VOD : Streaming services news, offers and general chit chat

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

They aren’t selling you one thing and giving consumers another. You may care little for consumers getting swindled by big media conglomerates and tech companies, but others will take a different view.

They’re promising massive libraries of content to watch at your convenience and naming many of these series in their advertising.

Sky telling you, for example, “that the final series of Succession starts in March” carries with it expectations that consumers clearly know and understand.

You seem to approach every post with a curve ball!

I have seen programmes advertised on TV channels, and then there’s a programme change. It happens on TV channels as well as on streamers.

[epsilon]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

You seem to approach every post with a curve ball!

I have seen programmes advertised on TV channels, and then there’s a programme change. It happens on TV channels as well as on streamers.

It seems that the curve ball is real and actually being thrown by Paramount!

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

You seem to approach every post with a curve ball!

I have seen programmes advertised on TV channels, and then there’s a programme change. It happens on TV channels as well as on streamers.

Nobody is claiming football never goes to extra time, or Royals don’t die. The principle is that a broadcaster makes a promise you can see content by subscribing to their platform. Which it would do so at a rearranged time.

It’s an entirely different scenario that a streamer, for no reason other than to save money on royalties, removing content from it’s library.

---------- Post added at 17:27 ---------- Previous post was at 17:24 ----------

Originally Posted by epsilon

It seems that the curve ball is real and actually being thrown by Paramount!

Indeed.

[TimeLord2018]

Originally Posted by epsilon

It seems that the curve ball is real and actually being thrown by Paramount!

In November Paramount introduced a change of control severance pay for their top executives, says it all really.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by TimeLord2018

In November Paramount introduced a change of control severance pay for their top executives, says it all really.

I might be over-using a C word in this thread, but that again sounds cynical to me.

Originally Posted by TimeLord2018

In November Paramount introduced a change of control severance pay for their top executives, says it all really.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...cs/ar-AA1keJ4w

Those changes adopted by the company's compensation committee cover executives including President/CEO Bob Bakish, Chief Financial Officer Naveen Chopra, General Counsel Christa D'Alimonte, Chief People Officer Nancy Phillips and Doretha Lea, executive VP of Global Public Policy and Government Relations.

In the case of Bakish, he would receive a severance multiple of 3 (vs. 2 for other executives) and a benefit continuation period of 36 months (vs. 24 months for others).

I wonder if the severance is a multiple of base salary, or includes share options and bonuses?

For instance, in March ‘23, Bakish’ 2022 compensation included a base salary of $3.1 million (unchanged from the year before ); stock awards of $15.9 million (versus none in 2021); and non-equity incentive plan compensation (like a cash bonus) of $12.9 million versus $16.82 million the prior year.

https://deadline.com/2023/03/paramou...on-1235303522/

[Itshim]

It’s an entirely different scenario that a streamer, for no reason other than to save money on royalties, removing content from it’s

Perhaps people are too use to Netflix leaving shows on for ages. Unless someone can show proof that any streamer offer a promise of keeping a show on for x number of weeks. Don't be surprised that they chop and change their shows. Perhaps I am cynic, but it didn't surprise me. Never pay in advance if you can help it was, what I was always told. Guess that was good advice for streaming providers

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Itshim

Perhaps people are too use to Netflix leaving shows on for ages. Unless someone can show proof that any streamer offer a promise of keeping a show on for x number of weeks. Don't be surprised that they chop and change their shows. Perhaps I am cynic, but it didn't surprise me. Never pay in advance if you can help it was, what I was always told. Guess that was good advice for streaming providers

The proposition that some have been peddling, for the best part of a decade, is exactly this though. A seemingly limitless library of content available at the touch of a button.

It’s sounds very much limited to me if random content disappears without warning into the abyss of the black hole caused by the average streamers debt.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

Nobody is claiming football never goes to extra time, or Royals don’t die. The principle is that a broadcaster makes a promise you can see content by subscribing to their platform. Which it would do so at a rearranged time.

It’s an entirely different scenario that a streamer, for no reason other than to save money on royalties, removing content from its library.
.

It’s not a different scenario at all, but such an attempt to put the TV channels in a better light than the streamers is an act of desperation to my mind.

As long as you’re happy…

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

It’s not a different scenario at all, but such an attempt to put the TV channels in a better light than the streamers is an act of desperation to my mind.

As long as you’re happy…

The only thing desperate is your pretence that Paramount pulling content and other commencing adverts is somehow consistent with what you’ve been telling us for ages. A customary search for the word “linear” sorted by old to new would be a reasonable starting point for anyone who wanted to compare the high cost, low quality, limited, general entertainment streaming offerings with your pie-in-the-sky claims.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

The proposition that some have been peddling, for the best part of a decade, is exactly this though. A seemingly limitless library of content available at the touch of a button.

It’s sounds very much limited to me if random content disappears without warning into the abyss of the black hole caused by the average streamers debt.

Who, apart from you just now, who has said anything about ‘limitless’ library of content?

You twist everything out of context. It is important that any library is refreshed from time to time to keep it relevant. You don’t sign up to see a specified list of content, you sign up to the content they happen to present. Things change from time to time, (except, possibly in your house). My only issue with pulling content is that they should give a few months’ notice that it’s going to be pulled so you have a chance to view it first.

---------- Post added at 19:39 ---------- Previous post was at 19:34 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

The only thing desperate is your pretence that Paramount pulling content and other commencing adverts is somehow consistent with what you’ve been telling us for ages. A customary search for the word “linear” sorted by old to new would be a reasonable starting point for anyone who wanted to compare the high cost, low quality, limited, general entertainment streaming offerings with your pie-in-the-sky claims.

What nonsense. You do realise that the content on the streamers includes the same content that would otherwise have been destined for the TV channels, don’t you?

And if you compare the cost of signing up for all the channels you want to see on Virgin and what the same content will cost you on Virgin Stream, you will notice a huge difference and you will also get more choice by signing up to the appropriate streamers instead.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Who, apart from you just now, who has said anything about ‘limitless’ library of content?

You twist everything out of context. It is important that any library is refreshed from time to time to keep it relevant. You don’t sign up to see a specified list of content, you sign up to the content they happen to present. Things change from time to time, (except, possibly in your house). My only issue with pulling content is that they should give a few months’ notice that it’s going to be pulled so you have a chance to view it first.

The biggest change in this thread is your persistent lowering of the bar in terms of what you expect from streaming services.

What nonsense. You do realise that the content on the streamers includes the same content that would otherwise have been destined for the TV channels, don’t you?

And if you compare the cost of signing up for all the channels you want to see on Virgin and what the same content will cost you on Virgin Stream, you will notice a huge difference and you will also get more choice by signing up to the appropriate streamers instead.

100% on a like for like basis what I’d pay Virgin for my TV package is more on Stream than TV360. I’m one of these “except sports” viewers remember that plough billions a year into the UK TV market.

I say all of this while subscribing to four overseas streaming services and Now TV.

[MatthewEastaugh]

Accused was literally dropped mid series, with episodes still remaining in the current series, that was being added weekly. Until it suddenly wasn't, and all of the series was removed.

Quantum Leap season two was announced as coming to Paramount Plus later in February. Until it wasn't, and the existing series was yanked off at the same time.

There are shows that they removed which were initially added less than two months ago, where the trailers are STILL UP on their YouTube channel, advertising the shows.

https://youtu.be/znFsvnss4T0
Trailer published 15th December. Show added at same time.
Trailer still up. Show removed from service after about six weeks, total.

https://youtu.be/lxErMisNKBw
Added end November. A 'Paramount Plus Original'. Gone already, so now impossible to watch.

https://youtu.be/3k0-7Lhvj1Y
Same as above, added end November as an 'original', now gone already and impossible to watch anywhere.

This is a far cry from 'line up subject to change'. This is literally advertising 'subscribe to Paramount Plus, we have all these shows, in fact why not buy an annual subscription to save money?', quickly followed by 'we've worked out a loophole to save money in our accounting, sorry but we've removed all those shows we sold you on earlier, would you like to watch Geordie Shore instead?'

---------- Post added at 20:36 ---------- Previous post was at 20:25 ----------

Some platforms are actually still showing adverts for the shows that are no longer available. It very much looks like the order to remove them came from 'on high', leaving the UK team scrabbling around having to continually apologise and sort the advertising out 'in the field' on the fly:

https://x.com/shamingjezebel/status/1754565777032724744

To quote William Gibson, and to apply it to streaming

The future is already here – it’s just not very evenly distributed

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I have seen programmes advertised on TV channels, and then there’s a programme change. It happens on TV channels as well as on streamers.

An episode being postponed due to a global situation (eg plane crash) is understandable. And streamers culling content is not new. But this is pretty unprecedented with no warnings and with a series (Accused) being dropped mid series. As Geek Town commented:

What was rather shocking with Paramount+ was that the removal came with no warning or announcement, meaning that people who were halfway through watching these series suddenly found them no longer available.

https://www.geektown.co.uk/2024/02/0...-paramount-uk/