Peacock (Streaming Service)

Paulio

Veteran Member
Apr 28, 2016
1,019
Northern California

The beginning of the Peacock trailer should start off with something like this, similiar to the Bugs Bunny one at the beginning of the HBO Max trailer. It gives viewers the notion the Peacock streaming is alive and well, ready to engage in the streaming wars.
 

quinnmac000

Veteran Member
May 14, 2014
5,285
Seoul, Korea
K-Pop-Themed Drama ‘Olympic Boulevard’ In Works At Peacock From Paula Yoo, Kyle Hanagami & Neil Meron – Deadline

Penned by Yoo, Olympic Boulevard is about a disgraced Korean American former K-Pop star who finds his chance at redemption and a possible comeback when he agrees to teach at one of the first K-Pop training schools in America.

Yoo executive produces with Meron and his producing partner Mark Nicholson. Hanagami serves as a producer. Universal TV, where Meron is under an overall deal, is the studio.

Hanagami has worked with superstars such as BlackPink, BTS, Britney Spears, Nick Jonas, NSync etc. He has over 4 Million YouTube subscribers and holds the title for YouTube’s most viewed choreography video of all time.

K-Pop, which has been hugely popular in Asia for decades, has started to go truly global and break into the US market in a big way with the blockbuster success of such acts as BTS.
 

Paulio

Veteran Member
Apr 28, 2016
1,019
Northern California
You know, with the merger of CBS and Viacom a few days ago, I'm surprised ViacomCBS hasn't leveraged its own properties for CBSAllAccess service. Instead, they sold its popular cable TV show--South Park--to WarnerMedia's HBO Max and leverage its some of its popular children's programming show to Netflix. I guess ViacomCBS figured they're not big enough to have its products being exclusive for its own streaming service.
 

Nick

Staff member
Moderator
Sep 22, 2011
18,259
Orlando
You know, with the merger of CBS and Viacom a few days ago, I'm surprised ViacomCBS hasn't leveraged its own properties for CBSAllAccess service. Instead, they sold its popular cable TV show--South Park--to WarnerMedia's HBO Max and leverage its some of its popular children's programming show to Netflix. I guess ViacomCBS figured they're not big enough to have its products being exclusive for its own streaming service.
They're being smart and see the forest for the trees. I don't even think all of the streaming services now are going to succeed, never mind one that doesn't have all that many AAA titles to offer consumers.
 

RevFreako

Premium Member
Mar 30, 2015
2,090
They're being smart and see the forest for the trees. I don't even think all of the streaming services now are going to succeed, never mind one that doesn't have all that many AAA titles to offer consumers.
I think Hulu, Netflix and D+ will be the clear winners. D+ is the only single-entity non-sport/WWE provider that will exist in five years -- maaaaybe Peacock too.
 

quinnmac000

Veteran Member
May 14, 2014
5,285
Seoul, Korea
I think Hulu, Netflix and D+ will be the clear winners. D+ is the only single-entity non-sport/WWE provider that will exist in five years -- maaaaybe Peacock too.
This is where a lot of wall street firms are actually starting to disagree. Disney issue was with having a such a low starting cost and that black friday deal for Hulu, the moment price increases happen which will have to happen for the service to be profitable, they will lose a lot of subscribers. Churn isn't healthy because it s unsustainable business model.
 

Nick

Staff member
Moderator
Sep 22, 2011
18,259
Orlando
This is where a lot of wall street firms are actually starting to disagree. Disney issue was with having a such a low starting cost and that black friday deal for Hulu, the moment price increases happen which will have to happen for the service to be profitable, they will lose a lot of subscribers. Churn isn't healthy because it s unsustainable business model.
So people are willing to pay $7/month, but not something like say $9/month on a price increase? Obviously it'll continue to go higher, but the price is so low right now, that I don't think customers will mind the price going up (when it does) as long as there is quality content to be had.
 

Paulio

Veteran Member
Apr 28, 2016
1,019
Northern California
I think Hulu, Netflix and D+ will be the clear winners. D+ is the only single-entity non-sport/WWE provider that will exist in five years -- maaaaybe Peacock too.
I'm not sure about Peacock though, and I'm interested to see what its free-for-everyone service with ad support strategy would do to help them survive throughout the 2020s. I don't find Peacock original line up (Peacock (streaming service) - Wikipedia) to be as interesting as HBO Max (List of original programs distributed by HBO Max - Wikipedia), and plenty of people in my circle are talking about getting Disney + or HBO Max, while little has been said for the Peacock service (it's probably be as much talked about if NBCU acquired 20th Century Fox). Off course, Sam Esmail's Battlestar Galactica is the only one that seems promising, but that's about it. People will always subscribe for content that is popular and appealing especially as recently too.

This is where a lot of wall street firms are actually starting to disagree. Disney issue was with having a such a low starting cost and that black friday deal for Hulu, the moment price increases happen which will have to happen for the service to be profitable, they will lose a lot of subscribers. Churn isn't healthy because it s unsustainable business model.
Consumers and companies know this will inevitably happen. Disney will find a way how to sustain its own streaming service as well as its acquired Hulu. After all, Disney has plenty of content that appealing to all ages, including old Disney cartoons and Mickey Mouse Club. With 10 million + subscribers growing more at a rapid pace on its Disney + service, people would have no problem paying for the service even with the price increase, as long there's quality content in the service. The streaming wars barely started (Disney + is already being launched and Disney acquired Hulu, and HBO Max and Peacock haven't come out until spring 2020) and Disney is just getting warmed up to overtake rival streaming services throughout the 2020s. Life will find a way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andysol

bob albert

Veteran Member
Sep 18, 2015
1,629
Peacock being free is the best thing comcast could do. Some people are already watching twitch and youtube and some creators are getting big money. Everyone is so concerned with locking down their costs with fixed monthly fees comcast could do well to fill in the gaps.
 

RevFreako

Premium Member
Mar 30, 2015
2,090
I'm not sure about Peacock though, and I'm interested to see what its free-for-everyone service with ad support strategy would do to help them survive throughout the 2020s. I don't find Peacock original line up (Peacock (streaming service) - Wikipedia) to be as interesting as HBO Max (List of original programs distributed by HBO Max - Wikipedia), and plenty of people in my circle are talking about getting Disney + or HBO Max, while little has been said for the Peacock service (it's probably be as much talked about if NBCU acquired 20th Century Fox). Off course, Sam Esmail's Battlestar Galactica is the only one that seems promising, but that's about it. People will always subscribe for content that is popular and appealing especially as recently too.



Consumers and companies know this will inevitably happen. Disney will find a way how to sustain its own streaming service as well as its acquired Hulu. After all, Disney has plenty of content that appealing to all ages, including old Disney cartoons and Mickey Mouse Club. With 10 million + subscribers growing more at a rapid pace on its Disney + service, people would have no problem paying for the service even with the price increase, as long there's quality content in the service. The streaming wars barely started (Disney + is already being launched and Disney acquired Hulu, and HBO Max and Peacock haven't come out until spring 2020) and Disney is just getting warmed up to overtake rival streaming services throughout the 2020s. Life will find a way.
To be fair, I wasn't taking streaming versions of existing channels like HBK or Starz into account, as they're really just alternative means of getting those channels.
 

Paulio

Veteran Member
Apr 28, 2016
1,019
Northern California
Peacock being free is the best thing comcast could do. Some people are already watching twitch and youtube and some creators are getting big money. Everyone is so concerned with locking down their costs with fixed monthly fees comcast could do well to fill in the gaps.
I really wonder if AT&T can do this as well, could they?

To be fair, I wasn't taking streaming versions of existing channels like HBK or Starz into account, as they're really just alternative means of getting those channels.
What? I was talking about streaming services like Disney + or Peacock. I'm not talking about premium channels like Starz or HBO.
 

RevFreako

Premium Member
Mar 30, 2015
2,090
I really wonder if AT&T can do this as well, could they?



What? I was talking about streaming services like Disney + or Peacock. I'm not talking about premium channels like Starz or HBO.
I was just clarifying because you brought up HBO Go. No big deal. :)
 

AlexanderMBush

Legendary Member
Nov 23, 2013
16,608
Arizona
I think Hulu, Netflix and D+ will be the clear winners. D+ is the only single-entity non-sport/WWE provider that will exist in five years -- maaaaybe Peacock too.
Personally speaking, I highly think HBOMax is going to have a better game at going up against D+/Hulu and Netflix than that of Peacock, especially to how it might be far more appealing to those who outright just subscribe to HBO not on Cable, but on online services already. It'll be as easy to transition, and would allow them a crap-ton of backlog media from all of WarnerMedia/AT&T. It's my guess, and it's in no offense to Comcast, but I don't see Peacock being as big as the HBOMax or Disney+.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andysol

Paulio

Veteran Member
Apr 28, 2016
1,019
Northern California
Personally speaking, I highly think HBOMax is going to have a better game at going up against D+/Hulu and Netflix than that of Peacock, especially to how it might be far more appealing to those who outright just subscribe to HBO not on Cable, but on online services already. It'll be as easy to transition, and would allow them a crap-ton of backlog media from all of WarnerMedia/AT&T. It's my guess, and it's in no offense to Comcast, but I don't see Peacock being as big as the HBOMax or Disney+.
That's what I thought. If Comcast/NBCUniversal has Fox, they would be at least be as competitive to Warner Bros' HBO Max. As it stands, they currently lack any comic book superhero movies or adult-animated shows like Simpsons or Rick & Morty, both things that the general audiences loves. I still can't believe they deliberately choose Sky (a foreign pay TV with no effect outside Europe) over Fox (contents with popular appeal and where everyone in the world loves), when they were almost close to leverage its position in convincing Fox shareholders to go to them instead of Disney. To this day, I still don't understand why Comcast/NBCU just gave up the quest for Fox in favor of Sky.
 

AlexanderMBush

Legendary Member
Nov 23, 2013
16,608
Arizona
That's what I thought. If Comcast/NBCUniversal has Fox, they would be at least be as competitive to Warner Bros' HBO Max. As it stands, they currently lack any comic book superhero movies or adult-animated shows like Simpsons or Rick & Morty, both things that the general audiences loves. I still can't believe they deliberately choose Sky (a foreign pay TV with no effect outside Europe) over Fox (contents with popular appeal and where everyone in the world loves), when they were almost close to leverage its position in convincing Fox shareholders to go to them instead of Disney. To this day, I still don't understand why Comcast/NBCU just gave up the quest for Fox in favor of Sky.
At this point, I'm more convinced that it was a power-play to push Disney into a bit of a financial loss to how much money they'd have to put up for even getting 21CF, especially when you now look at the final costs.

I actually..kind-of think that they would be doing what Disney is doing right now, if Comcast got hold of 21CF and the assets; just on a scale that'd accommodate both the cable and streaming services to Comcast's benefit. To me, Peacock feels like a non-starter for debating, as it's not to directly compete towards the big gangs.
 

quinnmac000

Veteran Member
May 14, 2014
5,285
Seoul, Korea
That's what I thought. If Comcast/NBCUniversal has Fox, they would be at least be as competitive to Warner Bros' HBO Max. As it stands, they currently lack any comic book superhero movies or adult-animated shows like Simpsons or Rick & Morty, both things that the general audiences loves. I still can't believe they deliberately choose Sky (a foreign pay TV with no effect outside Europe) over Fox (contents with popular appeal and where everyone in the world loves), when they were almost close to leverage its position in convincing Fox shareholders to go to them instead of Disney. To this day, I still don't understand why Comcast/NBCU just gave up the quest for Fox in favor of Sky.
You know studios make money from things other than just the shows they air right? A big and easy way for Comcast to make money is from formats. So for instance, take the Voice....now every country that airs their version of the Voice you get a cut of profit from. That's something that Sky gives them. They owned the most popular show in the UK rights with The Great British Bakeoff which makes them bank monthly.

Because they have their own HBO level production plan. They are producing shows with HBO which will give them stuff for their streaming service.

Comcast forked out $40 billion for Sky and is now backing its CEO Jeremy Darroch’s plan to turbo-charge its pipeline of originals. It has created Sky Studios and will double its programming outlay in a plan that insiders tell Variety will see it spend £1 billion ($1.2 billion) a year on original programming within five years. Gary Davey, Sky Studios CEO, and Jane Millichip, chief commercial officer, are tasked with executing the plan.

“We’ll certainly be the biggest European TV producer in Europe,” Davey says.

Sky is already flying high after “Chernobyl.” The co-production with HBO won acclaim and viewers on home turf and triumphed in the U.S. at the Emmys, taking home the second-most number of trophies for a series (with 10, including the coveted limited series statue).

“It wasn’t obvious that a drama about a nuclear disaster would be successful,” Davey says. “I was confident we would get a lot of positive reviews, but I assumed its audience performance would be modest. I was completely wrong about that; that was a happy surprise.”

The challenge for the newly minted Sky Studios is to deliver more watercooler series that will win and retain subscribers for the European pay-TV heavyweight.

“The magic sauce is deep local insight combined with the scale of the group. That’s what makes us unique. We can go more local than an international streamer and we can go more global and have more scale than a local broadcaster,” Davey says.

Sky has 34 dramas and 18 comedies in the works as it embarks upon the next phase of its production mission, including the high-finance drama “Devils” with Patrick Dempsey, out of Italy — the third of its big European bases — as well as the Jude Law-starrer “The New Pope,” which premiered at the Venice Film Festival. Its recent German-originated series include “Das Boot.”

Sky Studios - Wikipedia
HBO and UK's Sky Extend Carriage and Co-Production Deal
Inside Sky Studios’ Plan to Be the ‘Biggest European TV Producer’ – Variety
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Going back to Peacock...Comcast says they will reach a profit in 5 years and will invest $2 billion for content the first two years.
Peacock To Get $2B Investment In First Two Years, Turn Profit In Year 5, Comcast CFO Says – Deadline

Peacock, Cavanagh said, would not be a risky venture. “We’re not looking to play somebody else’s hand. I think our approach to Peacock is a thoughtful consideration of our strengths and opportunities to put together a plan that, in success, will put us in a really good place. Success is ours if we get it right and it’s worth pursuing.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: RevFreako

Paulio

Veteran Member
Apr 28, 2016
1,019
Northern California
At this point, I'm more convinced that it was a power-play to push Disney into a bit of a financial loss to how much money they'd have to put up for even getting 21CF, especially when you now look at the final costs.

I actually..kind-of think that they would be doing what Disney is doing right now, if Comcast got hold of 21CF and the assets; just on a scale that'd accommodate both the cable and streaming services to Comcast's benefit. To me, Peacock feels like a non-starter for debating, as it's not to directly compete towards the big gangs.
The question is does Comcast had no intention of getting 21CF's assets from the very beginning at all? Or maybe Sky got in the way and Comcast decided that was more important than Fox for some reason? I don't know why Comcast thinks getting Sky is more important than the Fox assets everyone knows and loves, and there's no clear answer why even after almost two years. The fact Disney paid $71 billion for the Fox assets meant nothing to the House of Mouse; even with the amount of debt, Disney will inevitably recover and owns every 20CF IP for life, so the idea of making your competitor pay a bit more really means nothing at all. And off course, Peacock might not compete directly towards HBO Max and Disney + because they don't have enough popular and/or appealing content (such as the lack of adult-animated shows, comic book superhero movies, and the many popular FX shows like AHS and It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, and recent HBO shows). If Comcast/NBCU acquired Fox, they would be singing a different tune regarding the streaming wars, especially since Universal started out aggressively as a serious movie and theme park competitor to Disney for decades (which is why not a single Universal IP exists at a Disney theme park throughout history as well as Universal's refusal to sell Hulk distribution right to Disney relating to the Marvel theme park rights at Islands of Adventure). For Comcast/NBCU to bow out of the Fox assets is just so ashine and unusual on their part.
 

AlexanderMBush

Legendary Member
Nov 23, 2013
16,608
Arizona
The question is does Comcast had no intention of getting 21CF's assets from the very beginning at all? Or maybe Sky got in the way and Comcast decided that was more important than Fox for some reason? I don't know why Comcast thinks getting Sky is more important than the Fox assets everyone knows and loves, and there's no clear answer why even after almost two years. The fact Disney paid $71 billion for the Fox assets meant nothing to the House of Mouse; even with the amount of debt, Disney will inevitably recover and owns every 20CF IP for life, so the idea of making your competitor pay a bit more really means nothing at all. And off course, Peacock might not compete directly towards HBO Max and Disney + because they don't have enough popular and/or appealing content (such as the lack of adult-animated shows, comic book superhero movies, and the many popular FX shows like AHS and It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, and recent HBO shows). If Comcast/NBCU acquired Fox, they would be singing a different tune regarding the streaming wars, especially since Universal started out aggressively as a serious movie and theme park competitor to Disney for decades (which is why not a single Universal IP exists at a Disney theme park throughout history as well as Universal's refusal to sell Hulk distribution right to Disney relating to the Marvel theme park rights at Islands of Adventure). For Comcast/NBCU to bow out of the Fox assets is just so ashine and unusual on their part.
For the sake of Sky, I see it as Comcast's play to get agressively into the European market for cable. 21CF might of provided them great assets for the short and potentially long-term, but Sky will allow Comcast to get a foothold in one of the largest continents in the world. I doubt this is the last we'll see of Comcast's international expansion, especially in the future.