YoutubeTV / ESPN

[dorndawg]

Are these two clowns going to get their issues worked out? For anybody that doesn't know, their agreement comes to an end Friday. They're already saying they'll lower the bill $15, but I have very little reason to continue it and I'm guessing I will have lots of company.

 

[8dog]

College basketball season isnt a great time to threaten customers with the loss of espn. It may help my blood pressure

 

[dawgnabit]

I literally just read that email. And right before bowl season and college basketball…. If they don’t get it resolved then I’m done and might even go back to cable or try the Direct TV steaming. And I’ve loved YouTubeTV much more than the other streaming services but I just feel like they have more negotiation issues than anyone else.

 

[DawgInThe256]

Someone will likely blink before Friday. I've heard the ESPN channels make up a huge part of the cost of cable/streaming packages. Wonder if YTTV is threatening to move them to an optional package.

 

[missouridawg]

YouTubeTV can consider me as good as gone if they lose ESPN.

 

[MSUDC11]

I would be shocked if it doesn't get resolved pretty soon, YTTV needs Disney a lot more than Disney needs them. If they don't get it fixed by the time the bigger bowl games start airing, I'll probably just do a 7 day trial of Hulu Live or something like that to cover my bases.

 

[columbiadawg2]

But Bowl season, CFP, National Championship game might get a few folks to switch platforms I would think. I know I'll be dropping YTTV and adding another streaming service so I can watch bowl games and then the college football playoff in two weeks. And YTTV can be pretty headstrong, they've had a few deals struck in the 11th hour but look at Roku. They let that one expire and didn't get a new deal for a few months

 

[8dog]

I was joking but we are all seeing that cord cutting as a cost cutting measure just isnt tenable.

 

[hatfieldms]

That’s the beauty of streaming. Just cut it off and use another service until they figure it out

 

[ZombieKissinger]

To paraphrase Jim Barksdale, if you want to make money, you gotta bundle or unbundle, baby

 

[dorndawg]

That’s the beauty of streaming. Just cut it off and use another service until they figure it out

Completely disagree. I want to fire up the tv and watch it, and have the bill autodraft once a month. Sitting there figuring out what game or whatever is on what app, and toggling around apps - 17 it, I'll just read a book.

 

[columbiadawg2]

I got ya. Yep, I'm going to be headed back to cable here soon just because I'll be paying more in streaming services. I thought this was supposed to save money

 

[hatfieldms]

Your credit card still bills once a month. Just to another service. My point was with cable you jd contracts, and have to get new equipment installed and picked up to change services. Now you just down load Hulu live, or direct tv steaming and move on with no hassle

 

[patdog]

Me too. I'm plenty happy overpaying for Comcast/Xfinity. Yes, it costs more. But I never have to worry about picture or sound quality, buffering, which channels just got dropped. And I get a much more easy to use and functional DVR and remote.

 

[Smoked Toag]

I was joking but we are all seeing that cord cutting as a cost cutting measure just isnt tenable.

TRUTH

 

[ronpolk]

YouTubeTV can consider me as good as gone if they lose ESPN.

Me too… and I really like YouTube tv. But hell Espn is about the only reason I have any tv package. All the stuff the kids watch is on Disney plus or Netflix

 

[Coast_Dawg]

Cord cutting is absolutely cheaper than cable and satellite. It’s just not for the lazy.

 

[dorndawg]

Cord cutting is absolutely cheaper than cable and satellite. It’s just not for the lazy.

I was fine with Uverse when it worked. Got to where I had to overhaul it every other time I turned it on.

 

[Smoked Toag]

Cord cutting is absolutely cheaper than cable and satellite. It’s just not for the lazy.

Factually it's cheaper, just not enough to really move the needle. And you're right about lazy, the clunkiness of streaming drives me insane. I watch TV to be lazy, not to do more work and wait and around.

 

[dorndawg]

Factually it's cheaper, just not enough to really move the needle. And you're right about lazy, the clunkiness of streaming drives me insane. I watch TV to be lazy, not to do more work and wait and around.

With you all the way. Youtubetv was the best I'd come across until they started this nonsense.

 

[aTotal360]

I said it years ago. The ISPs and networks have an incestuous relationship. They aren't going to let you cut costs for very long. Tin foil on...I believed they allowed it short term to test markets. Now they can start extracting the normal rates (or more) since they know people will go for it.

 

[Coast_Dawg]

I’m sure lots of people will be happy when the ESPN stand alone service finally comes to reality in the next 5 years or so. I’m tired of the streaming services adding more and more channels that small groups want. In the end, it’s just cable/satellite without the equipment rentals.

 

[8dog]

Imagine how bad this would sucked 5 years ago when you couldnt just go online and find another provider…when almost everything was equipment and physical cable lines. The simplicity is the value in all this far moreso than dollars.

 

[mstateglfr]

I got ya. Yep, I'm going to be headed back to cable here soon just because I'll be paying more in streaming services. I thought this was supposed to save money

My family likes the content on Netflix, Paramount+, Disney+, Prime, Peacock, and HBOMax.

Those streaming services capture everything on FX, CBS, NBC, ABC, and Fox in addition to giving all the original content of those platforms.
If I get cable, then I have FX, CBS, NBC, ABC, and Fox...but not all the original content of those platforms.

Seems like a really easy decision. I think many people are in a similar boat.

 

[Go Budaw]

Somebody tell me why ESPN can’t make their own damn streaming platform already? Charge $15-$20 per month just for the ESPN’s. Why do they continue to tether their content to other providers when they can just go straight to the market? I wouldn’t get Sling, YTTV, or anything else if I had that direct access, and I know I’m not alone.

 

[woozman]

We just canceled YouTube TV (cancelled Direct TV about a year ago).

The Disney+ package includes ESPN and HULU and is much cheaper. So now we’re down to that and Netflix. Oh, and the free Paramount+ deal I get with 247.

I get the locals for sports on an antenna.

 

[Coast_Dawg]

Somebody tell me why ESPN can’t make their own damn streaming platform already? Charge $15-$20 per month just for the ESPN’s. Why do they continue to tether their content to other providers when they can just go straight to the market? I wouldn’t get Sling, YTTV, or anything else if I had that direct access, and I know I’m not alone.

They can. They haven’t because they haven’t deemed it to be more profitable yet. The link below does a pretty good job of explaining it if you wish to read it. Basically, if they go standalone, they risk their carriage agreements and potentially lose the profits from all the cable/satellite/streaming service subs that pay for it but wouldn’t buy a stand alone ESPN service.

https://thestreamable.com/news/can-disney-help-espn-kick-its-reliance-on-pay-tv-subscription-models

 

[8dog]

You are not going to get standard ESPN programming with the Disney+ package

 

[8dog]

Because none of those capture the primary ESPN/SECN programming

 

[UpTheMiddlex3Punt]

If they keep coming out with more streaming services I'm gonna go back to pirating stuff**

 

[Trojanbulldog19]

Live sports is the only reason we have YouTube tv. We just swapped over from Hulu live. I guess we will hop back.

 

[IBleedMaroonDawg]

My family likes the content on Netflix, Paramount+, Disney+, Prime, Peacock, and HBOMax.

Those streaming services capture everything on FX, CBS, NBC, ABC, and Fox in addition to giving all the original content of those platforms.
If I get cable, then I have FX, CBS, NBC, ABC, and Fox...but not all the original content of those platforms.

Seems like a really easy decision. I think many people are in a similar boat.

I don't have Paramount yet but I highly recommend Discovery+. We watch it more than anything except football.

 

[columbiadawg2]

What do you use for live sports? That's my only issue right now. Kid and wife love all the content the ones you mentioned but I want all the local affiliates/ESPN/SECN. I live in VA now so streaming services that only allow one regional network always mean ACCN unless I pay for the whole sports package.

 

[mstateglfr]

Because none of those capture the primary ESPN/SECN programming

Yup, dumbass me.
It's the damn topic of the thread even, but I didn't think of it. It's not on my radar because I steal it from my parents and use my espn+ thru the Disney bundle.

Obviously a good point.

 

[Coast_Dawg]

We just canceled YouTube TV (cancelled Direct TV about a year ago).

The Disney+ package includes ESPN and HULU and is much cheaper. So now we’re down to that and Netflix. Oh, and the free Paramount+ deal I get with 247.

I get the locals for sports on an antenna.

Yup, dumbass me.
It's the damn topic of the thread even, but I didn't think of it. It's not on my radar because I steal it from my parents and use my espn+ thru the Disney bundle.

Obviously a good point.

@mstateglfr I think he might have been replying to woozman but not sure.

 

[onewoof]

You have no idea the greed of all the networks. They will resolve this but that's why your TV bills keep going up and up.

 

[PBDog]

please do it yttv - drop that bill by $15 then add espn+ for 70/year. take that $9 and have a starbucks 2x per month. win win

 

[Hot Rock]

It is still a way better deal than Dish or Direct satellite services. Cable is not an option in many rural areas.

I finally got a decent internet connection out in the sticks through 4 County Electric Power that can run multiple TV's, laptops, cellphones at once. The internet service is competitively priced and is reliable and fast. I am spending about $150 on Internet and Tv programming Combined. That used to cost me about $240 a month for Dish Network Satellite and a piss poor ATT internet through the old phone systems not fibre optic. I barely got 15 mbs download, it takes 25mbs to run one TV in HD.

I will explore other options if you tube tv drops ESPN but I figure I will still be better off.

 

[aTotal360]

Ditto. I'm paying $150/month for all sports channels (that matter), RedZone, and interwebs. IMO that's hard to beat. As much as people dump on Comcast, it's hard to beat their pricing and packages.

 

[Hot Rock]

please do it yttv - drop that bill by $15 then add espn+ for 70/year. take that $9 and have a starbucks 2x per month. win win

That is ESPN+ and does not have their regular programming. I am pretty sure that is game broadcast that aren't on ESPN or Network TV. It's cool to have for basketball and baseball games that aren't broadcast but you aren't getting big game on it.