Found 18 posts - Go to Last Post
You can share this post with others using the following URL:
You can share this post with others using the following URL:
You can share this post with others using the following URL:
You can share this post with others using the following URL:
You can share this post with others using the following URL:
Whoa. Thanks for summing that up actually. So we will literally need all 3 services in order to get what we used to before, in one package. I have Netflix and Amazon, but no Hulu, and so far, this discussion is educating me greatly. Please continueAMC new shows (like new content that never aired before April 2015) went exclusive to HULU. However, every existing show had a contract in place, Like "The Walking Dead" has a deal with Netflix.Originally Posted by futiles
So, you want to TWD, you currently need AMC or Netflix or you need to procure it illegally.
You want Fear the Walking Dead, you need Hulu or AMC or you need to procure it illegally.
And then deals change. BBCA is an AMC owned company, and Dr. Who WAS Netflix, but Netflix is losing the rights and they change streaming services. Existing AMC-owned shows are on Hulu, Netflix, and Amazon Video. So, if you do not want to have cable, but you want to continue to watch all of your shows, you need Hulu, and Netflix, and Amazon... (or procure illegally)
You can share this post with others using the following URL:
I'm just so tired of cable companies charging so much when I only watch a handful of channels. When you try to negotiate with them to eliminate or rearrange packages they have worked it out to the point you only save $5. I would gladly pay AMC directly to stream their shows and cut out the middleman. HBO is doing it, everyone else needs to get on board. Most of the apps on the One or the channel websites like the CW or FX still wants you to connect with your service provider making the apps useless.AMC new shows (like new content that never aired before April 2015) went exclusive to HULU. However, every existing show had a contract in place, Like "The Walking Dead" has a deal with Netflix.Originally Posted by futiles
So, you want to TWD, you currently need AMC or Netflix or you need to procure it illegally.
You want Fear the Walking Dead, you need Hulu or AMC or you need to procure it illegally.
And then deals change. BBCA is an AMC owned company, and Dr. Who WAS Netflix, but Netflix is losing the rights and they change streaming services. Existing AMC-owned shows are on Hulu, Netflix, and Amazon Video. So, if you do not want to have cable, but you want to continue to watch all of your shows, you need Hulu, and Netflix, and Amazon... (or procure illegally)
You can share this post with others using the following URL:
FTWD is the same schedule as TWD. Week before season two airs, season 1 will hit Hulu.I'm just so tired of cable companies charging so much when I only watch a handful of channels. When you try to negotiate with them to eliminate or rearrange packages they have worked it out to the point you only save $5. I would gladly pay AMC directly to stream their shows and cut out the middleman. HBO is doing it, everyone else needs to get on board. Most of the apps on the One or the channel websites like the CW or FX still wants you to connect with your service provider making the apps useless.Originally Posted by MarvzMitts
I only have Netflix and even tho TWD is Netflix only, they will be one season behind. So no new episodes.
FEARTWD on hulu, I believe will be last season plus this new season that is currently filming.
There is nothing I can think of that is on Amazon that I need to watch.
Also Better Call Saul Season 1 just hit Netflix if anyone needs to catch up.
You can share this post with others using the following URL:
So no episodes of season 2 on Hulu until season 3 is in the can?FTWD is the same schedule as TWD. Week before season two airs, season 1 will hit Hulu.Originally Posted by futiles
You can share this post with others using the following URL:
Basically.So no episodes of season 2 on Hulu until season 3 is in the can?Originally Posted by MarvzMitts
You can share this post with others using the following URL:
You can share this post with others using the following URL:
I may have to, or I'll have to go to my brother's house on Sundays.Or you can always resort to pirating......Originally Posted by pTartTX
You can share this post with others using the following URL:
Must be some hose if it can fit a tv... 😂I may have to, or I'll have to go to my brother's hose on Sundays.Originally Posted by MarvzMitts
You can share this post with others using the following URL:
You can share this post with others using the following URL:
Hehe, you got me.Must be some hose if it can fit a tv... 😂Originally Posted by porschephiliac
You can share this post with others using the following URL:
Yes, I do get that. I even remember when you had to fight to get channels from your provider like MTV. The way people watch TV has changed in the 20 years (I'm sure you are well aware). AMC is now a powerhouse that rivals and surpasses HBO with original content. I would just rather pay AMC directly for the majority of shows I watch on that channel instead of almost $100 for AMC and a shit load of worthless music, sports, and shopping channels that I have no interest in. Or channels that I might watch on a off chance if I have nothing else to watch. That doesn't happen with me since I am either gaming or watching Netflix.You do understand it isn't the cable companies making it difficult, right? HBO, being an add on premium is different than a standard channel. Standard channels charge a set fee per subscriber to the cable company, with a requirement that it is carried on a specific package with all the other channels they own. So, the ABC networks have no benefit to offer separately, since most people don't want ESPN, AND Disney, AND ABC Family, or whatever other channel is in their portfolio, but almost everyone wants one of those, so, Disney sells them as a single package to the cable providers per subscriber count. If they sold separately, most people would only want just one, and the return isn't there for them.Originally Posted by futiles
HBO is a tack-on, and calculates differently. So, since they charge you ~ $15/month through your cable provider, and also about that for the direct service, they make out better as a stand alone service.
A La Carte is always the go to demand, and sounds great, but, back to the Disney example, ESPN and Disney are literally a couple dollars each per month, and all their other channels (ESPN2, ESPNU, ESN, DisXD, ABCFam, whatever) are actually pennies per month. So, Disney says the cable company that wants ESPN HAS to have all the others and they want $5/month/subscriber for all the channels... So, you'd drop all the channels you don't want, and settle to the 20-30 you do, and you would still be in the $40-$60/month service.
It's shitty, it's changing, but there is obviously a strong deterrent from the studio/provider.
You can share this post with others using the following URL:
Except, would you pay for AMC, BBCA, IFC, and Sundance to watch TWD and FtWD on streaming? What would you pay for it? All of those channels are sold to your cable company as a package (same owner), and AMC is getting much more from cable providers selling direct to them for their 100 Million subscribers than they would get selling piece meal to individuals, and they get all their content into homes, not just specific content.Yes, I do get that. I even remember when you had to fight to get channels from your provider like MTV. The way people watch TV has changed in the 20 years (I'm sure you are well aware). AMC is now a powerhouse that rivals and surpasses HBO with original content. I would just rather pay AMC directly for the majority of shows I watch on that channel instead of almost $100 for AMC and a shit load of worthless music, sports, and shopping channels that I have no interest in. Or channels that I might watch on a off chance if I have nothing else to watch. That doesn't happen with me since I am either gaming or watching Netflix.Originally Posted by MarvzMitts
You can share this post with others using the following URL:
I'm sure they make a good amount of money that way. Having an AMC only App could be considered another revenue stream like DVD sales. I would be willing to pay around $5-$10 for live content, but then they would have to build one app for all the channels which doesn't make sense and would be confusing. MTV has its own app, VH1 also owned by the same company has its own App as an example, so they would need to split the channels up.Except, would you pay for AMC, BBCA, IFC, and Sundance to watch TWD and FtWD on streaming? What would you pay for it? All of those channels are sold to your cable company as a package (same owner), and AMC is getting much more from cable providers selling direct to them for their 100 Million subscribers than they would get selling piece meal to individuals, and they get all their content into homes, not just specific content.Originally Posted by futiles
You can share this post with others using the following URL:
Please let old threads die and do not reply to them unless you feel you have something new and valuable to contribute that absolutely must be added to make the discussion complete. Otherwise, please post a new thread in this forum instead.
Sign up for a new account. It's free and easy!
Sign up for an accountAlready have an account? Login here
Login to your accountKeypress | Action |
---|---|
s | Move focus to site search box |
r | Move focus to quick reply box in a thread or message |
n | View the first unread post in a thread |
f | Toggle and scroll to filter options (on select pages) |
? | Toggle keyboard shortcut help dialog |