[bryanlarsen]

"not a payment issue, it's an access issue."

...

"bullshit cash grab"

So in other words, it's a payment issue?

Let's say you watch $100/month for cable, and watch about 3 hours a day. That's over $3/hour. $10/month for 4 hours a TV is cheaper than cable, it's ad-free (I believe) and it's more convenient.

It's expensive compared to Netflix or piracy, but it can certainly be argued it's not a cash grab.

[khedoros1]

I already pay for CBS channels. I'm not paying them more for one show. They don't get to double-dip. I'd be happy to see any and all single-provider streaming services fail, and be forced onto some better-supported streaming service.

Not to mention that I'd have to buy another device to actually play their content on my TV; the blu-ray player supports Amazon, Netflix, and a few other big providers, but apparently not CBS. It's less about the cost of the device, and more about not wanting yet another little box under my TV that I need to worry about software updates and such for.

[mmanfrin]

You missed:

"You don't have to navigate between 15 different services"

I pay for Netflix, Prime, and Hulu -- I won't pay for CBS because there are already enough services.

[rhino369]

Then don't expect all content. Netflix, Prime, and Hulu have more content than you can watch.

Just don't think that justifies pirating whatever you want.

[kelnos]

Content isn't fungible. Netflix, Prime, and Hulu put together may have more content than you could ever watch (arguably, even just one of them alone does), but if it doesn't have the show or movie you want, you're boned.

I've had Netflix, Prime, and HBO for years. A couple months ago my gf and I really wanted to watch The Handmaid's Tale, which is only available on Hulu. Hulu charges $12/mo for their no-ad plan (hell if I'm going to pay for a service and still have to suffer through ads). The idea of paying $12/mo for a single show seemed a bit much to me... in the end I signed up for the free trial to watch it because I couldn't find pirated copies on Usenet.

Now Star Trek Discovery has just come out, and CBS wants me to give them $10/mo for the privilege of watching it. No thanks.

It's funny, because we've all jumped at the chance to "cut the cord" and ditch our cable subscriptions, but we've replaced it with the online version of exactly the same thing. We still don't have a la carte pricing for TV shows and movies for the most part. At this point I might be paying more per month than I used to for cable.

[xzel]

I don't think its fair to boil the two points he made into the same argument. He said too many services and timing issues and one thing about Star Trek. His second point is pretty specific to occurrence, companies taking their shows off 3rd party streaming services and putting them behind their own paywall. That is definitely a cash grab and its become more common, in my opinion.

[bryanlarsen]

That's exactly my point. There are two issues: cost and access. The OP said "It's not a payment issue, it's an access issue." I say it's both.