WarnerMedia Announces HBO Max, Its Netflix Rival That Will Launch Next Year (theverge.com) 65
There's HBO Go, HBO Now, and soon, there will be HBO Max. For WarnerMedia and parent company AT&T, the latter is most important, as it will become the subscription video service that they position against Netflix, Hulu, the upcoming Disney+, Apple's upcoming TV+, and a range of other paid video offerings. From a report: "Anchored with and inspired by the legacy of HBO's excellence and award-winning storytelling, the new service will be 'Maximized' with an extensive collection of exclusive original programming (Max Originals) and the best-of-the-best from WarnerMedia's enormous portfolio of beloved brands and libraries," the company wrote in a press release today. (The emphasis there is from WarnerMedia, of course.) So you'll get all the stuff you'd expect from having HBO -- TV series, on-demand movies, watching some primetime HBO shows live -- plus a huge serving of content from basically every other WarnerMedia property. More relevant to you is that WarnerMedia also confirmed that HBO Max will have exclusive streaming rights to every episode of Friends when it launches in spring 2020; that'll be after the hugely popular sitcom departs Netflix. Friends is set to leave in 2019, so there might be a gap where the show disappears from streaming altogether until HBO Max's debut.
"There might be a gap" (Score:2, Informative)
Yar matey, hoist the black flag!
No free lunch. (Score:2)
Yar matey, hoist the black flag!
Streaming media like all media programs for those who pay the bills.
You want a break from Star Wars, Star Trek or DC and Marvel comics? Good luck, because all the money is going into these franchise products and those who produce them ---- and the geek who pirates all his stuff doesn't get a vote here.
Re: (Score:2)
I.E. ONE subscriber but 100 Million viewers....All with an immediate access to the torrents.
Re:HBO EXTREME (Score:4, Funny)
I'm going to wait for HBO EXTREME!
Next up:
- HBO Max Extreme: For demanding consumers discerning Maximum Extreme content.
- HBO Extreme Max: For discerning consumers demanding Extreme Maximum content.
[ Just you wait ... :-) ]
Re:OMFG don't take away my Friends!!! (Score:5, Funny)
How will I live without Friends on Netflix?!?!?! Holy fuck, I'm certainly going to have to sign up for this IMMEDIATELY! "FRIENDS"!
make something new already
Why would they do that when they can keep fucking the IP chicken?
Besides, deep down inside you know you don't really want "new" content........what you really want is a vast selection of 80's police comedies and movies starring Tom Cruise.
Friends as a selling point? (Score:1)
May affect Prime Video a lot more (Score:5, Interesting)
I personally think the vast array of different HBO apps they are deploying is a mistake. I already find the difference between HBO Go and HBO Now super annoying, as I try to go watch something elsewhere when I have an app subscription but cannot... so another whole app to the mix just sounds like more confusion as to who can watch what, where (maybe one of them is replaced by Max??).
As for Netflix being harmed by this, I don't think so. Netflix is already not very much about movies. The example given is Friends, which yes WAS hugely popular but hadn't you heard? It's in massive disfavor [insider.com] these days amongst the Woke. If Max is going to push the "benefit" of Friends heavily it may actually serve to drive off subscribers!
The entity I think might be hurt more is Amazon Prime Video, which these days does seem to offer a number of movies. I have to assume that selection will be smaller if Max pulls away all Warner choices from Amazon. Amazon does also create its own titles but to be frank they seem to have much less of a hit rate than Netflix does, for whatever reason - so the main reason I ever go there in recent times is to see what movies they have.
What HBO Max can do against Netflix is somewhat dependent on how good originals are, but Netflix is awfully well positioned as the premium brand for original stuff these days, to where creators would prefer to do Netflix if they can for the prestige, and Netflix has also been throwing many billions of dollars into content. HBO would somehow have to outspend Netflix to try and draw in some truly quality originals, all that while Apple is probably also dumping a ton of money into series production to further draw away talent and show makers for their own service.
How much original TV production can the world really support in the end, the whole industry has to be stretched thin by now.
Re: (Score:1)
You watch entirely too much TV. Get out, the real world isn't on your TV set.
Re: (Score:3)
Don't really watch that much... (Score:4)
You watch entirely too much TV.
Despite appearances from my lengthy commentary, I watch very little TV and spend more time outdoors or traveling than watching TV.. I spend money on streaming services because of a handful of really good offerings they do have, that's why the quality matters more to me because I view my time as too valuable to watch random crap just to have something on.
As an example I still have not seen Avengers: Endgame because I cannot find a time where I consider that 3+ hours to be of greater value than doing almost anything else...
Re:May affect Prime Video a lot more (Score:5, Funny)
You watch entirely too much TV. Get out, The Real World isn't on your TV set.
Oh, yes it is. On MTV.
Re: (Score:2)
Outside is overrated! :P
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I browsed some of his other articles and it's the same tripe: Whining and bitching about some damn thing.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm fine with the author providing "alternative" (non-white) shows like Fresh Prince and Living Single (though I think it's funny that they feel that Friends ripped off Living Single, like it invented the "young trendy friends sitcom" genre).
But you could literally replace the word "diverse" in that article with "non-white". There's no need to bash on something that's popular just to elevate something else you like, especially on things like skin color. The author just comes off as an angry racist. Change
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yep the Expanse is great, and they have a few other good ones (I really like the new Tick).
But I've also seen a lot of other new Prime originals I didn't care for, I've had way more Netflix original stuff that I really liked.
Prime is in a kind of unique position though, since it's a benefit of a wider service people aren't going to cancel Prime because the video content is worse, when video with Prime was only ever seen as a side benefit anyway...
If people choose a third regular streaming provider besides N
Which HBO do I choose? (Score:4, Interesting)
I figured AT&T would be in a cash grab after leveraging themselves to buy TimeWarner but goddamn!
Streaming services and content providers had a good thing going for awhile. Now they have fucked it all up with their own walled gardens.
Now is the time to start pushing for compulsory IP licenses for video, like what radio has. Allow any user on any service to stream any content anytime and the appropriate royalty is paid.
Re: (Score:2)
The most ironic part is that all this carving up of video content by making exclusive services makes each added service less attractive. People are definitely willing to pay for a single streaming service for $15 a month or more. Are they willing to pay for 2 streaming services at $15 a month each to get the content they want? Probably. How about 3 streaming services at $15 a month each for about the same content? Maybe some, but the number is smaller now. 4 services at $15 a month? 5? At some point, people will either figure out the niche content they actually care about and abandon most others or they will just stop playing this game altogether and abandon cable and streaming for good.
I think history thus far has shown that consumers are in fact willing to pay for 2 or 3. But indeed as you say, there is a limit out there somewhere.
History may work against the streaming services here. I think people were willing to pay for 2 or 3 services because together they were still "cheaper than cable." The further they are removed from paying for cable the less relevant that data point becomes. At that point the comparison will be something like "Why would I pay for *insert service* when I us
Re:Which HBO do I choose? (Score:5, Insightful)
Streaming services and content providers had a good thing going for awhile. Now they have fucked it all up with their own walled gardens.
Damned right.
I have no interest in going to the (membership-only) Lettuce Store then making a trip to the (membership-only) Ground Beef Hut, then zipping over to the (membership-only) Cheese Shack, before visiting the (membership-only) Place of Seasoning, after which I can finally enjoy the (membership-only) Taco Shell Supply. Give me the world where I can visit a magic "grocery store" to pick up my needs and wants... even if it costs more for the convenience of having everything in one place.
I won't - simply won't - support the multiple streaming source model. My money goes to Netflix. HBO, if you want my money, that's where it is. If that means the monthly fee there has to go up to support you, so be it. I'd pay easily $100/mo to legally watch what I want to watch. But I won't pay 10 different providers $10 each, $5 each, or even $1 each.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd pay easily $100/mo to legally watch what I want to watch. But I won't pay 10 different providers $10 each, $5 each, or even $1 each.
I'd probably be a bit more demanding for $100... 2015 US Netflix was probably worth $40/month.
Re: (Score:2)
Streaming services and content providers had a good thing going for awhile. Now they have fucked it all up with their own walled gardens.
Damned right. I have no interest in going to the (membership-only) Lettuce Store then making a trip to the (membership-only) Ground Beef Hut, then zipping over to the (membership-only) Cheese Shack, before visiting the (membership-only) Place of Seasoning, after which I can finally enjoy the (membership-only) Taco Shell Supply. Give me the world where I can visit a magic "grocery store" to pick up my needs and wants... even if it costs more for the convenience of having everything in one place. I won't - simply won't - support the multiple streaming source model. My money goes to Netflix. HBO, if you want my money, that's where it is. If that means the monthly fee there has to go up to support you, so be it. I'd pay easily $100/mo to legally watch what I want to watch. But I won't pay 10 different providers $10 each, $5 each, or even $1 each.
That in a nutshell is why I'm still on cable. Except for live sports, my viewing entertainment time is fungible. The tv is background noise most of the time. If a movie comes out that I want to see, I'll rent it. Otherwise finding content on streaming services has just become too much of a goddamn hassle.
I'm not clicking a WarnerMedia link (Score:2)
for fear of catching Internet herpes. How much is this supposed to cost?
If it's about $1 a month, I'd consider it.
If every channel available on cable has a different app, I will need to find a device with about 20-30 GB of system memory just to load all them.
Next year? (Score:2)
Smells like vaporware...
COBBLE (Score:2)
What about Cinemax? (Score:3)
Like with MAX Go, will I be able to get MAX Max? Or perhaps Max MAX?
Re: (Score:2)
Another one (Score:2)
ala carte (Score:3)
Wel... this is still objectively better than cable (Score:2)
I'm not saying having to buy multiple services is a good or reasonable thing, but the people bitching about the cost alone have me a little baffled. How much ad-free third party content do you expect to have indefinite access to for $15 a month? Yeah, Netflix's library isn't like it was in 2009 but that was an aggressive loss leader strategy (and also the
Bad news for consumers (Score:1)
This “exclusive content” is a prime example of how vertical integration leads to a monopoly. Producers bar their content from all providers except their own, blocking fair competition. There ought to be a law against that.
If it's anything like HBO Go... (Score:1)
which is STILL using Flash to this day, is still gratuitously Linux-hostile (which is what my HTPC runs) despite being a damn website, and has one of the worst UIs ever seen, along with stupid laziness like not keeping track of Watch History etc, then forget it.
I don't care how good their original content is: when their developers (and customer support, and the organization as a whole) flat out don't GAF about actually delivering a good experience, I'm not using it.
Re: (Score:2)
HBO Now works fine for me on linux mint. It sort of spontaneously started working in the last year.
I suspect this will be US only? (Score:2)