Broadcast to FAST (Part III)
The Evolution of Television and Distribution
Previously On…
So far, we’ve covered the evolution between the start of the television broadcast era to the dawn of Netflix’s DVD by mail, and downloadable content via iTunes or Amazon (Unbox). The willingness of the viewing audience to sit through a number of commercials for broadcast television programming that didn’t quite meet the luster of that on HBO or Showtime was waning. If people wanted to catch up on an entire season of the show Lost, for example, it was economical to do this by binging on DVD or other means.
People are starting to wonder why they are paying so much for cable subscriptions that seem be increasingly showing “cheaper” television overall. It’s the mid-2000s, and “Cutting the Cord” isn’t a thing just quite yet, but people are starting to grow frustrated.
Netflix Streaming
There have been articles written (as noted on Wikipedia) that state that Co-Found Reed Hastings had told colleagues as early as the late 1990s that the plan was to migrate their subscribers from the DVD by Mail operation to streaming. Obviously, this was well before the technology allowed for this, in terms of bandwidth and compatible hardware. There were conceptual plans for a set top gadget that would download and store your movies (from a queue) overnight. This would be a way to sidestep the problem of insufficient in-home bandwidth for most users to stream without buffering. This device never came to fruition, and eventually instead was spun off into what would become the Roku media player.
It wasn’t until 2007 that the streaming service we all know today officially launched. At the time, the service was referred to as Netflix Watch Now and could only be viewed via Internet Explorer, likely due to the contents rights management baked into this web browser. This service had a very limited number of titles at launch. These were mostly films, and some second-run TV shows. There were none of the original titles that many know.
In 2008, many studios and rights holders were exploring their best options for streaming content. Many studios were feeling heartburn from Netflix’s impact on DVD sales and rentals. Consumers were no longer rushing out to buy or rent the latest releases; they were instead waiting until they arrived in their queue from Netflix.
Netflix ultimately formed deals with the studios that specified that Netflix would not place the latest releases into the DVD by mail operation for 28 days until after release. This agreement made Netflix appear as a viable source of new revenue to the studios as a new collaborator for licensing their massive libraries for streaming. Whereas the lifecycle was previously moved from box office, rental, cable premiums and then to cable reruns – the studios now had a new tier for longer streaming contracts and revenue that didn’t exist previously.
Meanwhile (in 2008), TV networks were forming a collective “on demand” type service in Hulu. Hulu was formed between News Corporation and NBC Universal. Other players bought in smaller stakes, which allowed for a good collection of on-demand content in one place. At first, Hulu focused on recent episodes of series broadcast on television networks. This was free and ad supported. There was no paid Hulu subscription until 2010. The paid Hulu service offered full seasons that were advertisement free and in high definition.
Netflix was still seeing the value in bingeable content, but did not have a broadcast network partner of their own to showcase this type of content. Later, Netflix did form partnerships with studios like Paramount, Sony/MGM, and Lionsgate. This allowed Netflix to secure the rights to highly bingeable prestige shows that viewers may have overlooked in their first runs on cable networks such as AMC. Shows like Breaking Bad and Mad Men gave Netflix’s streaming service a bit of an edge.
The streaming service was initially offered as complimentary add-on for Netflix’s DVD-by-mail subscribers, though there was an 18-hour monthly limit at first. This was presumably because Netflix did not want a huge data center/bandwidth bill as this model was quite new at the time. Later, this 18-hour limit was removed entirely for most DVD-by-mail subscribers. A standalone streaming option was unveiled in 2010 (USD $7.99/month at the time).
In conjunction with the growing online film availability the addition of entire seasons of prestige dramas made Netflix’s streaming service a very attractive option to an audience that noticed their viewing habits changing.
Netflix would also find success importing popular foreign titles to a wider audience such as the BBC’s Sherlock. Netflix was able to also fund its own signature show, House of Cards. Netflix later followed House of Cards with shows such as Orange is the New Black and Stranger Things. These shows had gained enough popularity to warrant new subscribers on account of these original programs alone.
HBO GO/HBO NOW
HBO, a profitable subsidiary of Time Warner, was starting to detect Netflix’s successful business models slowly chipping away at their subscription revenue. HBO was obviously originally successful due to their ability to show box office hits at home. HBO’s primary competitor in the 1980s was video rental; titles were available for rental or purchase well prior to their availability to the likes of HBO or Showtime. However, for the casual viewer who didn’t want to rush to the video store for all releases, HBO was sufficient. Time Warner and HBO had to determine a way to stay meaningful in this new streaming era. (This is something Time Warner and HBO deserve credit for, as other players were not always successful in gaining meaningful market share with their approaches to streaming.)
HBO had previously offered several variants of their linear cable channels. This was one of the reasons that cable or satellite companies could easily offer 200+ channels as a selling point to their bundles. Users received feeds for both the East coast and West coast time zones, HBO2, HBO Comedy, HBO Family or HBO Zone for a wider selection of movies being broadcast at any given time.
HBO GO was launched in 2010. The HBO GO streaming package was free to existing HBO subscribers. HBO had hoped that the additional library and flexibility of when and where to watch was enough to have former subscribers return, or enough to attract new subscribers altogether. This approach was moderately successful. Executives recognized that there was a limit to this success defined by the total number of cable subscribers. The success of Netflix proved that more and more people were stepping away from cable. To remain competitive, HBO needed a package that didn’t require cable.
This led to HBO NOW’s launch in 2015. Much consideration was taken here so that Time Warner would not alienate their partner cable operators, a concern which still exists by many studios today (such as Disney with ESPN’s sports rights in creating a sports streaming service). In fact, HBO initially limited the number of platforms HBO NOW was available on at first (limited to Apple hardware) for this very reason. Other platforms would soon be added. Additionally, the pricing was higher than that of having HBO added on to an existing cable package. (USD $15 for HBO NOW, around USD $9 - $11 for cable add-on).
HBO NOW and HBO GO ultimately merged into HBO Max (2020), and then later just Max. Time Warner merged with Discovery in 2022; content with Discovery’s networks (as well as Discovery+) was slowly added as well. The Max package also now offers advertisement supported subscriptions (USD $10).
CBS All Access/Paramount+
CBS All Access began as the first subscription-based service to focus on showcasing content from a single broadcast network (CBS). The service originally focused on popular CBS broadcast programming, such as NCIS, CSI, or Big Brother. CBS Television did have television rights to popular Paramount franchise Star Trek, allowing for production of exclusive Star Trek based series that would be exclusive to the streaming service.
(Paramount Studio retains the movie rights to the franchise, which was then under the Viacom corporate umbrella.)
Asking users to pay USD $6.00 per month for something that was free didn’t resonate well with potential subscribers. Users also did not initially subscribe due to lack of original content.
Prior to 2006, Viacom existed with nearly the same properties that ViacomCBS does today. In a move to foster growth Viacom split into CBS Corporation and Viacom. CBS, Showtime, The CW Network, along with publishing and radio broadcast organizations went under the CBS Corporation side. Cable TV Networks and Paramount Pictures went under the Viacom side. (This split was essentially undone in 2019 when the two halves merged once again).
At the launch of CBS All Access in 2014, Showtime content was being offered as its own subscription service (like HBO Max/Max). However, as both services were struggling to attract new subscribers, it was decided to merge Showtime’s streaming efforts into CBS Access. Users would have to purchase an add-on for Showtime’s content to their CBS All Access subscription for an added fee.
When the merger happened in 2019. Rather than having Paramount or MTV struggle with defining their own streaming platforms, their content was added into the CBS All Access platform. The platform itself was renamed to Paramount+ in 2021.
Amazon
Amazon, which had grown substantially from its origin as an online bookstore, modified its Amazon Unbox service into Amazon Instant Video (2011), which was available as a standalone subscription. Amazon had gained rights from Viacom and was offering Paramount and MTV titles. An early focus was to claim market share to prevent Netflix from being the sole dominant player in the streaming market.
In 2014 this Amazon’s service was renamed Amazon Prime Video and bundled into Amazon Prime Membership as a perk on top of the discounted shipping rates.
Amazon’s original content started in 2015 with The Man in the High Castle. This would soon be followed by Jack Ryan, The Boys, and The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel.
For many, this perk was enough to prevent Amazon subscribers from inching away from the Amazon brand and trying other services such as Netflix or HBO Max. In fact, the Amazon Prime Video app interfaces often added users to “add on” content from HBO Max or Paramount+ for an upcharge. This gave Amazon the benefit of being a “one stop” solution to what was becoming a confusing mess of interfaces for various streaming content.
Amazon seemed a bit more reserved in greenlighting original content in comparison to Netflix. Netflix gambled a great deal with funding original content which didn’t always pay off for Netflix. However, in the long run – the number of original titles that finally did resonate with viewers did provide a Netflix an advantage.
Amazon would later (2017) seek to gain an edge with live events such as sports, notably with the NFL in a Thursday Night Football package and later the MLB with select games over the summer. Netflix started broadcasting NFL games with a Christmas Day event in 2024.
Disney/ESPN/Hulu
As mentioned, Hulu was launched in 2007 featuring free ad-supported “on demand” type content from its partner owners (News Corporation, NBC Universal). The Hulu+ (paid) option launched in 2010 which featured more bingeable HD content with entire seasons of TV shows. Hulu + Live TV was launched in 2017, as many users at this point were very interested in “cutting the cord” – hoping for more lightweight channel packages to drop cable TV bills. This provided a unified interface for live linear channels directly in the same interface with bingeable content.
ESPN+ launched in 2018. Initially, ESPN+’s programming was mostly limited to UFC fighting (ESPN had just acquired rights from Fox) or smaller sports (such as regional college sports and some soccer leagues). Initially launched for USD $5/month, it was marketed purely at the deep sports enthusiast. This marketing was likely done to limit expectations on the type of content that would initially be shown on ESPN+. Later ESPN+ gained rights from other Leagues (such as NHL) and international soccer content, allowing ESPN to raise the price to USD $7/month.
Disney+ arrived with much fanfare in 2019. As Disney fans are fiercely loyal, it was rather likely that – of any of the streaming services – Disney+ would be the most likely be successful as a standalone option at launch. This was bolstered by Disney’s recent acquisitions of Marvel and Star Wars content (as well as other titles in 20th Century Fox’s libraries that it had acquired). Despite a few technical glitches (due to demand) at launch, and some minor disappointment about titles that were not initially available, the launch of Disney+ was successful.
Alongside the Disney+ launch in 2019, a bundle (USD $13/month) included Hulu/ESPN+/Disney+ all in one ad-supported package with ad-free variants of the package available as well.
Peacock
Like CBS All Access, Peacock was launched as the Streaming brand of NBC (with its Peacock logo). Unlike CBS All-Access however, Peacock offered a wider array of Original Programming at launch. None of this original program significantly caught on with viewers, however. While Punky Brewster and Saved by The Bell did get reboots, other teased reboots such as Battlestar Galactica (produced by Mr. Robot’s Sam Esmail) did not.
At launch (2020), Peacock relied heavily on reruns of NBC hits like The Office, Parks and Recreation, and Saturday Night Live. Movies from Universal did not arrive until 2021.
NBC’s rights to the Olympics and certain soccer leagues proved to be beneficial in terms of subscriber growth.
NBC Sports Network (national channel, not the regional sports networks) shut down in 2021. While some of this sports content went to USA or other cable properties, much of the sports content moved to Peacock.
As of 2025, Peacock has 36 million subscribers, compared to Hulu’s 72 million subscribers for reference. Peacock’s subscriber figures likely only bests Apple TV+ (which does not release subscriber numbers).
Apple TV+
Launched in 2019, Apple TV+ had more of a focus on original high-quality prestige content, as Apple didn’t have substantial contracts with studios at this point. The initial subscription price was USD $5/month (as of 2025 – USD $10/month).
Shows at launch included The Morning Show which received critical acclaim. This was enough for Apple to fund development of shows such as Ted Lasso, Silo, and Severance – each of which have been quite successful with dedicated fans or critical acclaim – allowing Apple to showcase the service for continued prestige content.
Despite having a much slimmer portfolio of shows compared to others, Apple TV+ has found success focusing on this original content. Additionally, Apple has the ability to promote discounted introductory subscriptions alongside the purchase of Apple computers and phones.
Apple TV+ also secured rights for MLS Soccer in the United States.
Subscription Fatigue
As I once wrote about (https://sonnik.substack.com/p/the-hidden-costs-of-modern-consumerism )- users are feeling as though they are in a subscription trap.
Users still feel as though they need to subscribe to a linear program service – whether it’s traditional cable or something such as YouTube TV. Perhaps the only reason they do retain these cable or satellite subscriptions is for the benefit of live news or sports programming.
Meanwhile, conversations with friends, family and colleagues may cause a viewer to feel as though they are missing out, or risk having their enjoyment spoiled by a content producer on social media if they don’t have access to a certain show or event. Relaxing on the couch after a long day, and catching up on some entertaining television for some simple leisure time does have appeal. The corporations that own and distribute this content know this.
As a child, I recall a few cable channels costing around USD $30 a month (including HBO). Today, it is possible for some individuals to pay approximately USD $300 a month for various sports, movies, and original programming available through cable TV and streaming services. Some people may find this acceptable, viewing it as the cost of having access to a wide range of content at any time. Others might not cancel a service due to fear of missing out (FOMO) or for occasional specific programming needs. Additionally, some individuals may not have the discipline or time to manage multiple individual subscriptions.
Meanwhile…
As we approach the present day in our review of these events, it’s important to know that local broadcasters are still out there seeking advertising for their local markets. The networks that they affiliate with have substantially less scripted programming today compared to thirty years ago. Instead, these networks now fill their schedules with reality or game shows. What is a local TV station to do when their networks aren’t competitive in primetime?
Additionally, is it possible for a linear channel to be streamed totally free and supported by advertising only?
Stay tuned…
Addendum to this post, WBD is now going to rename "max" back to "HBO Max" - I find the back-and-forth on this kind of humorous.
https://variety.com/2025/tv/news/max-changes-name-hbo-max-1236397399/