# Peacock Gobbles Up Hallmark



## NashGuy (Jan 30, 2014)

On Nov. 2, Peacock will launch a new Hallmark Hub in their app featuring live streams of the three Hallmark cable nets: Hallmark Channel, Hallmark Movies & Mysteries, and Hallmark Drama. Those channels' new episodes and movies will also be available on-demand next-day, along with older content too. Basically, anyone with the $5/mo premium subscription to Peacock (which is still free for many Comcast and Charter customers) will no longer need any kind of cable TV subscription to watch the latest from Hallmark. Those channels have a big following, particularly among women and particularly during the holiday season thanks to their Christmas romance movies. The Hallmark Channel ranked as the 10th most-watch TV channel across all broadcast and cable nets in the US last year.



https://www.nexttv.com/news/nbcus-peacock-to-stream-programming-from-hallmark



I predict that eventually all the major broadcast and cable nets will be sold via the major direct-to-consumer streaming apps owned by those companies. And for smaller network groups like Hallmark, many will either strike a partnership deal as they've done here with NBCU/Peacock or they'll just get acquired by one of the big boys.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

NashGuy said:


> I predict that eventually all the major broadcast and cable nets will be sold via the major direct-to-consumer streaming apps owned by those companies. And for smaller network groups like Hallmark, many will either strike a partnership deal as they've done here with NBCU/Peacock or they'll just get acquired by one of the big boys.


Does your crystal ball hint at what retail price the Peacock Premium offering will rise to to support these additional programming suites? I'm pretty sure that the ad revenue from Peacock Premium viewers is going to be less than what they could derive even from just OTA.


----------



## NashGuy (Jan 30, 2014)

harsh said:


> Does your crystal ball hint at what retail price the Peacock Premium offering will rise to to support these additional programming suites? I'm pretty sure that the ad revenue from Peacock Premium viewers is going to be less than what they could derive even from just OTA.


Doesn't look like there's any planned price increase for Peacock Premium coinciding with tomorrow's inclusion of the Hallmark content (just as there was no price increase when Peacock become the exclusive streaming home for WWE). Although Comcast has said that at some point they plan to stop giving it out for free to their broadband and TV customers. They're smartly trying to give those customers more reasons to regularly use the app and be willing to pay $5/mo for it when the free ride ends.

Looking further down the road, it seems likely that traditional studios' DTC services will have to increase their prices as their cable TV revenues decline and then eventually they just merge their DTC service and cable channels together. But there are a few forces at play that should keep prices in check better than what we saw with traditional cable, which for many years saw rate increases far higher than the general rate of inflation in consumer prices. 

First, there's less money being taken by middle men in DTC streaming versus cable TV (no MVPDs or local station affiliates) and there's more pure competition (Netflix vs. HBO Max vs. Prime Video etc.) as opposed to the co-optition model of the commingled cable TV bundle. 

Second, a fair amount of pro sports -- the stuff that's been on the RSNs -- are going to be shunted off into separate a la carte services which consumers won't have to take if they don't want. The same probably holds true for most/all of ESPN's content. That said, there will be more, not less, sports popping up across the DTC services going forward. Sports, and to a lesser extent, local station owners, have been the biggest drivers of cable TV price inflation over the past 30 years. Those factors will play lesser roles in the DTC streaming ecosystem. 

And finally, the surviving major DTC services will all be globally scaled and rely on their own apps (gleaning data from direct consumer usage and allowing the service to control the ad platform). All of that helps reduce costs and increase revenue versus the traditional model.


----------



## SamC (Jan 20, 2003)

Welcome to the bundle. 

This, and not any great choice filled future, is what streaming is becoming. An online-big version of USA Network, circa 1985. Something for everyone. And if your household doesn’t include someone from every demographic group, you get to pay anyway.

Just like cable/DBS.


----------



## NashGuy (Jan 30, 2014)

SamC said:


> Welcome to the bundle.
> 
> This, and not any great choice filled future, is what streaming is becoming. An online-big version of USA Network, circa 1985. Something for everyone. And if your household doesn’t include someone from every demographic group, you get to pay anyway.
> 
> Just like cable/DBS.


No, the streaming future will be like dividing the one big cable/DBS bundle out into 6 mini-bundles. Take the ones you want, leave the ones you don't. No contracts, come and go from month to month as you like. There will never be a future where to get Netflix, you're forced to take HBO Max and Apple TV+. Or where to get Disney+, you're forced to take Prime Video and a sports-only service featuring your local MLB, NBA and/or NHL teams.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

NashGuy said:


> They're smartly trying to give those customers more reasons to regularly use the app and be willing to pay $5/mo for it when the free ride ends.


The one and only way to do that is to offer compelling content. Peacock is not doing that other than WWE and sports coverage in my estimation. Some Peacock originals may be good but I haven't seen anything that piques my interest. The only thing I regularly watch on Peacock is racing (cars, sailboats and motorcycles) and _Resident Alien_ (when there are new episodes).


----------



## Bender The Lab (7 mo ago)

harsh said:


> The one and only way to do that is to offer compelling content. Peacock is not doing that other than WWE and sports coverage in my estimation. Some Peacock originals may be good but I haven't seen anything that *piques my interest.* The only thing I regularly watch on Peacock is racing (cars, sailboats and motorcycles) and _Resident Alien_ (when there are new episodes).


Everyone is different, a lot of women love the Hallmark Channel, especially during the Holiday with all those XMAS Films.

If I remember correctly, the Hallmark Channel is #10 of all the cable channels.


----------



## SamC (Jan 20, 2003)

NashGuy said:


> No, the streaming future will be like dividing the one big cable/DBS bundle out into 6 mini-bundles. Take the ones you want, leave the ones you don't. No contracts, come and go from month to month as you like. There will never be a future where to get Netflix, you're forced to take HBO Max and Apple TV+. Or where to get Disney+, you're forced to take Prime Video and a sports-only service featuring your local MLB, NBA and/or NHL teams.


But, of course, there will be something of interest in each streamer. So you will need all of them. Five or ten or twelve bills, and still a lot less content than cable/DBS provided for one bill. 

Welcome to the bundle.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Bender The Lab said:


> Everyone is different, a lot of women love the Hallmark Channel, especially during the Holiday with all those XMAS Films.


My point was more about the lack of compelling content in the pre-Hallmark lineup. If they're abandoning all that in favor of adding suites, they're edging ever closer to a live-streaming product and having to pay for big bundles.


----------



## NashGuy (Jan 30, 2014)

SamC said:


> But, of course, there will be something of interest in each streamer. So you will need all of them. Five or ten or twelve bills, and still a lot less content than cable/DBS provided for one bill.
> 
> Welcome to the bundle.


Heh. Apparently you don't know how to say no to a product that offers something of interest to you and decide not to spend money on it? It's TV. You don't "need" any of it. And the reality is that, as more and more viewing shifts to the internet, more and more content is becoming available for free via ad-supported apps like Freevee, Pluto TV, Tubi, etc.

Pretty much everything in your post is factually incorrect. There's a lot MORE, not fewer, hours of content available across the major SVODs now than what you get in the cable bundle. (Look at how many of those channels just endlessly recycle repeats of old shows and movies.) And how much does the full traditional bundle cost? DTV Stream charges $150/mo for it via their Premier package.

Meanwhile, here's the cost for the various DTC services, all ad-free (except for sports):

Disney Bundle (Disney+, Hulu, ESPN+) - $20
Netflix (HD) - $15.50
HBO Max - $15
Discovery+ - $7
Prime Video - $9
Peacock Premium - $10
Paramount+ with Showtime - $15
Apple TV+ - $7
Starz - $9
AMC+ - $9
Bally Sports+ - $20
total = $136.50

So all those DTCs add up to less than the cost of the full traditional bundle. You're getting more hours of content, in better picture quality (in some cases, 4K HDR), for less money, with just about everything ready to watch on-demand when you want. No fooling around with a DVR to set up and delete recordings or to fast forward through ads. Some of the services above can be had for less if you take a version with ads and/or if you subscribe during a sale or pre-pay for an entire year.

But again, what I've laid out above is not a bundle, other than a couple of limited instances (Disney and Paramount). Very, very few consumers would actually choose to subscribe to all of those DTC services at the same time. If I have more than three services at once, it's a waste of money because there will be at least one service that I'm just not watching enough to justify the cost that month. It's easy to cycle through services, keeping them for a few months and then replacing them with another to catch up on whatever looks good there. With the cable bundle, the optionality is much more limited. You can dump the premium add-ons and downgrade to the entry-level package but there's no way to cycle between different parts of the bundle.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

NashGuy said:


> There's a lot MORE, not fewer, hours of content available across the major SVODs now than what you get in the cable bundle.


More hours total or more hours of what I want to watch? 

There is a lot of library content that gets cycled through linear channels (the traditional method of cable delivery). There is also a limit on how many hours of content one can consume before their brain turns to mush.

Look at your list of providers and see how many rely on MVPD subscriptions as their primary method of collecting money. Then consider what they will do when they lose that MVPD income. Raise the rates on their streaming? That is my guess.

If you like the price of your streaming package thank a cable subscriber.


----------



## NashGuy (Jan 30, 2014)

James Long said:


> More hours total or more hours of what I want to watch?
> 
> There is a lot of library content that gets cycled through linear channels (the traditional method of cable delivery). There is also a limit on how many hours of content one can consume before their brain turns to mush.
> 
> ...


If what you want to watch is live sports, yeah, you're definitely still getting more of that on the traditional bundle, no question (although that's starting to change, especially as RSNs are becoming available as DTC services this year).

But if what you want to watch are scripted series, movies, documentaries, comedy specials -- basically anything other than sports, news and some reality shows -- you're going to get more of it and better quality on the streaming services. Aside from all the content that is exclusive to streaming (e.g. Netflix Originals, Disney+ Originals, Hulu Originals, Max Originals, etc.), it's also already cannibalized nearly all of that kind of content from linear cable too. Is there a significant broadcast or cable series other than Yellowstone that doesn't stream next-day or same-day on one of the DTC streamers (with significantly better PQ and the option to completely avoid ads)?

And yeah, as revenue declines from linear (check out today's quarterly call from Paramount), those companies will be forced to rely more on their DTC. I think this will mean eventually putting _all_ their linear content -- including all live sports and news -- in the DTC while also increasing the DTC price. But competition is fierce in the global DTC arena and the traditional media companies were tardy to the party started by Netflix and Amazon. The result will be further consolidation among those traditional companies in the DTC space as many of the folks cutting the cord on their linear channels won't pick them back up via DTC. NBCUniversal, WBD, Paramount and Fox won't all survive. Aside from Disney, I think there will only be one other traditional media company to survive as a global DTC streamer, in addition to the three tech natives (Netflix, Amazon, Apple). Universal+Warner seems like the best bet for that 5th spot. There could be one other major US-only DTC, perhaps. Maybe a tie up of Paramount and Fox. They would have substantial US sports rights between them (including all local Sunday afternoon NFL games!). As for non-US markets, they'd just license out the series and movies they make to the highest bidders among the big 5.


----------



## SamC (Jan 20, 2003)

NashGuy said:


> Heh. Apparently you don't know how to say no to a product that offers something of interest to you and decide not to spend money on it



I know how, I just am not used to it, because the wonderful consumer friendly cable bundle has protected the consumer for most of my lifetime. Sad to see that go away. More bills, less content, 




> So all those DTCs add up to less than the cost of the full traditional bundle.


Right now. And none make money. And most are just recycling material made for traditional linear TV, or showing “left over” sports rights, such as ESPN buying a whole conference and showing the women’s soccer on ESPN+ or showing auto racing qualifying, etc. 



> But again, what I've laid out above is not a bundle,


Each service is most assuredly a bundle. Peacock has Indy Car qualifying, Notre Dame football, soccer and Hallmark movie reruns. 

Unless you like all of that, it’s a bundle. Each containing material you want, and material you don’t just like cable. The difference you cover, below”



> Very, very few consumers would actually choose to subscribe to all of those DTC services at the same time. If I have more than three services at once, it's a waste of money because there will be at least one service that I'm just not watching enough to justify the cost that month. It's easy to cycle through services, keeping them for a few months and then replacing them with another to catch up on whatever looks good there.


Exactly. With the traditional cable bundle, “everyone” had everything, so the costs were spread out among the whole population. Now, the costs have to be covered just from the subscriber base of each individual streaming bundle.

When the bubble pops, and it will, and they start to try to make money, that means more bills, more costs, and FAR LESS ORIGINAL MATERIAL, as the money to cover it just won’t be there for each individual bundle. 

For the sports fan, even worse news as getting “all” the sports will require maybe 10 different bundles.


----------



## Mike Lang (Nov 18, 2005)

Something tells me the wife will still want the $5 "Movies Extra Pack" addon on Directv so she can DVR Hallmark Movies & Mysteries shows vs looking for them on Peacock.


----------



## MysteryMan (May 17, 2010)

Mike Lang said:


> Something tells me the wife will still want the $5 "Movies Extra Pack" addon on Directv so she can DVR Hallmark Movies & Mysteries shows vs looking for them on Peacock.


You have my deepest condolences.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Mike Lang said:


> Something tells me the wife will still want the $5 "Movies Extra Pack" addon on Directv so she can DVR Hallmark Movies & Mysteries shows vs looking for them on Peacock.


As with other house-centric streaming services, a series can be pinned and suites can be grouped (as Disney has done with Disney, Pixar, Marvel, Star Wars and Nat Geo and HBO has done with DC, Max, Sesame Street and cartoons).

NBC's _Days of Our Lives_ initially dropped from 1.6 million to 935,000 on the transition to Peacock but I expect that it will recover some of the lost viewers over time.


----------



## the2130 (Dec 18, 2014)

Mike Lang said:


> Something tells me the wife will still want the $5 "Movies Extra Pack" addon on Directv so she can DVR Hallmark Movies & Mysteries shows vs looking for them on Peacock.


You are probably right about that. My wife definitely prefers recording Hallmark stuff on the DVR, where they won't expire and disappear unexpectedly.


----------



## the2130 (Dec 18, 2014)

Seems to be ad-free on Peacock's ad-free tier. I checked a few movies and one show and didn't find any ad breaks. You would assume that to be the case for most services with ad-free tiers, but it isn't always the case with Peacock.


----------



## b4pjoe (Nov 20, 2010)

the2130 said:


> You are probably right about that. My wife definitely prefers recording Hallmark stuff on the DVR, *where they won't expire and disappear unexpectedly*.


Unless the HDD dies.


----------



## the2130 (Dec 18, 2014)

b4pjoe said:


> Unless the HDD dies.


Or the DVR itself has to be replaced. I've had that happen a number of times. It's my wife's preference to DVR shows, not mine. I prefer streaming them, so I can watch without the on-screen graphics, commercials, and other annoyances. If I think a show or movie might expire before I can watch it, I just record it for later viewing.


----------

