• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Media Companies Are Ready to Sell. Does Anyone Want to Buy?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Funny enough, Rich Greenfield of Lightshed Partners is outright saying that it is pure folly for the studios to even have these streaming services in the first place and published their findings hours before the WBD-Par talks broke: merging is not the answer, either scale back or cut bait.
Everybody’s got an opinion. Look what CNBC is running alongside Greenfield:

IMG_8778.jpeg
 
Well, then, just let them fall then. If the merger does happen, it takes a while for everything to get off the ground. And Amazon has way more problems than WBD does as a corporation.
Jeff Bezos is among the richest people in the world. Amazon can afford to run Prime, Freevee, Twitch and MGM regardless of their performances. And I haven't heard anything about any of them struggling.
 
Jeff Bezos is among the richest people in the world. Amazon can afford to run Prime,
Not related. Bezos owns 9% of Amazon, but he has a BOD and officers running it day to day. And the other 90% of the shares have owners that want a well run company that provides a good return on their investment.
Freevee, Twitch and MGM regardless of their performances. And I haven't heard anything about any of them struggling.
None are profitable, it appears. Like all these new media startups, they plan on losing money for half a decade while the "build the brand". They have work to do asI have no idea what FreeVee and Twitch offer nor how to get them.
 
They have work to do asI have no idea what FreeVee and Twitch offer nor how to get them.
Twitch is at Twitch Have not ever watched anything on it, or tried accessing it on my Roku boxes, if that is even possible.

FreeVee is an app on Roku. We’ve watched a few shows on it; has dynamically inserted commercials of either :90 or 2:00 length. Haven’t tried any other access methods.
 
Twitch is at Twitch Have not ever watched anything on it, or tried accessing it on my Roku boxes, if that is even possible.

FreeVee is an app on Roku. We’ve watched a few shows on it; has dynamically inserted commercials of either :90 or 2:00 length. Haven’t tried any other access methods.
That's what I meant... I know what they are, but have no idea what content they offer... so I have no incentive to explore their website. They have not gotten out any information that would tempt anyone in my family to take the next step.
 
Not related. Bezos owns 9% of Amazon, but he has a BOD and officers running it day to day. And the other 90% of the shares have owners that want a well run company that provides a good return on their investment.

None are profitable, it appears. Like all these new media startups, they plan on losing money for half a decade while the "build the brand". They have work to do asI have no idea what FreeVee and Twitch offer nor how to get them.
Max apparently was profitable for WBD as their streaming side saw a surplus. Not sure how with their expensive library though.
 
One thing I don't understand - why none of these TV (type) show and movie streaming services (probably Hulu & Netflix) also offer music/audio only streaming.

It might reduce churn to have a tier for audio only streaming (maybe one with ads, one without) for younger Smartphone users (and since some of the TV shows and movies have surround sound soundtracks, maybe the some of the audio only content could be provided in surround sound too).

(could put Spotify and Pandora out of business)


Kirk Bayne
 
FreeVee is an app on Roku. We’ve watched a few shows on it; has dynamically inserted commercials of either :90 or 2:00 length. Haven’t tried any other access methods.

FreeVee (formerly IMDbTV) is also a tier on Amazon Prime itself. On that platform, the commercial breaks can be as little as :20. Once in a while, an episode runs commercial-free. Whether that's in error or nobody bought, I don't know.

The continuation of the Bosch series, which was an Amazon original and ad-free, Bosch: Legacy, is on FreeVee, so I have exactly that amount of familiarity with it.


Beyond Bosch: Legacy and a couple of other originals (a continuation of Judge Judy?) it looks like Amazon pretty much just took their Classic TV library, which used to either be free to watch or for rent (depending on the show), added Top Gear to it and moved it all over to FreeVee to run with commercials.
 
Last edited:
One thing I don't understand - why none of these TV (type) show and movie streaming services (probably Hulu & Netflix) also offer music/audio only streaming.

It might reduce churn to have a tier for audio only streaming (maybe one with ads, one without) for younger Smartphone users (and since some of the TV shows and movies have surround sound soundtracks, maybe the some of the audio only content could be provided in surround sound too).

(could put Spotify and Pandora out of business)


Kirk Bayne

Amazon Prime does.

It's a crowded field and the current major players (Apple Music, Spotify, YouTube Music, Amazon Prime Music) as well as some smaller ones (Tidal, Qobuz) aren't especially vulnerable.
 
Last edited:
Someone dressed up as Shrek wouldn't be the same as a Furry, would it? I don't understand the whole 'Bronie' or 'Furry' culture. I had understood those who identified as Furries were mainly socially awkward folks who felt more at ease sexually and socially when contained in some animal costume. I'd heard on the radio a couple of years ago about some local community having a 'Furry' convention.
According to WebMD:
"One-third of the furry community identifies as exclusively heterosexual, and furries are five times as likely to identify as LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, tanssexual, queer, questioning, intersex, asexual, pansexual) than the general population."
 
Someone dressed up as Shrek wouldn't be the same as a Furry, would it? I don't understand the whole 'Bronie' or 'Furry' culture. I had understood those who identified as Furries were mainly socially awkward folks who felt more at ease sexually and socially when contained in some animal costume. I'd heard on the radio a couple of years ago about some local community having a 'Furry' convention.
According to WebMD:
"One-third of the furry community identifies as exclusively heterosexual, and furries are five times as likely to identify as LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, tanssexual, queer, questioning, intersex, asexual, pansexual) than the general population."
That was just my reaction to it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Back
Top Bottom