Verizon Communications is gearing up to enter the ever-growing online streaming TV market, alongside competitors like DirecTV Now, Sling TV, PlayStation Vue, as well as soon-to-launch bundles from Hulu and YouTube. Verizon is currently securing streaming rights from TV networks ahead of a nationwide launch of its cord-cutting service, which is said to show up for customers as soon as this summer, according to people familiar with the company's plans (via Bloomberg).
"Dozens" of channels will be on offer, and the service will act as a separate entity from Verizon's own teen-based go90 video app and FiOS Home TV offering. In terms of cost, the sources said that Verizon will enter the market with a bundle that runs somewhere between Sling TV's basic $20/month package and DirecTV Now's $35/month starting price. Specific channel offerings, and the amount that will be available, were not divulged.
Verizon’s preparations highlight the growing pressure to provide a cheaper, smaller package of TV networks to viewers who are turned off by a glut of programming available on traditional cable packages. Dish Network Corp. introduced a similar service, Sling TV, two years ago, and AT&T Inc.’s DirecTV Now came out late last year. Sling’s basic package costs $20 a month, while DirecTV Now starts at $35 for 60 channels. Verizon’s will probably be similarly priced, the people said.
It's expected for Verizon's bundle to follow the usual availability on platforms like iOS, Apple TV, and other set-top streaming boxes including Roku devices. According to the people familiar with Verizon's plans, it's currently "unclear" whether or not customers will have to be tied into Verizon's phone services to access the TV bundle. AT&T's DirecTV Now doesn't have such a restriction, but customers do get a discount if they sign up for both phone and TV services.
Although there are already plenty of cord-cutting options for users to choose from at present, more are coming down the line this year, including an anticipated launch this spring of Hulu's online TV service. At one point Apple was hoping to become a competitor in the live-streaming service field with its own dedicated cord-cutting bundle, but rumors of that service died down after news came out that the company was "frustrated" by its repeated inability to reach mutually beneficial terms with network programmers.
Top Rated Comments
In my opinion it's half baked. I'll be canceling. If someone can manage comprehensive video media streaming (all TV and movies) for a reasonable price I'd subscribe but as it sits the traditional cable/satellite model is overpriced for an out dated experience and their attempts at streaming skinny bundles seem like they know they need to be present at the table but don't care to do it right. I'll stick with subscribing to apps for the few channels that do things well (HBO and Showtime I'm looking at you) along with Netflix for a fairly broad, generic back catalog and iTunes for the specific TV series and movies I want.
edit: also now that I've been a cord cutter so long and have become accustomed to watching a show uninterrupted commercials are jarring. And no "jump" button to swap between two shows/channels. And the home screen isn't smart enough to focus to shows I've told it I like. And the show listings on each channel are just alphabetical rather than weighting popularity at all (do I really need to scroll through 200 HBO series to get to West World?). and and and...
* high quality programming, we need to get over the idea that we can have it for a fraction of what we pay now. OR if we really want...
* a huge discount to our monthly bill, we need to learn to love low-budget productions like reality TV and youtube-level programs.
Nobody yet has presented a win:win business model that keeps all of the high quality stuff coming, especially commercial free, AND makes it possible for the source of all of that money that pays for it to get a hair cut of 75%-95%. Instead, there's just a bunch of us that will use ambiguous terms like "reasonable" to rationalize a delusion of keeping quality the same while we pay so much less.
Try that anywhere else though: I'd like a more "reasonable" price for iPhone 8. Instead of $1000, I'd like it to cost me $100 or $50. And I'd like a loaded Macbook Pro. Instead of $3000, I'd like it to cost me $300 or $150. As soon as we read either of those, we likely & immediately realize the ridiculousness of such wants. Yet, with this kind of product, "we" are quick to believe there is room for up to 95% monthly fee cuts but still expect to keep the same quality & volume of favored programming coming to our screens.
edit: just looked at their show list, I did like limitless but it was on Netflix. Everything else is just blah to me.
Did I say that? Or anything about that?
Did I say that? Or anything about that?
Did I write one word counter to this concept? Not one.
You are making up counterpoint to no point I made.
I also didn't argue that the sky is green or the earth is flat and so on.
That IS the issue I identified and basically faulted... not the other stuff you've brought up.
If you do a automobile analogy, it would be better to talk about all the individual parts that make up the Mercedes. You can buy the parts separate if you want to, and customize the car how you want it. Individually the parts would cost more, some parts would be subjectively more desirable, and some could be considered unnecessary. Similarly to how a la carte TV Channels would be.
In many cases they already are in iTunes. You can buy whole series of many different TV shows.