HBO/Roku
July 2, 2020 3:25 PM Subscribe
HBO Max does not (yet) exist on Roku. Why?
HBO Go and Now were on Roku and are now being removed. HBO Max is not on Roku and conceivably might never be. Obviously this is because Roku and WarnerMedia haven't yet come to an agreement. But what exactly is happening in this dispute?
1) In general, does Roku pay content providers to have their content available? Do the content providers pay Roku? Or does no money change hands?
2) Next, is HBO asking for better financial terms than what they previously had with Roku? Is Roku asking for better terms than the previous deal? (Presumably, it's the former, because nothing has changed from Roku's perspective, so why would they want to use the new streaming service to play hardball with WarnerMedia.)
3) And finally, let's compare this to, say, the Apple Store. Apple sells songs and takes a cut per song -- okay, that's clear. Apple sells apps (e.g. mobile games) and presumably takes a cut per app.
But Apple also offers free apps that have ads, and apps like Netflix which are free to download but you pay to see any content. Presumably Apple wants a cut here too. So are app developers paying to have their app in the app store? Is it different for every app? Presumably Netflix has a lot of leverage and wouldn't want to pay Apple. But for Tiny Mobile Game Company that offers free games funded by ads, presumably Apple wouldn't let that company upload their game for free, right?
And Apple currently has HBO Max. What does it say that Apply has HBO Max but Roku doesn't?
HBO Go and Now were on Roku and are now being removed. HBO Max is not on Roku and conceivably might never be. Obviously this is because Roku and WarnerMedia haven't yet come to an agreement. But what exactly is happening in this dispute?
1) In general, does Roku pay content providers to have their content available? Do the content providers pay Roku? Or does no money change hands?
2) Next, is HBO asking for better financial terms than what they previously had with Roku? Is Roku asking for better terms than the previous deal? (Presumably, it's the former, because nothing has changed from Roku's perspective, so why would they want to use the new streaming service to play hardball with WarnerMedia.)
3) And finally, let's compare this to, say, the Apple Store. Apple sells songs and takes a cut per song -- okay, that's clear. Apple sells apps (e.g. mobile games) and presumably takes a cut per app.
But Apple also offers free apps that have ads, and apps like Netflix which are free to download but you pay to see any content. Presumably Apple wants a cut here too. So are app developers paying to have their app in the app store? Is it different for every app? Presumably Netflix has a lot of leverage and wouldn't want to pay Apple. But for Tiny Mobile Game Company that offers free games funded by ads, presumably Apple wouldn't let that company upload their game for free, right?
And Apple currently has HBO Max. What does it say that Apply has HBO Max but Roku doesn't?
But for Tiny Mobile Game Company that offers free games funded by ads, presumably Apple wouldn't let that company upload their game for free, right? So are app developers paying to have their app in the app store? Is it different for every app?
I can answer the portions of your question related to the Apple app stores. For application developers using Apple's app stores Apple collects the following fees: $99 a year for access to the Apple developer program (per company, not per app), 30% of the app up-front price (so $0 for a free app), 30% of in-app digital purchases, 30% of any in-app subscription revenue for the first year and 15% for subsequent years. A hypothetical game that was entirely funded by in-app ads would only be paying Apple $99 a year no matter how much it makes in ad revenue.
The vast, vast, majority of apps in the Apple app stores play by those rules. I few very large players have the leverage to negotiate special deals. Before Netflix dropped the ability to sign up via an in-app subscription on Apple platforms is was largely believed that Netflix was only paying a 15% in-app subscription fee well before Apple offered it to all developers. More recently, Apple granted Amazon permission to completely bypass Apple's in-app fees in their Prime Video app, apparently in return for Amazon agreeing to support a variety of Apple services (and perhaps related to earlier negotiations during which Amazon agreed to allow the Apple TV+ service on Amazon Fire TV devices).
posted by RichardP at 3:57 PM on July 2, 2020
I can answer the portions of your question related to the Apple app stores. For application developers using Apple's app stores Apple collects the following fees: $99 a year for access to the Apple developer program (per company, not per app), 30% of the app up-front price (so $0 for a free app), 30% of in-app digital purchases, 30% of any in-app subscription revenue for the first year and 15% for subsequent years. A hypothetical game that was entirely funded by in-app ads would only be paying Apple $99 a year no matter how much it makes in ad revenue.
The vast, vast, majority of apps in the Apple app stores play by those rules. I few very large players have the leverage to negotiate special deals. Before Netflix dropped the ability to sign up via an in-app subscription on Apple platforms is was largely believed that Netflix was only paying a 15% in-app subscription fee well before Apple offered it to all developers. More recently, Apple granted Amazon permission to completely bypass Apple's in-app fees in their Prime Video app, apparently in return for Amazon agreeing to support a variety of Apple services (and perhaps related to earlier negotiations during which Amazon agreed to allow the Apple TV+ service on Amazon Fire TV devices).
posted by RichardP at 3:57 PM on July 2, 2020
Is your model of Roku one that will let you cast video from your phone to the device? We have a Chromecast and that is how we use HBO Max. I understand this is not your question, but perhaps that is what Roku is expecting people to do. A friend just bought a new Roku because they removed Hulu from the old one and she is able to cast from her phone.
posted by soelo at 4:10 PM on July 2, 2020
posted by soelo at 4:10 PM on July 2, 2020
With newer Rokus, you can cast your screen to your TV(as if it were a chromecast) and thus watch anything that way.
posted by Obscure Reference at 4:17 PM on July 2, 2020
posted by Obscure Reference at 4:17 PM on July 2, 2020
I'll start by saying: I don't know. However, if you're interested in the economics of streaming services and their distributors, you might be interested in this anonymous author's blog: Entertainment Strategy Guy. The author claims to have worked for one of the large streamers in the past, but I can't vouch for that. I have found it quite interesting in the general "why do movie studios, streaming platforms, and cable companies do what they do" sense.
Generally, the eponymous Guy regards Roku as a "bundler" of streaming channels, and he claims that they take a cut of subscription revenue when people subscribe through the Roku box. I have a Roku, and I recently was asked to complete a survey where they wanted to know all about how I search for content and how I pay for it, asking whether I use the Roku-based services or pay directly through the apps (which is what I do, I didn't even know you could subscribe through Roku). The wording of the survey appeared to be fishing for a result that users are primarily loyal to Roku rather than the individual streamers. That would support the notion that Roku collects some money for the privilege of putting content on their platform.
That blog linked to this article in Variety about this question from late May here. It doesn't say a whole lot but it has quotes from PR flacks from each company.
posted by five toed sloth at 5:23 PM on July 2, 2020 [1 favorite]
Generally, the eponymous Guy regards Roku as a "bundler" of streaming channels, and he claims that they take a cut of subscription revenue when people subscribe through the Roku box. I have a Roku, and I recently was asked to complete a survey where they wanted to know all about how I search for content and how I pay for it, asking whether I use the Roku-based services or pay directly through the apps (which is what I do, I didn't even know you could subscribe through Roku). The wording of the survey appeared to be fishing for a result that users are primarily loyal to Roku rather than the individual streamers. That would support the notion that Roku collects some money for the privilege of putting content on their platform.
That blog linked to this article in Variety about this question from late May here. It doesn't say a whole lot but it has quotes from PR flacks from each company.
posted by five toed sloth at 5:23 PM on July 2, 2020 [1 favorite]
Roku gets a cut of revenue if you sign up for HBO Now through your Roku account (which is not the only way to get an HBO Now account, of course). I've read that this type of thing is their main source of revenue now. I believe they don't get any revenue for HBO Go subscriptions, because that is such a perk for subscribers of HBO through their cable companies. HBO is trying to move to direct billing (I'm not sure if their intention is 100% direct billing, or just more than before) and Roku wouldn't get a cut of that.
I don't think we know who is playing more hardball here.. could be that HBO is refusing to let people subscribe to HBO Max through Roku, could be that they are but Roku wants a bigger cut. There are so many variables it is difficult to conclude that one party is being more stubborn than the other, based on what little we know.
My understanding was that HBO Now is sticking around for now, and if you formerly had HBO Go, you can sign up for HBO Max for free on your computer and use those login credentials on HBO Now.
posted by acidic at 12:07 AM on July 3, 2020
I don't think we know who is playing more hardball here.. could be that HBO is refusing to let people subscribe to HBO Max through Roku, could be that they are but Roku wants a bigger cut. There are so many variables it is difficult to conclude that one party is being more stubborn than the other, based on what little we know.
My understanding was that HBO Now is sticking around for now, and if you formerly had HBO Go, you can sign up for HBO Max for free on your computer and use those login credentials on HBO Now.
posted by acidic at 12:07 AM on July 3, 2020
My understanding was that HBO Now is sticking around for now
The app turned into HBO Max on the day that Max became available and Now is not in the Apple app store today.
posted by soelo at 7:27 AM on July 3, 2020
The app turned into HBO Max on the day that Max became available and Now is not in the Apple app store today.
posted by soelo at 7:27 AM on July 3, 2020
five toed sloth & acidic are right; it’s all about the money. This article breaks it down pretty well. AT&T wants people to access HBO Max only from the app and pay directly a la Netflix et al. Roku and Amazon say no, you used to give everyone HBO through cable providers and add-on subscriptions that people bought from us and we don’t want to lose our cut. Their worry (and AT&T’s hope) is that with current trends in cord-cutting more and more people will be subscribing to these services a la carte instead of getting them bundled through cable providers or other walled-garden platforms like the Roku Channel or Amazon Video.
Each side has enough leverage right now that no one has backed down. According to this (via), Roku and Amazon control the bulk of streaming activity, but HBO has the extra content that they can withhold at will from anyone not using Max. Apple and other companies don’t care because these subscriptions make up a tiny portion of their revenues. Roku depends on their cut of subscriptions as a major part of their business model, and Amazon is Amazon so they’re used to doing whatever they want and having everyone fall in line.
posted by kyleg at 8:56 AM on July 3, 2020
Each side has enough leverage right now that no one has backed down. According to this (via), Roku and Amazon control the bulk of streaming activity, but HBO has the extra content that they can withhold at will from anyone not using Max. Apple and other companies don’t care because these subscriptions make up a tiny portion of their revenues. Roku depends on their cut of subscriptions as a major part of their business model, and Amazon is Amazon so they’re used to doing whatever they want and having everyone fall in line.
posted by kyleg at 8:56 AM on July 3, 2020
The app turned into HBO Max on the day that Max became available and Now is not in the Apple app store today.
I thought we were talking about Roku, where HBO Now is still available.
posted by acidic at 1:07 PM on July 3, 2020
I thought we were talking about Roku, where HBO Now is still available.
posted by acidic at 1:07 PM on July 3, 2020
This thread is closed to new comments.
The most likely possibility is that some agreement must be made between WarnerMedia (which owns HBO MAX) and/or AT&T (owns WarnerMedia) and Roku, Amazon, and any other currently-unsupported platforms.
posted by Sunburnt at 3:55 PM on July 2, 2020