Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Media Television Entertainment

Discovery To Launch Streaming Service in January Starting at $4.99 Per Month (cnbc.com) 65

Posted by msmash from the shape-of-things-to-come dept.
Discovery is the latest media company to jump into the ever more crowded streaming wars. It will launch its streaming service Discovery+ on Jan. 4, 2021. The service will include a $4.99 per month ad-supported tier and a $6.99 per month ad-free tier. From a report: The lower $4.99 tier costs the same as NBCUniversal-owned Peacock's premium tier with ads. The ad-free $6.99 tier is on par with what Disney+ costs. Both offerings are much less expensive than WarnerMedia's HBO Max, which costs $14.99 a month, and Netflix, which raised its standard plan to $13.99 a month in Oct. Discovery is also partnering with Verizon, which will give 55 million customers up to 12 months of the ad-free Discovery+ plan for free, depending on their wireless plan with the carrier.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Discovery To Launch Streaming Service in January Starting at $4.99 Per Month More

Discovery To Launch Streaming Service in January Starting at $4.99 Per Month

Comments Filter:

  • You wanted a la carte, matherfuckers (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Now you have this shit-show. We need someone to bundle all these streaming services together. Someone like, oh, I don't know, A FUCKING CABLE COMPANY.
    • Yes, a la carte as in I pick the channels I want and nothing more. Not over $100 for 95% of channels I could care less about. Cable companies won't offer this, hence the shit show you point out.

      • No. The cable companies forces bundles on you comprised of literally dozens, or possibly even hundreds of channels that you will never, in a million years, want to watch that you HAVE to purchase in order to get the one or two channels you really do want to watch.

        What I'd like to see is a true a la carte bundling service. Unfortunately, that would take major cooperation among companies that all seem to have themselves convinced the only way forward is a single-paid "only here" stream for each company. Re

      • Yes, a la carte as in I pick the channels I want and nothing more. Not over $100 for 95% of channels I could care less about. Cable companies won't offer this, hence the shit show you point out.

        To be (somewhat) fair, in some cases cable companies have limited/no choice but to provide bundles. For example, Disney often requires cable companies to purchase/carry their other offerings, like ESPN, ABC, Lifetime, History, A&E, and FX to get The Disney Channel -- or the other way around, depending on the market ... Obviously, the cable companies pass those expenses onto (spread them out over) their customers.

        14 companies you didn't realize Disney owns [insider.com]

    • A la carte done badly (which is what we have now) doesn't mean a la carte is bad, nor does it mean we should go back to the way cable companies were (which was worse).

      Two of the biggest problems right now are:

      1) Companies wildly overestimate the value of their channels, usually by at least a factor of 2, often by a lot more.

      2) Experience silos - companies want you to come to their app to view their content. There are lots of upsides for them for this, but it's totally at odds with what customers want. (it's

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by mysidia ( 191772 )

        1) Companies wildly overestimate the value of their channels, usually by at least a factor of 2, often by a lot more.

        Why yes... these are obsolete "Legacy" channels, anyways... modern replacement is to unplug and basically use Youtube instead, where the channels are all basically $0, and a $12/month subscription eliminates the advertising - Sure there might not be any "Discovery" channel, but honestly there's more content than I could ever want there, and its true ala-carte in the sense that there a

        • Youtube is slowly turning into shit today too, unfortunately. Lately it seems like my feed is nothing but text posts, patreon Q&As, content mill productions, ads, and maybe there will be something that genuinely will entertain me for 10 minutes before autoplay locks me into the above ad infinitum.

          • Easy, do not autoplay...

            But yes basically Youtube is getting worse seemingly by design, having to use a custom style sheet and multiple content things blocked as "ads" along with an ad blocker is kind of annoying..

            • how do you get that to work seamlessly on the TV in the living room?

              • I do not have a TV in the living room.

                In my case the places to look at things are the laptops and the media room with a video projector and a gaming capable PC connected for games and videos.

                But my media room setup should be easy enough to replicate. just connect the TV to a mini PC and use a wireless keyboard with a build in touch pad to direct it or alternatively just use screen casting from a laptop.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by EvilSS ( 557649 )

          1) Companies wildly overestimate the value of their channels, usually by at least a factor of 2, often by a lot more.

          Why yes... these are obsolete "Legacy" channels, anyways... modern replacement is to unplug and basically use Youtube instead, where the channels are all basically $0, and a $12/month subscription eliminates the advertising - Sure there might not be any "Discovery" channel, but honestly there's more content than I could ever want there, and its true ala-carte in the sense that there are millions of channels, which are not pay-per-channel.

          This. There are some amazing youtube channels out there to fill the void left by channels like History, Science, Discovery, etc. I know everyone seems to hate it for some reason, but Youtube premium is well worth the price to get rid of ads and give revenue to the channels you watch. I watch more Youtube than any other streaming service, and by a big margin. Just for the love of god stay away from their "trending" page.

    • Now you have this shit-show. We need someone to bundle all these streaming services together. Someone like, oh, I don't know, A FUCKING CABLE COMPANY.

      Channels like Discovery that once had informative programming, but switch to sensationalist crap, are the reason I left cable. I don't miss this, or cable, at all.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Pascoea ( 968200 )
        The end of it for me was when The Learning Channel had nothing to do with learning. Literally the only thing I miss about cable is live baseball, and Hockey to some extent.

    • Re:You wanted a la carte, matherfuckers (Score:4, Insightful)

      by sound+vision ( 884283 ) on Wednesday December 02, 2020 @04:12PM (#60787194) Journal

      If they had a retro mode for Discovery Channel how it was 20+ years ago, I'd gladly get that and the two or three other channels I watched for $6-12 a piece. Watching tigers fucking is way more interesting than watching someone shop for baby clothes.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mysidia ( 191772 )

      We need someone to bundle all these streaming services together.

      Well, MAYBE. But only if they can provide a compelling price as a result of bundling and not include too much stuff we don't want.

      A $25/Month bundle for all the channels I want to watch would be compelling. A $100/Month bundle is not compelling.

      Also, a $5/Month for Discovery is way overpriced, and I would not buy that by any means, and probably most people won't either - same deal for Disney+, way overpriced for too little - maybe if th

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by tepples ( 727027 )

        A $25/Month bundle for all the channels I want to watch would be compelling.

        If you're watching scripted programming, the current workaround is to binge a different service each month.

    • How about not the fucking cable company. Amazon, YouTube, Hulu, any company where I can choose the best service instead of the one or two choices available based on my physical address.

    • Now you have this shit-show. We need someone to bundle all these streaming services together. Someone like, oh, I don't know, A FUCKING CABLE COMPANY.

      What shit-show? Cable TV is still the same price as a half-dozen streaming services combined, is still 25% advertising, and is still 70% uninteresting filler. Is centralized billing worth that much to you? Frankly I can hardly even be bothered watching broadcast TV, and that's free.

      • Now you have this shit-show. We need someone to bundle all these streaming services together. Someone like, oh, I don't know, A FUCKING CABLE COMPANY.

        What shit-show? Cable TV is still the same price as a half-dozen streaming services combined, is still 25% advertising, and is still 70% uninteresting filler. Is centralized billing worth that much to you? Frankly I can hardly even be bothered watching broadcast TV, and that's free.

        I wonder if he's referring to the horrid bullshit the Discovery channel shows. Catering to the stupid has turned what was once some decent viewing into ridiculous crap that caters to adults that think at a third grade level. Same with th eHistory channel, which once had actual history on it instead of Pawn Stars and other fecal matter.

        • Same with th eHistory channel, which once had actual history on it instead of Pawn Stars and other fecal matter.

          You aren't paying attention - History is owned by Discovery.

          • Same with th eHistory channel, which once had actual history on it instead of Pawn Stars and other fecal matter.

            You aren't paying attention - History is owned by Discovery.

            You'll have to explain that. I know History is owned by Discovery - and just like the Discovery Channel, the History channel is pretty worthless.

        • I wish I could remember who wrote this on Usenet years ago while it was nearly true: "History Channel: all H*tler all the time."

          • I wish I could remember who wrote this on Usenet years ago while it was nearly true: "History Channel: all H*tler all the time."

            Yup, while it was a joke, they had WW2 documentaries, Wings with different planes of old and modern times, and yeah, Wings of the Luftwaffe as well. Watching them over again is preferable to the swill they are serving up now.

            The most interesting thing is that there are some Youtube channels like "Fall of Civilizations" that are top shelf good. As a hobbyist student of history, I find those channels to be markedly superior to just about anything Television has to offer.

            There are some others like Robert

    • "Now you have this shit-show. We need someone to bundle all these streaming services together. Someone like, oh, I don't know, "

      showrss.info ?

    • This isn't a bad thing to me.

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • This is what's hilarious. 20 years ago everyone was screaming "I want to buy my channels a la carte instead of having them all bundled!"

      Now that they're available a la carte (Disney / CBS / Peacock / Netflix / HBO / Amazon / Hulu etc. etc. etc.) everyone's all "I hate of all these a la carte offerings! I want a bundle!"

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by imidan ( 559239 )
      Yes, yes we did, and now I have the option of not buying the shitty Discovery channel just because I want to watch HBO. Nor do I have to buy the shitty History channel, the shitty SyFy channel, the shitty Learning Channel, etc., etc., etc....

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by rtb61 ( 674572 )

      This is not about a streaming service, this is all about an advertising service. They have zero interest in streaming services to you, this is all about advertising. They will force more and more ads over time and they want more ads, even though in an era of climate change and over consumption we should be cutting back on advertising more attacks on the climate. People should be consuming less wastefully not more but psychopathy demands what psychopathy demands, FUCK EVERY ONE ELSE, more for me now.

      This is

  • While it's good to see competition, you wonder how many services the market can support. Will we see consolidation/acquisition into several big players or is there demand for smaller, cheaper services? Most people would probably prefer to subscribe to one of the big ones then one or two $5/m services offering niche content.

    • Quibi ought to be your reference point. "Ala carte" isn't what it's cracked up to be, and there is much resistance to having to have so many nibbles that now make a cable company TV bill look like chicken feed. Sounds good on paper; doesn't cost them much for the infrastructure to do the streaming/billing, but only a handful will wanna buy it.

      • I know some old people who grew up during the postwar reconstruction in Europe in a rural area where most houses didn't have electricity. They see electric lighting as something of a status symbol. If your house is brightly lit at all hours of the night, you're a made man. They've went through the trouble of installing 12x40-watt incandescent chandeliers to light tiny rooms, floor lamps on top of accent lamps on top of the normal overhead lighting that was built with the house. They flip on the chandeliers

        • People tend to share passwords to thwart the charges, which I don't recommend. This makes the cost diffuse among a like-group of people.

          Add up what Spotify, or a music choice + NetFlix + Amazon (where applicable) + basic (+, ++, etc) + a phone bill (with extras), and this has become the nibbling economy. Death to your monthly cashflow by a thousand (subscription) cuts.

          I cite elsewhere Quibi, because it's a good example of saturation. The Dish Network etc are now headed towards Chapter 11. Add in Starlink.

          Th

    • It isn't competition when each provider has exclusive programming. If one wants to watch The Mandalorian then one must buy Disney+, If one wants to watch The Umbrella Academy then one must have Netflix, and if one wants to watch The Expanse, one must have Amazon Prime. They aren't competing with each other in a meaningful way.

  • 5 a month for what? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by RightwingNutjob ( 1302813 ) on Wednesday December 02, 2020 @04:01PM (#60787158)
    Mind-expaning content like "I weigh 700 pounds and keep stuffing my face!" Or perhaps intellectual stimulants like "Old Man Sits in Duckblind for Hours on End." Maybe "Aliens: Hoax or Conspiracy?"

    I remember being 8 years old some 30 years ago and being able to learn stuff by watching the Discovery channel and TLC. Nature docs, aviation history, you name it. Now? There's some good content on YouTube, but cable and the networks are a cesspool of mediocrity.
    • Wish I had mod points to hand you. Discovery and TLC are largely garbage time now. IIRC, they also like doing content on Hitler's secret weapons and the like.
    • Excuse me?
      Are you not finding 'Ancient Aliens', 'Alskan Gold Miners' and 'My 800lb wife' at least somewhat entertaining?
      I definitely do, whenever I think someone out there must be watching this garbage. Then I get sad that there are those people and this is what's become of previously somewhat decent channel(s).
      • I didn't say it wasn't diverting. I didn't say I didn't understand why they air it. I just lamented that they think they can charge money for it and they might be right.
        • I too lament the very low common denominator supporting such turds in the pipes; be it a cable pipe or intertubes.
          Perhaps I should've marked the first part of my post with an '/s'

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Discovery was involved with The Right Stuff and it was okay. Mixed in some elements of Soviet history (!) but it was okay. Not enough to sustain a streaming service though.

    • cable and the networks are a cesspool of mediocrity.

      Mediocrity is an overstatement. It is simply garbage. It appeals to the lowest and most idiotic denominator while claiming to be intelligent and educational, Learning channel my ass. It is the same thing that happened with the SciFi channel, which is now SyFy and shows ghost hunting, horror, and wrestling.

  • Life is just so fucking exciting these days. I can hardly contain myself.
  • Will their streaming service be different?

    • The last worthwhile show they had was Dirty Jobs.

      • Dirty Jobs and Mythbusters, now everything has about 5 min of actual content in a 30 min show, where they keep repeating the whole previous section every time they come back from the ads. 25 years ago I would spend my whole afternoon watching discovey, these days it is almost unbearable.

  • Is this what a la carte is? (Score:3)

    by xession ( 4241115 ) on Wednesday December 02, 2020 @04:33PM (#60787246)
    So my options are:

    A) Subscribe to an ever increasing number of services with an ever increasing fee

    B) Go to a website that streams nearly everything for free if you can say YO HO

    Thats a tough damn choice you know...

    These idiots have entirely failed to recognize what people disliked about cable. People very much disliked that they had to take so many crummy channels that they never watched for a premium price. People very much disliked all the crummy ads every 10 minutes. And lastly, people very much disliked the disarray and chaos of finding content to watch.

    So now we get to have some of the more popular channels costing just as much as several channels in a cable package, ads on pay services like Hulu and the complete scattering of this content across multiple websites that are greatly lacking any great way to tie them all together. Sure, there's sites like Trakt and I like trakt for what it is, but its yet another separate service. And all of it could just disappear on a whim...

    This is why Netflix became so popular in the first place. First it was the mail-to-you video store that always had what you wanted to watch. Then it was the streaming service that had a huge selection of movies and tv shows across nearly all studio properties in a rotating catalog to keep things fresh and inviting. Yet, slowly but surely, these studios have pulled back their content so they can try and rival Netflix with their own service, entirely missing the point for why it was popular in the first place. It just seems like a matter of time before people have decided they tried these services and didn't use them enough to justify the price. Then what?

    I'm happy to see competitors pop up to compete against Netflix. I definitely wasn't fond of seeing them raise their subscription price $2/mo for next year. But this studio segmentation thats happening now is stupid.

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Wednesday December 02, 2020 @04:35PM (#60787254)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Discovery is certainly more profitable than it used to be, because apparently, more people like trashy reality shows than documentaries. For those of us who actually liked the shows they used to air, it absolutely is worse. So, good for them, but I'd still pay for a service if it was filled with quality history, military, science, and nature documentaries.

      • Amazon Prime Video has a PBS Documentaries channel and another called Curiosity Stream. They cost extra, but they're there.

        • I subscribed to Curiosity Stream for perhaps half a year or so. It was decent enough, but I plowed through most of the content I like already, and the rest of it seemed a bit meh. Maybe I'll give PBS Documentaries a try now that I've cancelled Netflix. Thanks for the suggestions.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

        Discovery is certainly more profitable than it used to be, because apparently, more people like trashy reality shows than documentaries. For those of us who actually liked the shows they used to air, it absolutely is worse. So, good for them, but I'd still pay for a service if it was filled with quality history, military, science, and nature documentaries.
        Flag as Inappropriate

        Yeah, Discovery is airing less of the traditional scripted-reality shows and more of the trashy reality shows, and getting away from

    • > Star trek discovery would imo be a great show if it wasn't star trek.

      Star Trash: Disaster would still be a shit, generic Sci-Fi show even if it wasn't riding the coat-tails of Star Trek. Garbage writing [youtube.com], horrible acting [youtube.com], a bland Mary Sue [youtube.com] character, etc. all because Alex "Klutzman" has no fucking clue what makes *good* Sci-Fi as demonstrated by the Sci-Fi master themselves Isaac Asimov, Arthur C, Clarke, and Robert A. Heinlein:

      Exploring the Social implications of Technology.

      STD is a fake trek for fake f

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by mark-t ( 151149 )

        STD is a fake trek

        Totally on board with this for season one, and even season two wasn't that much better.

        But I have noticed a couple of episodes in this latest season that refreshingly felt like real Star Trek. Time will tell if these episodes were just flukes, or if it is a hopeful sign of things to come and the show just needed to find its footing.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by bn-7bc ( 909819 )
      Another reason Discovery/History become shit is that they all started launching their separate premium channels (discovery science H2 etc) the traditional main channels ( often included in cheaper bundles or even basic) just became a tool to sell the others and thus had to av the broadest apeal possible. Note: this is commented om from a European persoective, I have no idea about us cable pacaging

  • Gold Rush (Score:3)

    by nevermindme ( 912672 ) on Wednesday December 02, 2020 @04:36PM (#60787258)
    They already have 4 to 5 hours of primetime a week feeding my inner 3 year old in pushing dirt and washing rocks. At least it shows anyone who knows how to use a piece of equipment should be informed enough how to order the spare parts kit for said equipment.
  • Discovery Networks already provides a streaming service in Sweden/Norway/Denmark/Finland called dplay, which has been available for many years. It also includes "live" streaming of several channels they own - except Discovery Channel for which they do not appear to have the streaming rights. Neither do they have the streaming rights to many of their more popular shows, like Mythbusters. Or much of a back catalogue of shows that ended before the streaming service started, with the exception of previous seaso

Slashdot Top Deals

As you will see, I told them, in no uncertain terms, to see Figure one. -- Dave "First Strike" Pare

Close