[zeestephen]

This looks like a slowly emerging, truly competitive business model that will radically change the one provider cable TV that most of us have now.

TV "a la carte."

Buy what you want to watch.

Forget about the other 70 channels you never even look at.

[DoughtyOne]

I like Netflix and Hulu, and I hope these late comers don’t destroy them.

Netflix probably operates on a very thin margin. You start getting HBO and others competing, the drive up pricing, and bye bye Netflix.

I say this on the premise HBO might rip away contracts from the others, because I might be able to pay more, or simply utilize the movies it already has under contract.

Hopefully they can co-exist.

[Paladin2]

NetFlix rulz....

Hollyweird droolz...

[SamAdams76]

For the past year and a half, I've basically been watching Netflix. Either through my laptop or my TV via Roku. Recently added Amazon Prime. I've gotten so used to watching movies or TV shows on my own schedule - that it's a jarring experience to watch regular TV with all those commercials.

I don't care that the TV shows tend to be a year behind. Who cares? I just watched Season 5 of Mad Men that is about two years old but to me it was fresh and new. I don't need to sit through 14 minutes an hour of ads just to see the shows now that I can just as easily watch a year from now. In the meantime, there's plenty to see.

[Zhang Fei]

NFLX is tripping over its own feet. It’s paying, on a per episode basis, the same money for House of Cards as HBO is paying for Game of Thrones. Except HBO has merchandising and syndication rights for Game of Thrones. Netflix seems to have no concept of cost control. Until they hire a green eyeshade guy who understands TV programming, NFLX is going to run out of money to spend.

[nitzy]

This HBO product could be awesome or just not worth it. I currently only do YouTube and Netflix through a Roku but I would add HBO if the offer was right.

Give me all of the movies they have access to and the original programming for $10 a month and I am all over that deal. If they leave out movies or try charging $15 or more for the service than I will probably just get by with what I have.

[psjones]

Hulu Plus has a lousy service..Netflix, on the other hand, is very intuitive, easy to navigate, they have a very smart set up. I watch a variety of shows, something subscribing to the likes of CBS or HBO is not going to give me. I watch BBC shows, ABC, AMC, etc., etc. Many times the shows are better than the movies out there, so I find myself watching more shows than movies.

[adorno]

The CBS and/or Netflix model wont work, and people will end up paying a lot more for their services, than they do now with cable service which might cost around $90 per month. I commented on the Yahoo forum about how CBS and the networks might make things more expensive than things are now... ""For $6.99 or $7.99, watching TV could end up a lot more expensive than just paying for the cable service.

I'm all for a-la-carte TV service, but at the price that CBS and others would go to, it could add up to a lot more than the single price option of cable TV. So, if CBS gets its $7, and people want to watch the other networks, ABC, NBC, FOX, that would bring up the total to around $28-$30. That's just four stations. Then, if people want the "lesser" networks, say 5 of them at $4-$5 a pop, then we're talking about and additional $25, which with the regular networks, would total some $55. That's for 9-10 stations. That's fine and dandy, but, there are many other stations, such as SYFY and cable news stations, and FX and a bunch more. If those other "smaller" networks were to go for $4 per month, and people wanted 5 of those, then, we're talking about another $20. That and the other stations which I mentioned, would bring the total for TV stations to some $75 per month. Then, you are going to get programming which is already at least a day old, where most of the programs on each stations aren't even watched by subscribers. To make things better, the TV stations would have to make "a-la-carte", even more "a-la-carte", where people only pay for the programs they want from each stations, and then, people get to pay for what they truly want, and for a much lower price.

The bigger problem for CBS and NBC and FOX, is that, their sports broadcasts wouldn't be included, which would make their stations a lot less desirable. At that point, the sports leagues, such as the NFL and NBA and MLB and NHL, would want to start their own internet sports networks, and charge some $8-10 per month. At that point, the original $90 per month cable fee will start looking like a great bargain.

I truly do want a-la-carte cable service. But, I want that to mean that, we're paying only for the stations we want to watch, and not the 150-200 that are included that the vast majority of people don't use or want. So, instead of paying $90 for 200 stations, I want to pay $30 for 10 stations. That would go a long way towards pleasing the majority of people who are tired of paying for things they don't use or need or want.

[itsahoot]

Forget about the other 70 channels you never even look at.

Seventy, heck I think I have 400 or so. All switched digital, but they deliver 60 megabit service.

[House Atreides]

I’ve been suspecting that Apple is working on a future Apple TV that can be used efficiently and cheaply to pull selected input. I am SO ready to divorce the cable companies.

[goldstategop]

This signals the death of the network model and the traditional “season.” The days when you had programming distributed exclusively through a few networks at set times is gone. The networks are going to have to come to terms with the reality they’re no longer gatekeepers or go out of business.

Netflix is producing original TV shows and movies and we can expect Amazon and Hulu to be doing the same thing to attract and keep subscribers. And the low cost of watching shows from month to month is another reason for their exploding popularity. That’s affecting cable and its traditional bundled high cost per month model.

And nowadays you don’t have to be restricted to watching streaming content on your computer. If you have a broadband connection, you can view it on your TV and in your easy chair or from your couch with a Chromecast-enabled device. Any time you want.

The viewer really is in control of the experience and there’s no going back.

[dennisw]

Only problem is stand alone high speed internet access at home is always wildly priced. Comcast etc always want you to bundle it with TV, home phone etc. When bundled, high speed internet access becomes cheaper

ATT wants you to bundle with cellular and home phone