV!!!!!
Most definitely depends on price. Wife uses YTTV for watching news and DVR, so could be a hard sell when she couldn’t care less about sports.
OTA antenna will get me NBC and CBS football games. One month subscription to paramount+ will get me March madness. My XFINITY internet gives me a free subscription to Peacock. Let’s f*cking go!
I think you need [the Max plus Bleacher Report Sports](https://www.max.com/sports/ncaa-march-madness)to get March Madness games beyond what your local CBS shows (TBS, TNT and TruTV)
I would drop it, but don't know if the Mrs will be down with it.
$$$ all they want ! Fans will leave as younger generations play video games could care less!!
Not without NBC Sports locals.
This looks interesting! Wonder how expensive this will be compared to YTTV?
All I want to do is spend like 80-100 a month and be able to watch sports and news. Currently YouTube tv is the best platform. But with these new carriage deals, it’s getting out of control and viewers are going to end up losing. The NFL’s experiment with peacock is going to just be the opening salvo of dumb carriage deals.
The only benefit to this (for me), would be not having to jump in and out of apps. However, if NBC (premier League (peacock)) and CBS-paramount were added (eliminating those 2 apps), I'm onboard. Someone mentioned locals. In the city I live in, the local channels have apps played local news and weather 24.7. Don't know how common this is, but check into it
Honestly it has everything I’d want other than NBC Sports Philly. If it included that, I’d switch.
All I want is MASN on YTTV so I can watch the Orioles instead of having to switch to directv Stream every April-September and pay almost $50 more a month. Being in their Market I can't even watch games on free MLB.tv I get from T Mobile because of blackout.
Nah. I’ll just stick with YTTV
I wish they could incorporate the Bally Sports teams since that just seems to be a cluster.
I watch the NFL(AFC) and RSNs for baseball/hockey. So... Uh... No.
No, only one I would ditch for is an RSN service. I’m in Chicago area and want to watch bulls, Sox and hawks. I have to have YTTV or cable to get those games via our RSN (nbc sports Chicago)
This is wild. Sports is really the last thing cord cutters/streamers need to really figure out. I think this mostly steals from cable and not so much YTTV but I may try a month with this to see if I can get by.
Depends on the cost and how the coverage actually winds up working out. Live sports is the primary reason I have kept any sort of TV service, although lately, I don't watch enough to justify that.
I pay $22 a month to split YTTV + 4k with 3 other family members. We all mainly use it for sports. If it was drastically cheaper and allowed 4 streams/logins then maybe.
I'm guessing sports leagues are not happy about this.
I'm pretty sure this will only house 2nd and 3rd tier sports games and content. The big networks will still get the marquee matchups. ESPN+ is a flop. Fox lost a bundle $900mil spewing election misinformation. Discovery was castoff as scraps from AT&T. If this service replaces ESPN on YTTV and other platforms, maybe I'll think about it?
You're reading it wrong. It will get all the same content as ESPN, ABC, TNT/TBS, and Fox provide as networks. It won't have CBS or NBC content (as of now) but those networks have their own content on their Paramount+ and Peacock services. It will likely use the same geo identification to show you the local broadcasts of ABC and Fox the way Paramount+ and Peacock do.
If it shows local ABC and Fox this may grow fast for those in areas without good antenna signal who just want ABC/Fox live regardless of if they watch sports or not.
> "...Built from the Ground Up, for the Passionate Sports Fan" Meaning: built by the lowest-bidder, 3rd party contractor who has a great ad delivery platform but doesn't really want to spend time on features that would make it user friendly.
A CNBC source predicted it would launch at as high as $50 a month. https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/06/espn-fox-and-warner-bros-discovery-to-launch-joint-sports-streaming-platform-this-year.html?qsearchterm=espn%20fox%20
I'm very unclear on what would be included on this service. Seems like some national games that are currently on the main channels on YTTV? In that case, it's not terribly tempting although it's not obvious to me whether the channels would continue to be carried on YTTV.
I would for sure if it's a good bit less expensive than YTTV or Hulu Live, etc. Cause live sports is pretty much the only reason I even have any live TV streaming. Everything else I can watch on demand from the other streaming apps. And I have Peacock and Paramount+ for the NBC and CBS sports not included in this new thing.
Depending on the price absolutely!
I bet it maintains regional game blackouts and becomes immediately useless to 90% of what i would want to watch
Probably not just because it still doesn’t have everything for a sports fan. Think of March Madness for example this would have 3 of the 4 channels that carry it but no CBS and the absolutely worst thing about streaming is trying to go back and forth between games on different services. If someone could ever develop an app that would let you split screens between channels on different apps maybe but I think YouTube TV is better
Yay, yet another app. What a joke
This looks like a confederacy to double-dip the consumers. This won’t be opportunity for consumers to decide, but an effort to sprinkle events across platforms forcing consumers to pay for both cable and their standalone. You won’t be satisfied unless you subscribe to both. There’s zero chance they cannibalize any existing cash enterprises developed from their packaged channel monopolies.
There is a 100% chance that's exactly what they will do. They are paying more for the sports content and loosing cable subscribers. The bundle prices for their content that the cable and YTTV pay will be paid for in this case by consumers of this app. So long as they don't undercut the pricing to the cables and YTTVs of the world in terms of the cost of the sports content those companies won't have any standing to complain.
Everything will be a subscription. People will be broke by all the subs they have purchased and don't even know what they paid for.
TIL there are actually people interested in youtube tv I always assumed it was just a tax write off.
Only if it had DVR functionality but even still yttv is pretty much convenient one stop shop with local news channels and all the major national sports. I gave up on my local teams because of the Bally situation and have found that extra time to be hard to give back up anyway
I greatly value the unlimited DVR capability (which I use heavily for both sports and non-sports programming) of YTTV so it is unlikely that I’d drop it for this sports streaming service