cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
SweetBlitz
Expert 3

Should Cinema & Entertainment merge?

Given Amazon, Netflix and now Disney plus provide both movies and TV shows as part of the main subscription, should Now TV follow suit?

 

Now TV at rack prices is £22/month for both, whereas top tier Netflix is £14/month.  Amazon is currently £79/annum and Disney plus just £60/annum (£80/annum from 23 Feb when Star comes online).  

 

Given that all 4 services will have to depend mainly on their back catalogue for the next year or so, a Now TV pass covering cinema and entertainment in the £10-£15/month range would be somewhat competitive.  

 

As it stands, I am unlikely to renew Cinema when it expires in mid-February having already ditched Entertainment back in mid January.  I have Amazon as much for the other benefits and have had Netflix, but am very tempted by £60 for a year of Disney plus just for the new Star content.


Will keep the Sports pass running until end of football season, but Cinema and Entertainment are not the draw they used to be as separate subscriptions.  Time for change?

16 REPLIES 16
gavs82008
Legend 5
Legend 5

@SweetBlitz @ukbobboy @Anonymous User @Anonymous User 

It's a very interesting point to bring up. 

 

Personally I would have to agree that the two passes should indeed merge. However simply merging the passes how they are just would not work.

If it were up to me, I would;

  1. Have 3 Streams, 1080p HD and 5.1 sound as standard across all passes
  2. Use "Boost" to provide 4 streams and where possible UHD content
  3. Drastically reduce the price of this "merged pass", something where without offers it is competetive.

Whilst I understand that Comcasts US service Peacock TV is different to Now TV due to Comcasts business model in the US. This is where I think Peacock have it bang on, as they have 3 tiered systems for the service

  1. Free
    • Littered with Ads (like ITV and All4 without the "+")
    • Limited content
  2. Premium $4.99
    • Unlocks all content (this includes movies, sport the works)
    • Ads only on recently added shows after being aired
  3. Premium Plus $5
    • Everything from premium but removes the ads

Also where I think Peacock is better is that 1080p HD and 5.1 are standard, even on the free service. And most importantly, 3 streams is default and there is no requirement to "register" devices unlike Now TV. 

 

Being a Peacock TV subscriber thanks to me VPN and US PayPal account,  I can say hands down that it is far better than Now TV. Even on the simple things, like the continue watching, its very much like Netflix and Amazon where it assumes you want to start the next epsiode straight away.

 

If Sky start doing something similar with Now TV, then I would be inclined to say Now TV is good value for money. However the rate they pick up shows that isn't on Sky Atlantic just really grinds my gears, a topic for another conversation!

FYI that I do not work for NOW, just a NOW customer trying to help
ukbobboy
Legend

@gavs82008   @SweetBlitz   @Anonymous User   @Anonymous User 

 

 

Hi Gavs

 

Although I agreed with the broad theme of your post, and it's Peacock based model, I would have to disagree with some of the "finer details" therein. However, and not to nit pick, for Now TV to adopt such a model would mean a complete re-write of it's business plan and a re-negotiation of it's broadcasting licence, and both are highly unlikely to happen.

 

And going back to this merger of "Cinema and Entertainment" passes for a moment, such a merger and subsequent price hike would make it a bit more difficult for Now TV to attract new users, i.e. the very foundation of their business.

 

Although I will agree that Now TV should evolve to keep up with user expectations, it cannot loose sight of the "first time users" it constantly attracts.

 

And my final point, Now TV want to retain the maximum number of users it can but, I believe, it realises that it cannot do this if it only caters for it's more economically established customers.

 

 

UK Bob 

 

 

SweetBlitz
Expert 3

such a merger and subsequent price hike would make it a bit more difficult for Now TV to attract new users, i.e. the very foundation of their business.

 

The price would have to be in the £10-£15 range.  It cannot be significantly more than Netflix top level.  Arguably the merged pass should be at the bottom end of the range (same an Entertainment currently) as It is closer to the middle tier of Netflix which costs £9/month.   I don’t know what the churn is on Now TV, but I suspect many will be subscribing with Netflix and Disney plus in preference this month.  And having paid £60 for a year of Disney plus, may not return to Now TV.

ukbobboy
Legend

@SweetBlitz 

 

SB

 

You said, "... I suspect many will be subscribing with Netflix and Disney plus in preference this month.  And having paid £60 for a year of Disney plus, may not return to Now TV."

 

Yes, I agree because I am also considering the Disney + offer, the only problem is that I do not watch as much TV as I use to.

 

 

UK Bob

Saint1976
Elite 3

I don't subscribe to comparing different streaming platforms to find a price point. I'm not saying NowTV is good value for what you get, but to compare NowTV to Netflix, Amazon and Disney+ can't really be done at a core level.

 

NowTV - only available in 4 countries with a few million users (sky don't release the exact figures but it's estimated to be about 4-5 million). Also they are the poorer cousin to Sky Q. There will always be the model of driving customers towards the contracted option.

 

Netflix - 200 million users across 200 countries. This provides Netflix with a huge revenue advantage (£20 billion in 2019). They don't produce any devices or live content. It keeps their model small and removes a lot of the technological costs.

 

Amazon - similar user numbers to Netflix and in the same number of countries. Amazon also has the advantage of multiple revenue streams (40 subsidiaries including market place, music, books, devices, logistics, data analytics and more) generating turnover of £280 billion. They can throw money at whatever they like without it having a negative impact on margin and sell content at a bargain bottom price, again without damaging margin.

 

Disney+ - Aiming to replicate Netflix and Amazon by reaching 200 million customers in 200 countries. They produce and own the most profitable content on the planet. The license fees produced by leasing content runs into tens of billions and they're another company with multiple revenue streams - theme parks, hotels, property, studios and merchandise.

 

NowTV is a very small fish in an enormous pond. Yes it's expensive, yes the platform sucks, yes there are too many restrictions but they can't and never will be like the other services.

 

Should they combine cinema and entertainment? Maybe, maybe not. I don't see advantages either way if you look at them in isolation to the market available to them - a few more million people in 4 countries!

SweetBlitz
Expert 3

NowTV is a very small fish in an enormous pond. Yes it's expensive, yes the platform sucks, yes there are too many restrictions but they can't and never will be like the other services.

 

@Saint1976 

 

Which makes me wonder if Now TV will be around in this form for much longer.  Sports is the big draw and probably most profitable, but if Cinema, Entertainment, Hayu and Kids aren’t significantly contributing to the bottom line then perhaps the plug will be pulled on them.  

Anonymous User
Not applicable

@Saint1976 

 

NBC/Comcast/Universal/Dreamworks is not that small of a company they own resorts etc like Disney do and have a strong film division as well not as big as Disney but by no means are they small.