HBO Max, Discovery+ To Merge Into Single Streaming Platform Starting In Summer 2023 (variety.com) 88
Warner Bros announced that HBO Max and Discovery+ will launch in the U.S. as a single service in the summer of 2023. Variety reports: "At the end of the day, putting all the content together was the only way we saw to make this a viable business," [said JB Perrette, CEO and president of global streaming and interactive for Warner Bros. Discovery, on the company's Q2 earnings call]. Bringing HBO Max and Discovery+ together is aimed at cutting churn so "there's something for everyone in the household," he said. WBD did not announce what the new brand name for the merged service will be, nor did execs discuss pricing for the unified streamer. Warner Bros. Discovery is initially focused on the ad-supported and ad-free versions of the combined HBO Max-Discovery+, Perrette said, but is also "exploring how to reach customers in the free, ad-supported space" with content that is totally different from what's on the premium VOD services.
HBO may or may not be part of the name of the unified direct-to-consumer WBD platform; Perrette said the company is doing research on consumer perception of the HBO Max name. But, HBO will continue to be a major brand: "HBO will always be the beacon and the ultimate brand that stands for television quality," he said on the call. The merged HBO Max-Discovery+ will combine the best elements of both services, said Perrette. He said HBO Max has had "performance and customer" issues but offers a rich set of features; Discovery+ has more limited features but provides a more robust underlying delivery capability. The media company plans to take the unified HBO Max-Discovery+ platform to Latin America following the summer 2023 rollout in the United States, adds Variety. Europe will see it in early 2024; Asia Pacific in mid-2024; and additional markets in fall 2024.
HBO may or may not be part of the name of the unified direct-to-consumer WBD platform; Perrette said the company is doing research on consumer perception of the HBO Max name. But, HBO will continue to be a major brand: "HBO will always be the beacon and the ultimate brand that stands for television quality," he said on the call. The merged HBO Max-Discovery+ will combine the best elements of both services, said Perrette. He said HBO Max has had "performance and customer" issues but offers a rich set of features; Discovery+ has more limited features but provides a more robust underlying delivery capability. The media company plans to take the unified HBO Max-Discovery+ platform to Latin America following the summer 2023 rollout in the United States, adds Variety. Europe will see it in early 2024; Asia Pacific in mid-2024; and additional markets in fall 2024.
Market analysis by product anouncement (Score:3)
The rollout is far enough in the future that they can modify and tweak the product based on perceived customer acceptance.
"Oh, we didn't mean we would include the Oprah Winfrey and History channels. Those will remain separate from the HBO Plus Max for now."
Re: (Score:1)
Much of the damage is already done. $90 million movie cancelled close to completion, several TV shows cancelled, teams at HBO laid off.
By the time it goes live there won't be anything worth watching on it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Really? What woke movie has done great?
Mad Max: Fury Road
Re: (Score:1)
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
It's something to do with being able to write down the value of what they are buying if the whole $90m is written off. Unless it makes a huge amount of money and results in lots of secondary sales (merchandise, licencing etc.) they stand to gain more from the tax write off, apparently.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's the tax they would pay due to the merger. Devaluing the company as much as possible before buying it or something.
Re: (Score:1)
Unless they expected to make a loss actually showing the movie (not making the movie, I mean they expected cinemagoers to force WB to pay them to watch it, or sue them because of how bad it was, or something like that) there is simply no way a "tax write off" makes any sense in this context. They'd be able to write off the loss (the difference between revenue and costs) anyway.
I think there is a way to make sense of it, though. As I understand it, those costs would usually be amortized since they will provide the company revenue over a period of time. Any gain or loss will be recognized over a period of years. WBD, due to the merger, had a limited time opportunity to identify assets they won't be using and writing them down to offset this year's income. With that in mind, it may have made more sense to take the $20M all at once from the IRS, rather than the $50M it may have r
Re: (Score:2)
And with HBO Max costing twice a Disney+ subscription already
Disney+ is following the Netflix path. Except instead of cheap licensing deals, they just have an eternity of a back catalog. I expect their price to more than double over the next few years. But they have to suppress the competition for a while longer first.
Re: (Score:1)
I'll pass... (Score:2)
Re:I'll pass... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Not even close to Web3.0 compatible. Sounds like something out of the 1990s.
Here's how you do it today, throw "bitcoin", "blockchain", "cloud" and "social" into a blender, add some artificial flavoring and nonsensical words and you have a product.
Re: I'll pass... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why do some people purportedly find multiple bills a hassle? Especially those that just automatically charge to your card every month. "Bundling" is just a euphemism for requiring consumers to purchase more stuff than they really want or need.
Re: (Score:2)
It's an interesting psychological question, even though I know they're equal I do "feel" a difference between paying 6 places $10 a month versus 1 place $60 a month.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Some of that is simply because the other services don't work as well as Netflix does from a reliability standpoint. So they prefer to watch stuff on Netflix because everything works consistently. HBO Max is painful to browse, Peacock is a bad joke. YouTube TV had a good interface but they keep bundling crap I don't want and raising prices as a result so I've gotten rid of that.
The other problem with all of them being different services is that for people who are busy they don't have to want to keep all tha
Re: (Score:2)
YouTube TV had a good interface but they keep bundling crap I don't want and raising prices as a result so I've gotten rid of that.
I'll never understand people who "cut the cord" only to immediately turn around and re-subscribe to a linear cable TV service using a slightly diffe
Re: (Score:2)
We had cable TV and whole home DVR costing us north of $180/month plus netflix, disney+, Amazon Prime. Replacing that with Youtube TV was the easiest decision we ever made. We went from a crappy MoCA based convoluted cable box to just a Roku which we again already had at each tv because streaming was already a thing. So cutting out $180/month saved us a good chunk of change since we were already paying for a few streaming services as it was. Extra bonus no rebooting DVRs every week.
With Youtube TV now costi
Re: (Score:2)
I don't understand people who are critical of cord cutters.
I'm not critical of cord cutters. I just don't consider people who cancel their cable only to buy a cable package from a different providers as cord cutters.
Waitaminute! (Score:3)
Re: Waitaminute! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"I prefer the BBT without laugh track "
The show has been off the air for three years, and people are still putting effort into lying about the show having a laugh track.
Re: (Score:2)
"I prefer the BBT without laugh track "
The show has been off the air for three years, and people are still putting effort into lying about the show having a laugh track.
I think the actual point they were trying to make is that shows with laughter (either from laugh tracks or a very enthusiastic audience) are weird and unfunny when you take out the laughs.
It is true, but it's more to do with the fact that comedies with laughter need different kinds of jokes and timing. Most importantly performers have to pause after every joke because the audience is laughing and anything they say during the laughter will be inaudible. That's also a reason why a laugh track is so tempting,
Re: (Score:2)
Finally! A single streaming service! (Score:5, Funny)
All the shows that I want, all in a single package!
Well... yes. No, well, not really.
You can have HBO Max-Discovery+ Sports which will cover most sports from badmington to curling to synchronized swimming (Baseball, Football and Basketball are extra on separate streaming addons).
You can have HBO Max-Discovery+ Classic with all the reruns of the classic shows that you loved so much in the 70s and 80s (complete with vintage advertisement in between for that authentic nostalgic feel).
You can have HBO Max-Discovery+ Primetime, which will cover all your favorite new movies (with "new" basically meaning anything that isn't still in cinemas and/or bombed like crazy, everything worth watching is available for a small extra fee).
You can have HBO Max-Discovery+ Talk, all the talkshows you ever wanted, for you to watch whenever you feel like (as long as the talkshow is basically a thinly veiled infomercial, if actual talk was going on it would be on HBO Max-Discovery+ Highbrow... but we don't offer that, too small a market).
You can have HBO Max-Discovery+ Shows&Series, where all you favorite sitcoms and serial dramas are. No later than one year after they have been aired on TV, promised.
Or of course you can have HBO Max-Discovery+ Platinum, with all those awesome packages rolled into one. And only at about thrice the price you pay now for the different streaming services from HBO Max and Discovery.
Re: (Score:2)
You forgot HBO Max+ No Discovery Ad Supported Blockchain.
Re: (Score:2)
Each frame of the film can be its own NFT, just think of the money.
Re: (Score:2)
First thing that came to my mind was the classic line "This... is a Snagglepuss, drawn by Hic Heisler. It is worth something. This... is an arm drawn by nobody. It is worth nothing".
Worst
NFT
Ever
Re: (Score:2)
"I can give you this telephone, it is shaped like Mary Worth. No groaning in my store"
Re: (Score:2)
Her stern but sensible face can tell kids to never do anything stupid anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you can get everything. Except of course what you actually want.
It's a bit like European politics.
Now merge all the rest (Score:5, Interesting)
Merge them all. Or at least have all content available on all platforms.
I don't subscribe to any of these services, because the content I might want to watch is scattered over too many of them. Until they make accessing content convenient, piracy is far simpler.
Just as a footnote: remember DVDs and BluRay? I realized we hadn't watched any of ours for at least 2-3 years, maybe longer. Who wants to be forced to sit through "previews" for stuff that was released ages ago? Who wants to read FBI notices, when I don't even live in the US? So I'm finally getting around to breaking the DRM and ripping the discs to our file server.
So, never. (Score:2)
Because different entities can and often do control different seasons of the same shows and sometimes movies in the same franchise.
But yea, "piracy" i.e. Sharing has been better for many decades at this point. Not only do they have no warnings, they don't have captive audience ads embedded either. The only issues are the shifting sands of availability and quality (sometimes good sometimes bad) - and your criminal ISP (traffic snooping and comically low bandwidth caps and upload speeds).
Re: (Score:2)
This right there is the reason why people still copy and rip content.
Media industry, get a clue: You're trying to compete with someone who offers the product for free. The only way you can win that war is by offering a better product. More convenient. More accessible. Better quality. Less hassle. Better usability.
Instead, you do the exact opposite. Your competition is a product that is more useful to your customer and also cheaper.
Could someone explain economy to these morons?
Re: (Score:2)
This right there is the reason why people still copy and rip content.
Media industry, get a clue: You're trying to compete with someone who offers the product for free. The only way you can win that war is by offering a better product.
And to many, nothing is better than "free", so why should the industry bother trying to cater to them?
Re: (Score:2)
C'mon, we both know that people are more than willing to pay for comfort. Offer something that gives people convenience and they pay.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
We used to have this scenario, where all the content was available on one big platform. They called it "cable TV". If streaming services merge, they'll start pulling exactly the same stunts. Goodbye to canceling your service any time. Goodbye to not paying for what you don't want. We've been there, done that.
Mergers are alliances against a common enemy: You. (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Why would a merger improve content? If you throw rotting tomatos into a rotting salad, do you expect to get a good meal out of it?
Re: Mergers are alliances against a common enemy: (Score:2)
Funny enough many foods are better when they use over ripened food. Banana pudding is a good example, you want over ripe Bananas and it saves waste.
Pentti Linkola talks about this a good bit as part of the climate crisis. Many foods would be fine with less refrigeration but health code forces the food to be shipped under certain conditions, thus waste energy and heat. He even describes some fish dishes being better if the fish are old, joking that his guests would say the fish is so fresh when it had been
Re: (Score:2)
Why would a merger improve content?
That's the story they tell government regulators. But on slashdot government regulation=communism, so enjoy this turd sandwich.
Re: (Score:2)
Talk for yourself, I live in a heavily regulated country (seriously, you can't even build a garage on your property without the village idio... mayor getting involved) and while we bitch and rant about it, trying to take any away from us is akin to trying to repeal the 2nd in the US.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair it did result in a shitload of terrific films. We can rightfully call Harvey Weinstein an absolute piece of shit but the man had a real eye for producing movies and nurturing creative talent, we can't pretend he wasn't, his IMDB page speaks for itself.
Much like Phil Spector is one of the most important music producers of the 20th century with influence across almost every genre but also, a real colossal piece of shit. There is merit to the idea of seperating the art from the person.
Re: (Score:2)
Most mergers of any companies result in lower quality.
Re: (Score:2)
Most mergers also led to the resulting company be worth less than the original two companies were.
I don't want ads or pre-existing content. (Score:1)
What's the hold up? (Score:2)
As for HBO Max it seems like if they want to survive they'd better expand to the rest of the world pronto. I wo
Not sure they have stuff I want (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
back to cable (Score:5, Interesting)
The slow march back to 'cable' TV.
I don't want HBO, no interest. I have Discovery+. So am I going to see my rates jump up to $25/m for my Discovery+ since it must be bundled with HBO?
Re: (Score:2)
The slow march back to 'cable' TV.
I don't want HBO, no interest. I have Discovery+. So am I going to see my rates jump up to $25/m for my Discovery+ since it must be bundled with HBO?
Get used to it. This is a dynamic market right now. All the companies are searching for the right tradeoff between fragmentation, price, and convenience. We started with Netflix being the only game in town, then Amazon popped up. Over the last three years, other streamers popped up like mushrooms, everyone wanting their $7.99 slice of the pie. Now they're realizing they overshot and it's time to consolidate. I hope a lot of the XYX+ services merge and, like you, I'm concerned prices will rise. And we still
Re: (Score:2)
negates the purpose of 'cord cutting' at a fundamental level. We'll be back to paying for QVC and half a dozen televangelists just to watch a couple shows but it's worse because none of these services actually have all the hit shows. You'll need 3-5 services to get a proper selection and we're right back at the cable bill people have rejected.
I, like sooo so many, will drop my Discovery+ the moment they jack up the price to include HBO. You can see it in Netflix subscriptions as well but they held on lon
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
yeah, it's not about giving me just the content I want, just that the audience for Discovery+ vs HBO isn't the same, so cramming them together is just like making SyFy viewers buy QVC in a bundle.
If HBO doesn't like people cancelling once the latest Game of Thrones they need to produce content and release content in such a way that people want to keep it. Not try to bundle it to 'force' people to buy that don't want that part.
What they are going to get is people cancelling their HBO because they have no in
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Hmmm, I pay for HBO-Max. I don't have to pay the other fees that my cable company mandated. It's not more expensive unless you are signing up for a lot of streaming services. If it's too much for you to handle, cable still offers their selection.
Re: (Score:2)
Back to cable TV (Score:2)
>"Bringing HBO Max and Discovery+ together is aimed at cutting churn so "there's something for everyone in the household,"
No, what it means is more crap you DON'T WANT in one service at a higher price. Eventually, instead of getting what you want for the price you want, you will have to pay a lot more to get the few things you want. Oh, kinda like cable TV.
So... Basically they're creating smaller cable? (Score:2)
That's what this amounts to. Pay us for cable tier crap instead of paying the cable company to provide it. You know the next step past cutting the cable and just streaming is going outside and finding something interesting to do... Or staying inside and finding something else interesting to do. Your choice really.
Re: (Score:1)
No (Score:1)
HBO proper is next I assume (Score:2)
It took a bit longer than expected but I think many had a sinking feeling when AT&T ended up in charge of HBO that they would eventually ruin it and the production ethos and culture that made it by far the most successfull television production channel in history. The studio that essentially created the concept of "prestige TV".
Re: (Score:2)
The whole point here is that AT&T sold HBO (and all of Warner Brothers) to Discovery last year, so aside from selling it AT&T didn't ruin anything.
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you, that totally flew past me apparently.
Replace ATT with Discovery I suppose lol
Discovery+? (Score:2)
What the heck is Discovery+? Is there even a single Slashdotter who subscribed to that streaming juggernaut known as Discovery+?
Re: (Score:1)
Cost (Score:2)
Hopefully the cost doesn't go up too much.
HBO Max is $14.99 per month for the ad-free tier (and I don't subscribe - I have no interest).
Discovery Plus is $6.99 per month for the ad-free tier - I've been a customer for that since the service started.
I don't really want any HBO content - merging the two together is basically forcing me to buy it. I could live with a price increase of up to around $9.99 (for ad-free - I'm not watching commercials), but beyond that I may opt to just cancel the whole subscripti
Price (Score:2)
Canada? (Score:3)
Monopolism. THe endgame of Capitalism (Score:1)
Why you have 8 choices of cars?
Why every equivalent thing sold is the same price, though product longevity varies 60%?
The real purpose of Capitalism is to enrich Capitalists, and the way it is done is by eliminating competition
Vertical integration is the root of all evil (Score:2)
Media companies should have never been allowed to integrate vertically. I could not care less whether Fox joins with Disney, but if Disney+ is the only host of their content, and HBO Max is the only host of WB, etc, it makes market into a virtual oligopoly.
It started with TV networks (like CBS) being allowed to own studios (like Paramount pictures). Before that TV networks had to shop around for shows, and shows could jump onto another network if they paid better.
Then we allowed distribution companies (like
Re: (Score:1)
You can't fix this with "overlapping directors" laws, you have to get to the root, break up corporate and thus dynastic, control.
You don't have to break up capitalism, you have to break up capitalism EVERY time it wins monopoly control!