HBO Max Will Reportedly Get a Cheaper, Ad-Supported Tier In 2021 (theverge.com) 12
According to Reuters, AT&T is exploring an ad-supported tier for HBO Max that would launch in 2021. "That's one year after HBO Max is expected to launch as an ad-free subscription service," reports The Verge. "Reuters suggests that HBO Max is likely to cost more than HBO's current standalone streaming service, HBO Now ($15 a month), which is on par with earlier reports. However, FierceVideo recently reported that analysts believe HBO Max could cost as low as $8 a month through an ad-supported offering." From the report: The ad-supported option will allow AT&T to offer HBO Max at a lower cost than that of the traditional cable channel and HBO Now. HBO Max will offer more content than HBO Now, and is targeted at cord-cutters. The company will also offer HBO Max for free to the approximately 10 million AT&T customers who are also HBO subscribers. HBO reportedly had approximately 140 million subscribers globally as of 2018, with 35 million subscribers in the United States alone. The Verge has reached out to HBO for additional comment.
This doesn't mean those 10 million subscribers, or other customers that use HBO via cable packages and HBO Now, will start seeing ads. An HBO spokesperson previously told Bloomberg that "We will never carry ads on HBO." But HBO Max is still HBO to an extent. This is the issue with AT&T and WarnerMedia's decision to lean on the HBO brand name for its general service; people still see it as HBO. Jon Klein, former president of CNN and media expert, previously told The Verge that by adding HBO into the name, people are expecting a traditional HBO experience. Adding Max implies it's that experience, but more, Klein said. Advertisements haven't been part of the HBO experience -- at least until now.
This doesn't mean those 10 million subscribers, or other customers that use HBO via cable packages and HBO Now, will start seeing ads. An HBO spokesperson previously told Bloomberg that "We will never carry ads on HBO." But HBO Max is still HBO to an extent. This is the issue with AT&T and WarnerMedia's decision to lean on the HBO brand name for its general service; people still see it as HBO. Jon Klein, former president of CNN and media expert, previously told The Verge that by adding HBO into the name, people are expecting a traditional HBO experience. Adding Max implies it's that experience, but more, Klein said. Advertisements haven't been part of the HBO experience -- at least until now.
Back when cable first came out... (Score:3, Informative)
It's interesting to see which and what turns were taken over the years.
Of course it will...Then the price will go WAY UP (Score:4, Insightful)
ATT is watching their ATT Now service implode after raising prices 200%. They drew in several million subscribers by offering service for $30 a month for an entry level cable package. But the most recent price increase puts their lowest tier at around $80 and in the process they've lost almost half the subscribers.
But fear not, ATT is fully vested in destroying both DIrecTV and Warner media assets. After acquiring DTV they promptly ended all future SAT launches and basically guaranteed the death of DTV within 10 years when the birds die. Then they promptly priced their "streaming" services such that they are guaranteed to find almost no customers after luring them in with low prices. (expect disney to do the same thing with Disney+, that $7 price won't last past 6 months).
Now that they have the Warner assets management had to figure out the best possible way to kill Warner Media. Seeing as how the bulk of this audience purchases subscriptions precisely because there aren't commercials (one of HBO's biggest selling points) they've decided to move ahead with advertising and ensure that the Warner assets are destroyed within the year instead of the normal 5 year ATT timeline to destroy products.
But Fear not, ATT management is up to the task of destroying HBO.
Re: (Score:3)
So they more than doubled the price but lost less than half their customers and you think that's a failing business model?
Re: (Score:2)
The other half aren't sticking around, the only way to get ATT to stop service is to stop paying, no other method really works, they refuse to let you cancel and keep billing you or lie and say they canceled then keep billing you. The other half of subscribers just haven't been kicked off yet, The number of subscribers to ATT Now will be a rounding error within a year.
Who/What/Where? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
There was GoT, and there's comedy specials. Netflix seems like the big dog in terms of the latter these days, but they still have their own content.
I wouldn't use the ad-supported version, though, and I'm happy enough only getting HBO for one or two months a year. That's more than enough time to see everything I want to see on HBO.
So Many HBOs (Score:2)
First HBO Go, then HBO Now, then HBO Max.
Now we have an HBO Max variant ?
Get it together HBO.
They do make great content. GoT, Chernobyl, Veep, etc.
The app on any device should ALWAYS be called "HBO" or Home Box Office.
HBO naming almost as bad as USB (Score:3)
I still to this day get confused as to what HBO I even use - they have HBO Max, and HOB Go, and now yet another option - or maybe one of those turns into the ad options?
HBO to me is still a very hit or miss service, with some shows I like but then a large gulf between those shows, and movies that don't update very often and that I mostly do not care about.
Re: (Score:2)
HBO Go: Included with an HBO subscription through a traditional multichannel pay TV (i.e. cable or satellite) provider
HBO Now: Separate subscription, same content as Go as I understand it
HBO Max: Expansion of Now to include more WarnerMedia properties
Everyone wants to Double Dip (Score:2)
You can't do that effectively. Almost every time, 90% of the people choose one method or the other, making the other option a waste of cash. It's not just the ads, it's also the privacy (if you offer ads for some people, you have the capacity to track EVERYONE, even those that paid for no ads.)
But the real problem is that while it is fairly easy to compare products against different competitors, it is very HARD to compare the cost of the ads.
You have to guess about how many ads they show, how long they a
Re: (Score:2)
The concept defeats the whole purpose of paying for streaming content, escaping, how do I put it, animal cunts screaming in your face about fucking rubbish you do not want and if they did that to you in person you would likely punch the fucking cunts in the fucking face and throw them the fuck out of your home.
Yeah you fucking morons at HBO I pay to stream so I can watching fucking advertisements and enjoy lying arseholes scream about how good their crap products. I mean the fucking greed of those lying cu
Re: (Score:2)
I Figured out a way for advertisers to load up pay for streaming content with ads but only because jock strap douche bags irritate me. Advertisers can buy video's of old sporting events, classics the jock strap douche bags will watch, be it football, baseball, cricket, rugby, car racing and get the streaming services to make them available to watch, those things are just chock-a-block full of ads, banners, the cars, the drivers, et al, so for example coke can buy them and block out competing banners and in