• 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.
What do you mean by "current definition?" Big tech didn't get to be big by buying the competition. They kept creating new products and adding new businesses to their existing business, so they never faced government approval.
But wouldn't buying/merging other tech companies be considered growing the tech company? Facebook acquired something like 91 companies and rolled them all under Meta(tm). Most notable are: Instagram, Friendfeed, Threadsy, WhatsApp, TheFind, and Twistedpixel Games.
 
(I swear to God the avatar just makes it worse....)

Are you going to really make me one more time explain that launching a streaming platform at the exact same moment as other major competitors and spending billions to instantly attain the scale that Netflix and Hulu had 15 or more years to attain, including loss-leader pricing to drive subscribers while losing as much as $3 billion a year is the problem?

Because that would be like the tenth time I've done that.
But how did WB manage to avoid that?
 
But wouldn't buying/merging other tech companies be considered growing the tech company? Facebook acquired something like 91 companies and rolled them all under Meta(tm). Most notable are: Instagram, Friendfeed, Threadsy, WhatsApp, TheFind, and Twistedpixel Games.
Meta even launched Threads using the Instagram infrastructure!
 
But how did WB manage to avoid that?
Oh, well, this is only the third time I've had to say this, so I'll call it a win---they cut costs.

 
Oh, well, this is only the third time I've had to say this, so I'll call it a win---they cut costs.

I guess that makes sense. I was thinking CBS in 2019 wanted to re-merge with Viacom to launch a streaming platform with the content, since everyone else was. Perhaps they thought their linear assets would be more of treasure.
 

"But that’s not enough in 2019. The next step for Redstone, according to people who work for her: trying to find other companies to merge with her newly merged company...while a combined CBS and Viacom is bigger, it won’t be nearly big enough to compete with the really big video companies. "

So apparently, she was trying to merge with someone else again and even in 2019 acknowledged it would not be big enough to compete.
 
So apparently, she was trying to merge with someone else again and even in 2019 acknowledged it would not be big enough to compete.
Pretty much from day one, larger publicly traded companies are always keeping their eye on potential acquisitions or merger opportunities whether they eat, or are eaten. Most of the scanning and potential discussions are purely informational or informal and likely never come to fruition.
That's just the way business works.
 
Heard this on the radio this morning. Subscription cancellations at various video streaming services increased.


Yeah, but a 6.3% churn rate isn't epic. Stand the figure on its head---93.7% of streaming customers stayed put in November.

And it's important to note that unlike, say, SiriusXM, where a cancellation usually is a cancellation ("I don't need this"), a chunk of these cancellations are people like me starting to be a bit wiser with our bucks and only paying for the streamers we're actively watching---open to and in some cases expecting to re-subscribe when the next seasons of the shows we care about drop.
 
Pretty much from day one, larger publicly traded companies are always keeping their eye on potential acquisitions or merger opportunities whether they eat, or are eaten. Most of the scanning and potential discussions are purely informational or informal and likely never come to fruition.
That's just the way business works.

Exactly.

In fact, attaining scale through mergers and acquisitions before diving into the streaming pool would have been the better move for Paramount, NBCUniversal, Warners, Disney and Apple (if Apple wanted to be a major rather than a boutique---which early on, they signaled they did).

They were going up against already-established Amazon, Netflix and Hulu (and Hulu, by that point, was either going to be wholly-owned by FOX or Disney---the only question was which).
 
Last edited:
Yeah, but a 6.3% churn rate isn't epic. Stand the figure on its head---93.7% of streaming customers stayed put in November.

And it's important to note that unlike, say, SiriusXM, where a cancellation usually is a cancellation ("I don't need this"), a chunk of these cancellations are people like me starting to be a bit wiser with our bucks and only paying for the streamers we're actively watching---open to and in some cases expecting to re-subscribe when the next seasons of the shows we care about drop.
Okay, but it's still a 6.3% loss of customers, and it apparently is increasing. And the article stated that 24% of customers cancelled at least two services over the past year. That's a lot of streaming consumers ditching a service.

Maybe the churn is built into the business plan. But if streaming services are beginning to struggle with profitability, I can't see how an average 6.3% loss of customers is a positive, especially when the 'churn' seems to be increasing.
 
Yeah, but a 6.3% churn rate isn't epic. Stand the figure on its head---93.7% of streaming customers stayed put in November.

And it's important to note that unlike, say, SiriusXM, where a cancellation usually is a cancellation ("I don't need this"), a chunk of these cancellations are people like me starting to be a bit wiser with our bucks and only paying for the streamers we're actively watching---open to and in some cases expecting to re-subscribe when the next seasons of the shows we care about drop.
I always find those types of articles interesting. A few times I saw pieces like the one Boombox posted - That had a headline about how all the streaming services across the board have or are raising their prices, that they're all having a tough go of it, or having to merge or package with other streamers or dropping their streaming services completely, or experiencing a mass exodus of customers, etc. While some of those articles were interesting and solidly written and I have sometimes posted them on Radio Discussions as I thought they'd be of interest here, in most cases I found that the headline didn't represent the facts and information in the actual article, that the headline and in some cases the article was sensationalism rather than well-researched and objectively written, or it was so slanted or subjective that it couldn't really be taken seriously.
 
Okay, but it's still a 6.3% loss of customers, and it apparently is increasing.

What the article doesn't tell you is whether it's a net loss of customers or made up for with new subscribers. It's just a cancellation rate minus context.

And the article stated that 24% of customers cancelled at least two services over the past year. That's a lot of streaming consumers ditching a service.

But not any one service---all of them, at different points over the year, with no accounting as to how many came back.

I contributed to that statistic. Hell, I probably skewed it high. Last year, I cancelled:


  • Disney+ (grandkids moved 2,500 miles away---I got it when they premiered "Hamilton" and kept it because I figured the kids would be at our house a lot.)
  • Hulu (finished Season 5 of "What We Do In The Shadows". We'll be back when Season 6 drops.)
  • Peacock (finished Season 1 of "Poker Face". We'll be back when Season 2 drops.)
  • Paramount+ (finished Season 2 of "Yellowjackets". We'll be back when Season 3 drops.)
  • AMC+ (finished Season 1 of "Cooper's Bar", which is moving to another platform. "Better Call Saul" ended. Will renew for "Dark Winds", but after we finish some stuff on other platforms.)
  • Starz (finished Season 2 of "Shining Vale" and they've cancelled it and removed it from the platform. That would land them on my FTG list, but "Party Down" Season 4 will probably drop this fall and I'll be back.)

That's six platforms. Disney+ is the only one I wouldn't be likely to renew, except it and Hulu are going to be one platform this year, and I'll go back to Hulu.

We're actively watching shows on Netflix, Amazon and Max. As long as we are, I'll keep those subscriptions. Even if we weren't actively watching anything on Amazon, it comes with our Prime membership).

We're not actively watching anything on Apple+ at the moment, but my Apple One bundle (Music, TV and storage) makes it make sense to keep while waiting for new seasons of "The Morning Show", "Severance" and "Schmigadoon!". There's also a rumored new season of "Big Little Lies".

Maybe the churn is built into the business plan. But if streaming services are beginning to struggle with profitability, I can't see how an average 6.3% loss of customers is a positive, especially when the 'churn' seems to be increasing.

Streaming services aren't "beginning" to struggle with profitability. Amazon, Netflix and Hulu are all profitable and have been. Every other major has been in the red since day one and only Max has fixed that and become profitable via some very aggressive cuts.
 
Last edited:
Heard this on the radio this morning. Subscription cancellations at various video streaming services increased.

What you're witnessing is the free market at work. Want to sign up for Peacock for a few months for Big Ten football and cancel thereafter? Or Paramount+ to binge watch one specific Star Trek show for one month? Or Disney+ just to watch Loki and then cancel after a month? Now you can!

Unless streamers remove the option of cancelling after one month, which is ridiculously counterproductive, the churn issue will never go away and be just a fact of life. Oddly enough, that chart I shared way earlier in this thread showed that Max, Discovery+ and Starz have comically high churn rates while Disney+, Hulu and Paramount+ are quite stable.
 
What you're witnessing is the free market at work. Want to sign up for Peacock for a few months for Big Ten football and cancel thereafter? Or Paramount+ to binge watch one specific Star Trek show for one month? Or Disney+ just to watch Loki and then cancel after a month? Now you can!
That's a great point as compared with the days of cable and satellite plans, whether basic or premium services like HBO, Showtime, etc. Consumers who are paying attention can binge-watch a particular series or pay ala carte for a streaming service, then cancel and sign up again when the next season of a series resumes. You can't do that with cable or satellite. Usually, it's a minimum one or two year commitment to get a lower rate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Back
Top Bottom