Thread on premium about Disney looking to sell ESPN and expecting ESPN to exclusively be a streaming service by 2025.

Started some conversation about what the future might be for streaming and cable.

I think this is an interesting topic (and conversation will be better here than it will be on Premium).

Some questions:

- What do you think watching stuff on your TV will be like in the future?
- Will there still be cable?
- Over the air channels?
- Will apps consolidate?
- More stuff just being pay per view?

And what would you WANT it to be like?

Here's TCTTS's opinion from that thread:

TCTTS said:

---

We're nearly there already, and a lot of this obvious, but eventually it's going to go something like this...

You'll have your Apple TV or Roku or Fire Stick or whatever. Then, via whichever one of those, you'll subscribe to some combination of these apps…

Apple TV+
-MLS
(with more sports to come)

Amazon Prime Video
-Thursday Night NFL

Disney+/Hulu/ESPN
-Monday Night NFL
-NBA
-NHL
-College Football
-College Basketball
-College Baseball

Fox Sports / Fox News
-MLB
-NFL
-College Football
-College Basketball

Max
-MLB
-NBA
-NHL
-March Madness

Peacock
-Sunday Night NFL (NBC)
-College Football (NBC)

Paramount+
-Sunday NFL (CBS)
-College Basketball (CBS)
-March Madness (CBS)

If you're on, say, Apple TV, they'll offer various "sports packages," or discounted rates to bundle all apps together, and then, on your Apple TV, you'll have a "Sports" tab where all the games from the apps you subscribe to will live, they'll all be surf-able, available in multi-view, etc. Same thing for "News." Cable will eventually crumble, the broadcast channels (ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX) will die off, and the only live content left will be News and Sports. Any other "channel surfing" will basically be like Netflix is now, where you simply browse various shows and movies.

Basically, think of Apple TV, Roku, Fire Stick, etc like we do the cable/satellite companies now. And the above will essentially be a new iteration of cable, just more a la carte, and more on-demand (though probably not much cheaper, if at all).

That said, there will likely still be a place for Fubo, Amazon Freevee, etc, and I'm guessing that's where YouTubeTV ultimately ends up - as one of the FAST services.

---

Expanding on this, I really do think the Apple TV app on the Apple TV is the beginning of where we're ultimately headed.

Right now, any app I download on Apple TV, I can choose to connect it to the Apple TV app. So when I watch, say, a House of the Dragon episode on Max, and Max is connected to my Apple TV app, when I open my Apple TV app, under the "Watch Now" tab, the next episode of House of the Dragon will be there, under "Up Next," ready for me to click on and watch. I'm basically "following" House of the Dragon via my Apple TV app. So instead of navigating/opening app after app, I can access all of my shows, across all apps, from one primary umbrella app, if that makes sense. (Technically, when I watch House of the Dragon from my Apple TV app, it's opening the Max app, but you barely even notice it, as the episode automatically starts playing.)

The same goes for sports. Via my Apple TV app, I added the Dallas Mavericks to "Up Next" (aka I "followed" the Mavs), and their next aired game will now show up under "Watch Now" in my Apple TV app. I click on it, and it's technically opening the NBA app, but I never had to navigate there and open it myself.

It's pretty rudimentary right now, but I can see this feature becoming more and more customizable, to the point where it's basically a glorified DVR interface that "records" all the shows I follow from all my various apps, that I can then organize however I want. And already, based on the shows I watch, the Apple TV app recommends shows from other apps, and navigating those will eventually kind of sort of be like channel surfing.

Combine that with eventual live sports and live news tabs, and you've basically got the new, streaming version of the cable/DVR combo, complete with eventual app "packages" I can subscribe to, all through Apple TV (aka the new DirecTV, Spectrum, etc).

bagger05 said:

---

Seems like the entire industry is built on charging people for things they won't use.

Do you see any future where things are more PPV? Rather than paying for ESPN+ you pay $5 to watch the A&M game?

---

I could be wrong, but I don't think so. The leagues/companies just can't make enough money that way. IMO, the future is bundles/packages, same as it ever was.

Piggy backing on this thread but if I cut cable what is the best streaming service for regular ESPN and local channels? I have ESPN Plus with HULU and Disney Plus but you have to have a TV subscription to get anything on the regular ESPN networks

I absolutely love YouTubeTV.

bagger05 said:

---

Seems like the entire industry is built on charging people for things they won't use.

---

For subscriptions, yes. The bet is you won't care enough to cancel if the plan goes from 4.99 to 7.99, etc.

They also want to you to watch their stuff so you can watch the ads they're giving away for fractions of pennies.

TCTTS said:

---

I absolutely love YouTubeTV.

---

Thanks so much

I didn't know the Apple TV could do that. I agree that's the way it's headed. Next evolution would be some kind of universal search. That would be fantastic.

I'm cool with the bundles. Just hate having to switch apps and most things I don't know what is on which app so it's a guessing game.

bagger05 said:

---

Thread on premium about Disney looking to sell ESPN and expecting ESPN to exclusively be a streaming service by 2025.

Started some conversation about what the future might be for streaming and cable.

I think this is an interesting topic (and conversation will be better here than it will be on Premium).

Some questions:

- What do you think watching stuff on your TV will be like in the future?
- Will there still be cable?
- Over the air channels?
- Will apps consolidate?
- More stuff just being pay per view?

And what would you WANT it to be like?

---

It will be available still on cable but they are planning on also having a DTC Streaming product by 2025. Of course, once they offer DTC, cordcutting will accelerate even more.

I'd assume things like Hulu Live and YouTube TV or will those things disappear as networks consolidate everything

The NFL and BIG were smart, both putting most of their product on OTA Networks.

Philo covers most networks that are not Sports/OTA/CableNews.

Fox may need to develop a DTC product to cover FS1, Big10 Network, Fox News and Business as well as offer local Fox Stations in the same manner as Paramount+.

The problem is so much is going behind so many paywalls. Newsmax was free to stream but because they charge cable and Fubo a carriage fee, this month they had to replace the free version with Newsmax+ for $5/month to get the full product. All the free streaming partners now get Newsmax 2 which is a watered down product.

TCTTS said:

---

I absolutely love YouTubeTV.

---

I second YouTube TV. It has all the programming I need for much less money than cable.

Speaking from the design/UX perspective, the concept is great but it still needs a lot of work.

Google also has it's own variant on this on their streaming stick that I think is a hair better but they still all suffer from some clunkiness, opening other apps when you select a certain game or show which sometimes requires a login and then you're trying to find a password or verify on your phone or whatever. But the idea is great, I think once we get a few versions down the line in these apps and they become more seamless and open up their APIs to each other, i.e. you just stay in AppleTV to watch everything from Netflix/Disney/etc., it's going to be a really cool experience.

A lot of the issues we're seeing with different streaming apps right, as my best guess, is that we're seeing them retrofitting things to legacy architectures. Hulu live TV, for example, is an absolutely abysmal experience. But I'm guessing that's at least partially the case because they didn't originally design it to have live tv, it was only meant to show their "recorded" versions of shows the next day. Then some execs got the idea to add live tv, gave an unrealistic deadline and budget, and some poor product team had to figure out how to shoehorn it into the existing app.

JayHowdy! said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

I absolutely love YouTubeTV.

---

I second YouTube TV. It has all the programming I need for much less money than cable.

---

We switched to the Hulu package with Live TV, Disney+, and ESPN+ to save some money and try it out.

I will likely be canceling before the end of month 1 and switching back to YouTubeTV.

wcb said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

I absolutely love YouTubeTV.

---

I absolutely loved them when they were $49. Now I just sorta love them. For $79 or whatever it is for now.

---

I like the convenience, and we went from DISH to YTTV years ago and the picture quality was a major difference. It wasn't grainy. When I watch traditional cable at other people's houses now, I see the downgrade in image quality because I'm so used to YTTV.

That being said, the price increases have gotten annoying as they've added channels I don't care about. And if they drop ESPN in a few years when things get blown up...there's no way I'm sticking around to pay that much.

But the app works great, and I've been able to watch A&M games in multiple sports so easily when we're out of town on my phone or the tablet.

fig96 said:

---

A lot of the issues we're seeing with different streaming apps right, as my best guess, is that we're seeing them retrofitting things to legacy architectures.

---

Sooooo are you in media or formerly in media?

TCTTS said:

---

Expanding on this, I really do think the Apple TV app on the Apple TV is the beginning of where we're ultimately headed.

Right now, any app I download on Apple TV, I can choose to connect it to the Apple TV app. So when I watch, say, a House of the Dragon episode on Max, and Max is connected to my Apple TV app, when I open my Apple TV app, under the "Watch Now" tab, the next episode of House of the Dragon will be there, under "Up Next," ready for me to click on and watch. I'm basically "following" House of the Dragon via my Apple TV app. So instead of navigating/opening app after app, I can access all of my shows, across all apps, from one primary umbrella app, if that makes sense. (Technically, when I watch House of the Dragon from my Apple TV app, it's opening the Max app, but you barely even notice it, as the episode automatically starts playing.)

The same goes for sports. Via my Apple TV app, I added the Dallas Mavericks to "Up Next" (aka I "followed" the Mavs), and their next aired game will now show up under "Watch Now" in my Apple TV app. I click on it, and it's technically opening the NBA app, but I never had to navigate there and open it myself.

It's pretty rudimentary right now, but I can see this feature becoming more and more customizable, to the point where it's basically a glorified DVR interface that "records" all the shows I follow from all my various apps, that I can then organize however I want. And already, based on the shows I watch, the Apple TV app recommends shows from other apps, and navigating those will eventually kind of sort of be like channel surfing.

Combine that with eventual live sports and live news tabs, and you've basically got the new, streaming version of the cable/DVR combo, complete with eventual app "packages" I can subscribe to, all through Apple TV (aka the new DirecTV, Spectrum, etc).

---

This is what Google TV does. I have always been an android user until very recently, but I carried Google TV over with me when I switched to apple. It syncs up YTTV, Disney+, Hulu, Prime, etc. Pretty slick.

https://tv.google/

superunknown said:

---

fig96 said:

---

A lot of the issues we're seeing with different streaming apps right, as my best guess, is that we're seeing them retrofitting things to legacy architectures.

---

Sooooo are you in media or formerly in media?

---

I'm a product designer, so very familiar with creating things only to be told "yeah we can't actually do that"

fig96 said:

---

Speaking from the design/UX perspective, the concept is great but it still needs a lot of work.

Google also has it's own variant on this on their streaming stick that I think is a hair better but they still all suffer from some clunkiness, opening other apps when you select a certain game or show which sometimes requires a login and then you're trying to find a password or verify on your phone or whatever. But the idea is great, I think once we get a few versions down the line in these apps and they become more seamless and open up their APIs to each other, i.e. you just stay in AppleTV to watch everything from Netflix/Disney/etc., it's going to be a really cool experience.

A lot of the issues we're seeing with different streaming apps right, as my best guess, is that we're seeing them retrofitting things to legacy architectures. Hulu live TV, for example, is an absolutely abysmal experience. But I'm guessing that's at least partially the case because they didn't originally design it to have live tv, it was only meant to show their "recorded" versions of shows the next day. Then some execs got the idea to add live tv, gave an unrealistic deadline and budget, and some poor product team had to figure out how to shoehorn it into the existing app.

---

In 100% agreement, and all very well said.

The Apple TV version is definitely super rudimentary right now - it's literally just a single row of "Up Next"/followed episodes of shows - but in a year or two, it, Google, etc, will no doubt have something much more robust, seamless, and customizable. That's a great way to put it, re: none of these streamers/execs planning for the "live" aspect, and now they're having to pivot and retrofit everything. We're just in that weird transition period right now, but you can definitely see where it's headed, and once they finally have it all figured out, I really do think it's going to be a much cooler experience than cable ever was. It'll be the best of both worlds.

That's awesome. Hopefully we have four or five options in the future, if not more, to keep it all competitive. Like with local cable providers, you'll be able to choose either Apple, Google, Amazon, Roku, etc, you'll sign up for all your apps/sports through one of them, select one of the various packages they offer, and then have all the content from your various apps/package unified under a single umbrella UX experience.

Aren't these basically things that Roku and Plex have done for years?

I'm going to get shows streamed right to my Neuralink

fig96 said:

---

superunknown said:

---

fig96 said:

---

A lot of the issues we're seeing with different streaming apps right, as my best guess, is that we're seeing them retrofitting things to legacy architectures.

---

Sooooo are you in media or formerly in media?

---

I'm a product designer, so very familiar with creating things only to be told "yeah we can't actually do that"

---

I always think of that scene on the Simpsons (the Christmas episode with Funzo) where the marketing team does the kids focus group to determine what a toy should be like and the kids basically wanted everything smashed into one thing. That's what it feels like to me. Create all new infrastructure all while maintaining and still growing your core business, but with no additional funds or workers.