# IF DIRECTV were concerned about the Roku threat how do they feel about this?



## dualsub2006 (Aug 29, 2007)

For reasons known only to them, D* has chosen not to allow HBO Go access on the Roku. Some guessed that perhaps D* was a little uncomfortable helping a company like Roku that markets a cord cutting device.

HBO Go IS available for D* subscribers on the Xbox, after all, that's a gaming console and not a cord cutting streamer.

Think again:
http://m.techcrunch.com/2012/06/04/the-xbox-360-now-a-true-cable-box-killer/

This isn't something that will cause people to cut the cord tomorrow, but Microsoft has stated that their goal is to own the living room with the Xbox.


----------



## Darcaine (Aug 31, 2009)

Microsoft has never hidden the fact that they wanted to control the living room. They made that clear when they announced the original Xbox.

It always seemed strange to me that Directv would have anything to do with them, but I suppose money talks, and Microsoft is no stranger to throwing money at every opportunity they see.

But perhaps with ESPN going to Xbox Live, and potentially pulling people away from the cable/sat companies, we'll see a drop in the price of ESPN, or maybe even an a la carte offering, which would be welcomed, imo.


----------



## ShapeGSX (Sep 17, 2006)

For the moment, you still need to be subscribed to a TV service in order to use the XBox video services like ESPN. So this is not a cord cutting tool. Frankly, though, neither is HBO GO on Roku.


----------



## Darcaine (Aug 31, 2009)

ShapeGSX said:


> For the moment, you still need to be subscribed to a TV service in order to use the XBox video services like ESPN. So this is not a cord cutting tool. Frankly, though, neither is HBO GO on Roku.


True, but how long will that last? Not very long IMO.


----------



## dualsub2006 (Aug 29, 2007)

"ShapeGSX" said:


> For the moment, you still need to be subscribed to a TV service in order to use the XBox video services like ESPN. So this is not a cord cutting tool. Frankly, though, neither is HBO GO on Roku.


That's true, but MS spent the second half of last year talking about pay tv on the Xbox, then in January's said that it would be too expensive.

It might be easier to negotiate lower fees with the pay networks if they could show several million active users.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

Darcaine said:


> True, but how long will that last? Not very long IMO.


People said the same thing 5 years ago and we're still not close.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

ShapeGSX said:


> For the moment, you still need to be subscribed to a TV service in order to use the XBox video services like ESPN. So this is not a cord cutting tool. Frankly, though, neither is HBO GO on Roku.





Darcaine said:


> True, but how long will that last? Not very long IMO.


Access to HBOGO content will _always_ require a subsrciption, whether through a cable or sat provider, or delivered directly via streaming. Why would/should HBO _ever_ give away their programming?


----------



## dualsub2006 (Aug 29, 2007)

"Shades228" said:


> People said the same thing 5 years ago and we're still not close.


Watch ESPN, HBO Go, MAX Go, CNN app, TruTV, Showtime Anytime and soon enough Starz. All networks with streaming apps. We're much closer to over the top now than 5 years ago.

Maybe it doesn't ever happen, but MS has the money to make it happen if they want to.


----------



## dualsub2006 (Aug 29, 2007)

"Nick" said:


> Why would/should HBO ever give away their programming?


Nobody said that they should.


----------



## Darcaine (Aug 31, 2009)

Nick said:


> Access to HBOGO content will _always_ require a subsrciption, whether through a cable or sat provider, or delivered directly via streaming. Why would/should HBO _ever_ give away their programming?


My point wasn't that it wouldn't require a subscription. My point is that in the near future HBO/ESPN will target consumers directly a la Netflix.

You are of course right, there will always be a price to pay, but forcing linear tv subscriptions to access HBO Go, ESPN, etc won't last past this decade IMO.


----------



## Darcaine (Aug 31, 2009)

dualsub2006 said:


> Watch ESPN, HBO Go, MAX Go, CNN app, TruTV, Showtime Anytime and soon enough Starz. All networks with streaming apps. We're much closer to over the top now than 5 years ago.
> 
> Maybe it doesn't ever happen, but MS has the money to make it happen if they want to.


Exactly, and if any company has the desire to, it'll be MS.


----------



## shuye (Oct 20, 2008)

Darcaine said:


> True, but how long will that last? Not very long IMO.


The wait is over - I saw over the weekend that you can now stream videos, free (with Prime account) and paid through Amazon on the Xbox now.


----------



## Darcaine (Aug 31, 2009)

shuye said:


> The wait is over - I saw over the weekend that you can now stream videos, free (with Prime account) and paid through Amazon on the Xbox now.


Wait, do you mean HBO shows are on Amazon Primes streaming service, or just that Amazon primes streaming service is available to Xbox Live subscribers?


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

Could be that HBO wanted too much per subscriber for DIRECTV customers to access it on Roku?


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

dualsub2006 said:


> Watch ESPN, HBO Go, MAX Go, CNN app, TruTV, Showtime Anytime and soon enough Starz. All networks with streaming apps. We're much closer to over the top now than 5 years ago.
> 
> Maybe it doesn't ever happen, but MS has the money to make it happen if they want to.


We're really not but the companies are doing well to provide more options to make their brands more relevant.



Darcaine said:


> Wait, do you mean HBO shows are on Amazon Primes streaming service, or just that Amazon primes streaming service is available to Xbox Live subscribers?


There are some HBO shows but nothing current. If you don't mind being a couple of seasons behind it might be ok for you. It's a supplemental service not a take over service. Amazon wants to make money and not be targeted by IPS's for bandwidth issues.

Of all the services Prime gives you the most for your dollar due to the shipping upgrade as well and the fact that you can allow people in your house to have individual log ins unlike Netflix.


----------



## ponchsox (Jun 2, 2012)

I wonder how many people just cancelled HBO after the Game of Thrones finale?


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

ponchsox said:


> I wonder how many people just cancelled HBO after the Game of Thrones finale?


Less than those who called to add it because of Game of Thrones I'd bet.


----------



## dualsub2006 (Aug 29, 2007)

"Justin23" said:


> Could be that HBO wanted too much per subscriber for DIRECTV customers to access it on Roku?


Dish has it, so I'd find that hard to believe.

D* hasn't been shy about saying that fees are too high. If money had been the object they could have, should have and probably would have said so.

They gave me several reasons why and none were about money.


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

Perfect example...the "Watch ESPN" app. D* doesn't have access to it but other companies do. Probably comes down to $$$


----------



## dualsub2006 (Aug 29, 2007)

"Justin23" said:


> Perfect example...the "Watch ESPN" app. D* doesn't have access to it but other companies do. Probably comes down to $$$


That's definitely a money issue, as in how much ESPN wants for the Watch service AND the Longhorn Network.


----------



## MCHuf (Oct 9, 2011)

ShapeGSX said:


> For the moment, you still need to be subscribed to a TV service in order to use the XBox video services like ESPN. So this is not a cord cutting tool. Frankly, though, neither is HBO GO on Roku.


You don't need a pay-tv subscription to get ESPN 3. I had U-Verse for internet/phone and ota for tv and ATT gave me ESPN 3(60). I now have Wide Open West for those services and E* for tv and I still get ESPN 3.

If you need to be current and willing to pay on a per episode basis, you can watch quite a bit current pay-tv (non-premium) programming through Amazon. So the landscape is slowly but surely changing. For example if you subscribe to a particular show, Amazon gives you a 5% discount. So a 16 episode series will cost you $45.44 in hd and $30.24 in sd. Pretty pricey, but if you only follow 10 - 15 non-ota network series, you can save money compared to a full pay-tv package. Add in Netflix for $16 per month (streaming + 1 disc by mail) plus ota, you can cut your tv costs while tailoring your tv package to your tastes. Of course the weakness of this plan is sports programing. But for most people, life is all about compromises.


----------



## Darcaine (Aug 31, 2009)

Here's a couple interesting articles on the potential future of tv.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090324/0004194221.shtml

http://www.businessinsider.com/tv-business-collapse-2012-6

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120604/04210719187/duh-tv-business-is-verge-collapse.shtml

Things aren't exactly looking bright for the future of the legacy TV model.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

Darcaine said:


> Here's a couple interesting articles on the potential future of tv.
> 
> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090324/0004194221.shtml
> 
> ...


All of these compare TV to newspapers online. It's not the same at all. Newspapers died because the majority of people stopped caring about newspapers. They just wanted blogs and articles. Real journalism is left as a fine dining experience now and most people just go for the fast food of bloggers with an opinion(much like all of these articles). These people don't care because all it is about is page hits not anything real.

Everyone said youtube was going to be the death of the TV model because people could make their own shows and people would subscribe to them. How's that working out so far?

One day, far away, IPTV will be the mainstream. It will be because the technology will exist for people to provide it at a cost that's reasonable and everyone will be connected. However that model is a blip on the radar. Content providers cannot go out on their own right now. If they could they wouldn't be taking their channels down for $.30 a subscriber.

Now the real issue is people have this garden of eden mantra about IPTV. It will give you everything you want and you will pay next to nothing for it. How's that working out for online retail?

I've said this before and I'm sure I'll say it again. For every reason that you want something to happen because you say it will cost less is another reason why the content providers won't do it. They're not there for you. They're there for the shareholders who demand profits.


----------



## dualsub2006 (Aug 29, 2007)

"Shades228" said:


> I've said this before and I'm sure I'll say it again. For every reason that you want something to happen because you say it will cost less is another reason why the content providers won't do it. They're not there for you. They're there for the shareholders who demand profits.


I don't know who this is directed at, but MS wasn't talking about cheap, over the top content, they were talking about becoming a pay TV provider and delivering your subscription via Xbox Live.

You're right, people have these pipe dreams about over the top, but that's not the point here.

The point is that the best guess for why D* blocks HBO Go on the Roku was that D* sees Roku as a threat, but allows it on the Xbox because they see MS as a partner.

That partner, Microsoft, has a stated goal of winning the living room with the Xbox. As late as December 2011 they talked openly about wanting to provide pay TV networks via Xbox Live.

D* and other MSOs are allowing MS to gauge interest in pay TV services on Xbox Live with HBO Go and Watch ESPN, but the Roku gets blocked.

Roku doesn't sell TV packages and Roku doesn't deliver any of the content that people watch on the device, but they are a threat. MS is a partner.

Meanwhile, D* welcomed the dirtiest player in the game to the table. Pipe dreams aside, IF Microsoft decides to offer pay TV service through Xbox Live then traditional MSOs are going to have a serious problem.

And D* won't have anyone to blame for their losses but themselves. And they'll STILL block HBO Go access on the Roku.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

dualsub2006 said:


> I don't know who this is directed at, but MS wasn't talking about cheap, over the top content, they were talking about becoming a pay TV provider and delivering your subscription via Xbox Live.
> 
> You're right, people have these pipe dreams about over the top, but that's not the point here.
> 
> ...


Microsoft is not attempting to become MVPD. They are attempting to become a portal for other companies. Hence the Xinfinity and FIOS apps rather than a link to a bunch of channels independently.


----------



## Beerstalker (Feb 9, 2009)

Actually Microsoft was looking to be a provider, much like Apple has been. But as far as I know both have backed off on it for now. They wanted to have channels/apps that you could subscribe to directly from them. So if you wanted HBO you would subscribe to HBO though them and get an HBO app on your X-Box/iPhone that gave you access to their content. Kind of like HBO Go now, but without having to have a subscription to it thought Comcast/DirecTV, etc.

They wanted to do it for all channels, so you could have a Fox app that might give you access to Fox shows, a USA app for USA shows, etc. They wanted to break it up so you only had to subscribe to the channels you watched. So if you only watch sports you could just subsribe to ESPN, Fox Sports, and stuff like that without having to subscribe to get ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox, USA, TBS, etc. But when they started talking to the actual channel providers they found out that it was going to cost them way more money than they expected, and the channel providers wanted to bundle everything together still like they try to do with the Major providers now. If you want ESPN you have to get ABC, Disney, etc. So they have dropped the idea for now, but I wouldn't be suprised if they try again in the future.


----------



## smitbret (Mar 27, 2011)

Beerstalker said:


> Actually Microsoft was looking to be a provider, much like Apple has been. But as far as I know both have backed off on it for now. They wanted to have channels/apps that you could subscribe to directly from them. So if you wanted HBO you would subscribe to HBO though them and get an HBO app on your X-Box/iPhone that gave you access to their content. Kind of like HBO Go now, but without having to have a subscription to it thought Comcast/DirecTV, etc.
> 
> They wanted to do it for all channels, so you could have a Fox app that might give you access to Fox shows, a USA app for USA shows, etc. They wanted to break it up so you only had to subscribe to the channels you watched. So if you only watch sports you could just subsribe to ESPN, Fox Sports, and stuff like that without having to subscribe to get ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox, USA, TBS, etc. But when they started talking to the actual channel providers they found out that it was going to cost them way more money than they expected, and the channel providers wanted to bundle everything together still like they try to do with the Major providers now. If you want ESPN you have to get ABC, Disney, etc. So they have dropped the idea for now, but I wouldn't be suprised if they try again in the future.


Hopefully, this all lead to a la carte programming from the major providers.


----------



## dualsub2006 (Aug 29, 2007)

"smitbret" said:


> Hopefully, this all lead to a la carte programming from the major providers.


Do you realize how much that would cost you?


----------



## dualsub2006 (Aug 29, 2007)

"Beerstalker" said:


> Actually Microsoft was looking to be a provider, much like Apple has been. But as far as I know both have backed off on it for now.


MS did want to become a provider. Google it, they stated openly that they were in discussions with the major pay TV networks to bring them to Xbox Live. It isn't a belief that they were about to do it, they were trying to work it out.

Yes, Microsoft said that they were giving up because it was too expensive. Given how much they've already lost on the Xbox I would be shocked if they would be willing to let a little thing like money stop their goal to own the living room.

My own belief is that after MS can show millions of users watching these pay TV offerings provided by D* and others, they believe that they will be in a better position to negotiate rates. I'll be stunned if MS doesn't try again with pay TV. And soon.

Meanwhile, D* still blocks HBO Go access on the Roku.


----------



## dualsub2006 (Aug 29, 2007)

Well, after spending a few months working around the fact that D* blocks HBO Go on the Roku, I see now that my local cable company Insight/Time Warner now offers HBO Go streaming that D* blocks. 

I've made a call this morning to see what my cost would be to move all of my movie channels to Insight and how the two combined will affect my total TV expense. 

I actually wouldn't mind having a few of the new Tivo DVRs. The one I encountered recently was really nice, and much faster than I expected.


----------

