Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Advertising Movies

Disney+ Launches Its Ad-Supported Tier To Compete With Netflix 34

Today, Disney+ launched its ad-supported tier, "Disney+ Basic," at $7.99/month. The plan is currently only available in the U.S. and will become available in other countries sometime next year. TechCrunch reports: Netflix has its work cut out for it if it wants to compete successfully with Disney+'s new ad-supported tier. For instance, Disney+ Basic not only lets viewers stream high-quality video, including Full HD, HDR10, 4K Ultra HD, Dolby Vision and Expanded Aspect Ratio with IMAX Enhanced, but it also lets subscribers stream on up to four supported devices simultaneously. Plus, the ad plan includes Disney+'s full content catalog. Netflix's ad-supported plan, on the other hand, only supports 720p HD video quality, subscribers can only stream on one device at the same time and around 5% to 10% of Netflix's content library is missing due to licensing restrictions.

Neither Disney+ Basic nor Netflix's "Basic with ads" plan allows offline viewing or downloads. Other features not included in the Disney+ Basic plan at launch are GroupWatch, SharePlay and Dolby Atmos. A Disney spokesperson told TechCrunch that the company hopes to support this in the future, but the exact timing is unknown. Ads will range from 15 to 30 or 45 seconds long, the spokesperson added. As we previously reported, Disney+ is limiting the total ad load to an average of four minutes of commercials an hour. Preschool content has zero ads.
"Today's launch marks a milestone moment for Disney+ and puts consumer choice at the forefront. With these new ad-supported offerings, we're able to deliver greater flexibility for consumers to enjoy the full breadth and depth of incredible storytelling from The Walt Disney Company," Michael Paull, president of Direct to Consumer, said in a statement.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Disney+ Launches Its Ad-Supported Tier To Compete With Netflix

Comments Filter:
  • Hard pass on more advertising in my life.

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

        This may be an attempt to stem the tide of subscribers who subscribe for a couple of months, watch the content for the year, then unsubscribe.

        You offer a ad tier, and grandfather everyone in the ad-free tier. But then you cancel the ability to choose the ad-free tier - but everyone who's on it, keeps it until they stop subscribing.

        Thus, those who cancel can only "get back on" the ad tier so maybe they'd reconsider not cancelling because they'd lose their ad-free subscription.

        Sure, maybe you offer a special

  • On one hand nice to have an option (plus, Disney is a much better value than Netflix where you have to spend $$ to get 4k HDR). On the other hand, i hope it fails so there is no chance ads start spreading to other tiers.
    • On the other hand, i hope it fails so there is no chance ads start spreading to other tiers.

      I realize your average Slashdotter hates ads with the fire of a thousand suns, but regardless I really don't understand this reaction.

      This is not ads on Disney+. You keep the subscription tier you have and it will continue to be ad-free.

      This is a new, lower priced-tier with ads that you can choose if you want.

      It's no different than me choosing to not pay more for an ad-free YouTube tier.

      • It costs what it used to cost to not have ads.

        Yes, I understand inflation and all that, but it leaves a bad taste from it lining up that way.

      • Ads, okay, that's how tv and radio have worked like forever.

        Ads PLUS I have to pay a monthly fee? Plus my internet (as opposed to a one-time antenna purchase)? Forget it.

        There is NOTHING that is so important that I'll pay to watch ads.

        • Ads plus a monthly fee is how cable television has worked forever. The benefit was vastly more channels. Now the benefit is "on demand."

          • Ads plus a monthly fee is how cable television has worked forever. The benefit was vastly more channels. Now the benefit is "on demand."

            Back in the beginning, one of cable TVs selling points was no commercials. I guess most of the people alive today never saw that.

            • Back in the beginning, one of cable TVs selling points was no commercials. I guess most of the people alive today never saw that.

              GenX here.

              "Back in the beginning" that was the selling point of HBO & Skinemax - Called "Pay TV." It was never cable TV's selling point.

              ...and in 2022 dollars, in 1985 HBO cost around $30 per month.

              • Back in the beginning, one of cable TVs selling points was no commercials. I guess most of the people alive today never saw that.

                GenX here. "Back in the beginning" that was the selling point of HBO & Skinemax - Called "Pay TV." It was never cable TV's selling point. ...and in 2022 dollars, in 1985 HBO cost around $30 per month.

                I'm talking the 70s here. You know, before the dawn of time, when dinosaurs roamed the earth (at least on the Flintstones).

                • Well, back in the 70s, Cablevision just took what was broadcast over the air, and bundled it into a coax drop to your house. So I'm not sure what you mean by "no commercials."

                  You were getting the NBC, ABC and CBS feed without having to rotate your antenna or deal with bad reception, but it still had ads.

                  Sure, PBS had no ads, but it had no ads if you were picking it up with an antenna as well.
                  • You could get the main American channels w/o ad substitution over the local cable company. And that's what people wanted. Ignoring ads was a thing even back then. And ads were a LOT shorter. 1 minute, not 2-3 minutes.

                    And as you noted, PBS didn't have ads (except for the telethons ...)

                    $7/month. And no remote invasive spyware.

                    • I don't know what you mean by "w/o ad substitution."

                      If you had cablevision and you were watching The Rockford Files on NBC there would be ad breaks, just like i if you were watching it via rabbit ears or an antenna on the roof. It's true that cablevision meant you might be watching the Chicago feed - With Chicago ads - instead of your local affiliate in Springfield, but there would still be ads.

                      Yes, there were fewer ad breaks in an hour, but that's got nothing to do with cablevision.
                    • "Ad substitution" was the practice where Canadian carriers started inserting Canadian ads into the feed.

                      Same with speeding up episodes to be able to insert even more ads than their American counterparts.

                      Both are slimeball practices.

                      Also, there were packages that were ad-free. That's what you paid extra for.

                      Thing was, before this crap started, you didn't pay extra for the privilege of watching extra ads. Now? Everyone has ads, even for paid subscriptions. No wonder people are switching to tubi and p

                    • I grew up in Vancouver, Canada. In the 70s, 80s & 90s I had experience with Delta Cablevsion, West Coast Cable and Rogers Cablevision.

                      Also, there were packages that were ad-fre

                      I never once saw ad-free packages, other than Canadian HBO knockoffs like Superchannel.

                      The "speeding up" that you're talking about only occurred in syndication and it happened regardless of whether you were watching a station like KCPQ out of Tacoma on cable, or via your antenna. Cable-only stations like TBS were also gu
          • No, now the benefit is "I got to save a hundred bucks a month by dropping cable entirely". Streaming services may soon find the same calculus at work with their own customers. There are lots of us that aren't going to pay money only to continue to get ads shoved in our faces, and they've jacked the prices of the ad-free tiers up enough to be unappealing to a lot of people.

  • Well that didn't take long now did it? What's wrong Disney? I thought your content held so much more worth that you could run your own streaming service with blackjack and hookers! Netflix, now devoid of most content, has begun an AD supported tier just to try and compete, read: stay relevant, with "better" streaming services. Why would you Disney, the self-proclaimed better service, need an AD supported tier?

    Could it be that your content isn't worth the massive cost you charge consumers? That, given so m
    • Disney+ has original content worth the subscription. I won't be going with the ad tier though.
      • by tsqr ( 808554 )

        Disney+ has original content worth the subscription. I won't be going with the ad tier though.

        Worth the subsciption, in your opinion. It's available to me as a Hulu add-on for $2.99/month, and I'm not interested. I did a 1 month free trial a while back to find out what The Mandalorian fuss was about. Waste of time.

        • There's also half a dozen Marvel miniseries, Andor, Obi-Wan, etc. Almost any time I turn on Disney+ there's something genuinely new worth seeing.
          • by tsqr ( 808554 )

            "Worth seeing" is completely subjective. I'm not a fan of superhero fantasies, Star Wars spinoffs, or animated features, so Disney+ would be a waste of time and money for me. My take on ad-supported options is, they might be a low-cost option for someone who is uncertain about the service and wants to find out if it's worth subscribing.

            .

            • Well then it sounds like you aren't the target audience for Disney+ anyway, ads or no ads. On the plus side, if you ever decide to binge the MCU you're going to have a ton of fun content waiting.
    • What do you mean "take long" or "What's wrong"? The ability to run without an ad supported tier is not nor ever was any metric of success. Disney is adopting an industry trend. The fact they are a more recent service doesn't mean they should ignore the trend. That would be insanely stupid.

      Why would you Disney, the self-proclaimed better service, need an AD supported tier?

      Because business 101 says if a competitor attempts to undercut you, you should react appropriately. And they did. No price changes at Disney, just the introduction of an ad supported tier to further compete with Netflix wh

      • No price changes at Disney, just the introduction of an ad supported tier to further compete with Netflix who lowered the bar.

        No price changes, unless you count the 38% increase from $7.99 to $10.99 for the ad-free tier that took effect two days ago.

      • Disney is adopting an industry trend.

        That's a funny admission of guilt there, given that the reason Netflix even needed to create this "industry trend" was due to *falling* revenue caused by the likes of Disney pulling their content from the platform.

        The fact they are a more recent service doesn't mean they should ignore the trend.

        Given they helped force it into existence, there's no way they ever would if given the choice themselves.

        Because business 101 says if a competitor attempts to undercut you, you should react appropriately

        That's exactly what Netflix did by introducing their AD tier.

        Future price changes enabled at Disney, through the introduction of an ad supported tier to further kill Netflix who dared to compete with them.

        Fixed that for you.

        This is called "competition" and you should be celebrating it.

        Well, given that you clearly only care about the money involved, I'm sure you'll be celebrating the increase

  • 7.99 still seems high for a service with ads. I expect services with ads to be at least free, I'm not interested in paying to see ads ever again.

    • 7.99 still seems high for a service with ads. I expect services with ads to be at least free, I'm not interested in paying to see ads ever again.

      It's the Musk-rat effect. $7.99 ($8 bucks) or $11 bucks. Though I expect Musk will have to offer a "half-price deal" like he just did for Twitter ads. Expect to see $4.20 RSN.

  • Netflix has ads? I'm devastated to hear about what I've been missing.

  • Disney+ doesn't have anything I want to watch and have no young kids. Disney+ is still losing $$ with all their subscribers !
  • by PPH ( 736903 ) on Saturday December 10, 2022 @01:42PM (#63119328)

    ... rethink following in Netflix footsteps as they slowly sink into oblivion. Lemmings and cliffs come to mind.

    I know that's a misconception. Interesting to note that it was a Disney documentary that spread this myth. You'd think they'd have learned by now.

Understanding is always the understanding of a smaller problem in relation to a bigger problem. -- P.D. Ouspensky

Working...