• 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

The “showtime” could be coming to a end for Showtime…

Y2kTheNewOldies said:
www.yahoo.com

Paramount Is Considering Merger of Showtime Streaming Service With Paramount+ (Report)

Paramount+ recently announced a bundle option with Showtime's streaming service
www.yahoo.com www.yahoo.com

Not really shocking but expected when considering how to attract an audience today
Click to expand...

Almost certain we'll be seeing streaming services team up together to pull ahead of the competition. These super streamers, say a Hulu joining up with Amazon Prime Video, or a third or more. The consumer would be the winner here, no longer having to sign up and pay monthly fees for a multitude of streamers. To have a huge amount of content under one roof, and pay just one subscription fee is something we all wish for. The streamers who do this, will be also be the winners.
 
Interesting decision. Showtime is a heritage brand in the Viacom system going back almost 50 years. But the name of the company now is Paramount, so that's going to be the emphasis. Showtime's 28 million subscribed households get added to Paramount + 43 million.
 
This would be a shocker to the pay-TV world. Showtime has been one of the heritage names of pay cable since the 1980s. Would this mean ALL of the Showtime networks go bye-bye from cable/satellite?
 
The question is, is there still a place on cable for "premium" networks like HBO, Showtime, Cinemax, Starz and similar? Back in the day if cable subscribers wanted premium, full-length movies with no commercial interruptions, plus things like the occasional boxing match, they paid extra $$ to subscribe to one of these services. Now with the internet and so many streaming services, it seems cable-based premium movie providers are somewhat antiquated. Now anyone can watch nearly any movie they want, sometimes on the same day it's released in theaters, at any time they want via the web or streamer.
 
Last edited:
KilowattKat said:
Almost certain we'll be seeing streaming services team up together to pull ahead of the competition. These super streamers, say a Hulu joining up with Amazon Prime Video, or a third or more. The consumer would be the winner here, no longer having to sign up and pay monthly fees for a multitude of streamers. To have a huge amount of content under one roof, and pay just one subscription fee is something we all wish for. The streamers who do this, will be also be the winners.
Click to expand...
Agreed and well-stated. We're already seeing the beginnings of various streamers merging, combining or offering "BOGO" deals to subscribers - and in my opinion it's what must happen. First, the reason people dumped cable and satellite and went with a combination of OTA antennas and streaming in the first place is to save money. That's completely negated if they now need to pay for multiple streaming services to get the content they want - especially those like Discovery+ which one must subscribe to in order to view older episodes and shows that were once available free on their website. Second, at least for now, there just isn't enough $$ to support all these different streaming services in their current model, especially since every major TV network, sports provider, RSN, movie service and even companies like Amazon and Apple have their own streaming services, all of which cost $$ - Especially if subscribers want commercial-free content.
 
Mikey Radio said:
Agreed and well-stated. We're already seeing the beginnings of various streamers merging, combining or offering "BOGO" deals to subscribers - and in my opinion it's what must happen. First, the reason people dumped cable and satellite and went with a combination of OTA antennas and streaming in the first place is to save money. That's completely negated if they now need to pay for multiple streaming services to get the content they want - especially those like Discovery+ which one must subscribe to in order to view older episodes and shows that were once available free on their website. Second, at least for now, there just isn't enough $$ to support all these different streaming services in their current model, especially since every major TV network, sports provider, RSN, movie service and even companies like Amazon and Apple have their own streaming services, all of which cost $$ - Especially if subscribers want commercial-free content.
Click to expand...
I agree with an OTA Antenna and various streaming options one can have all the content to watch.
 
Mikey Radio said:
The question is, is there still a place on cable for "premium" networks like HBO, Showtime, Cinemax, Starz and similar? Back in the day if cable subscribers wanted premium, full-length movies with no commercial interruptions, plus things like the occasional boxing match, they paid extra $$ to subscribe to one of these services. Now with the internet and so many streaming services, it seems cable-based premium movie providers are somewhat antiquated. Now anyone can watch nearly any movie they want, sometimes on the same day it's released in theaters, at any time they want via the web or streamer.
Click to expand...

I question it myself in this day in age...

Showtime still does some boxing and MMA events, but HBO has been out of the live sports business for the last couple of years now. Cinemax has been treated like a non-factor by HBO, so much so that in the last several years, most TV providers now offer Cinemax and its multiplex channels just as a separate add-on, as opposed to being offering in a "premiums" pack (with HBO and the others) or in a higher-end package (i.e. "Gold" or similar-type TV packages). Also, even before HBO Now/Go morphed into HBO Max, the Cinemax app was/is only available on mobile devices, and not on Fire TV, Roku, or Apple TV. It's along the same way Showtime treats The Movie Channel and Flix...only the traditional TV providers carry those, and they're not offered on any of streaming TV providers as of now.

I just think at this point, the big premium networks should just consolidate all of their secondary channels and shut them down. The multiplex HBOs, Showtimes (plus the TMCs and Epix), Cinemaxes, Starzes (including the Encore and Indie/Movie/RetroPlex channels), Epixes (including the ScreenPix channels), have all served their usefulness, but with each network's library of programming readily available through your TV provider's on-demand component as well as their own individual streaming apps, what's the point of keeping these channels around other than a cash-grab and eating-up bandwidth?
 
ShawnHill1 said:
I just think at this point, the big premium networks should just consolidate all of their secondary channels and shut them down.
Click to expand...

But that would decrease value. Today, people are looking for value when they subscribe to a package. Which one gives me the most of what I want. You need to have additional channels in your package to show potential subscribers that they're getting more content than the other packages.
 
Don't tell the 70+ year old demographics who watch Encore Westerns. My (now late) father was one of them.
 
Y2kTheNewOldies said:

Now Official Showtime is rebranded as Paramount + with showtime.
Click to expand...

I sort of saw this coming, especially when we were talking about our 2023 predictions on the National TV page. I'd figured that one of these companies were going to do some sort of consolidation and/or merging of certain channels and streaming services.

Unlike the HBOMax and Starz apps, though, there are separate Showtime apps although it's the same exact content--the "Anytime" app for those who receive Showtime through a TV provider, and the self-titled one that's a standalone offering. Assuming Paramount's network apps (CBS, MTV, BET, VH1, etc.) will remain for those with TV Everywhere authentications, it's probably likely Showtime Anytime remains as is for the time being.
 
Last edited:
It would be better if peacock merged with paramount/showtime for skyshowtime here (that name would work better and incorporate them better.)
 
tall_guy1 said:
It would be better if peacock merged with paramount/showtime for skyshowtime here (that name would work better and incorporate them better.)
Click to expand...
How likely are we to see any two of the big OTA networks merging for content subscription sales? They are what you would call "vehement enemies" or "aggressive competitors".

Were it not for rivalries going back more than a half a century (longer if you include radio), it would make sense for the Big Three (who do the bulk of the scripted content) forming a single entity and competing for revenue shares based on views.
 
DavidEduardo said:
How likely are we to see any two of the big OTA networks merging for content subscription sales? They are what you would call "vehement enemies" or "aggressive competitors".

Were it not for rivalries going back more than a half a century (longer if you include radio), it would make sense for the Big Three (who do the bulk of the scripted content) forming a single entity and competing for revenue shares based on views.
Click to expand...
Overseas they combined the two and used the name SkyShowtime.
 
tall_guy1 said:
Overseas they combined the two and used the name SkyShowtime.
Click to expand...
But is that not a Comcast company that bought the rights to the content in association with Paramount?
 
DavidEduardo said:
How likely are we to see any two of the big OTA networks merging for content subscription sales? They are what you would call "vehement enemies" or "aggressive competitors".

Were it not for rivalries going back more than a half a century (longer if you include radio), it would make sense for the Big Three (who do the bulk of the scripted content) forming a single entity and competing for revenue shares based on views.
Click to expand...
I'll say. 96 years!
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom