Paramount+ and Showtime streaming services are merging

AppleInsider

Paramount Media Networks has announced a plan to merge its Paramount+ and Showtime streaming businesses, and executives warned of layoffs and other changes.

Paramount+

Streaming channels Paramount+ and Showtime are already combined into one app, and that will now be extended to the businesses. Paramount CEO Bob Bakish announced the move in a memo to staff on Monday afternoon, according to a report from The Hollywood Reporter.

The Showtime linear pay-TV channel and the premium tier of Paramount+ will be rebranded as Paramount+ with Showtime. Chris McCarthy will lead the Showtime studio and linear channel, while Tom Ryan will oversee the streaming business.

"While we are confident this is the right move for our company, our consumers, and our partners, we know this change brings uncertainty for the teams working on these brands and businesses," Bakish wrote. "We are committed to being as transparent and thoughtful as possible throughout this process, and we expect to share additional details in the coming weeks."

Bakish also mentioned that the move would "unlock operational efficiencies and financial benefits" for the company. Changes such as pricing and a plan to merge user accounts will be announced in the coming weeks.

The company plans to introduce significant changes to its programming and will focus on shows that are closely associated with Showtime's "brand strengths and content filters," such as "Billions," "Dexter," and "Yellowjackets." As a result, underperforming shows that account for less than 10% of views may get cut.

The first three shows that Showtime will cancel include "Let the Right One In" and "American Gigolo." "Three Women" will get moved to a different platform.

Competition to Paramount+ and Showtime

Paramount may be trying to strengthen its streaming platform as it competes with rivals such as Apple TV+ and Disney+ (view plans), as well as Warner Bros. Discovery.

For example, in May of 2021, AT&T's WarnerMedia merged with Discovery in a $43 billion deal, with plans to create a single streaming service. And in 2022, Discovery CEO David Zaslav told investors that the new service would combine HBO Max and Discovery+.

The platform's name is unknown, but it is set to launch in the summer of 2023 in the US and other regions in 2024.

Read on AppleInsider

danox

Content companies are low margin and are usually sold every 5 to 10 years to a new sucker in Hollywood. Keep your distance, Apple.

foregoneconclusion

Let me guess: the "financial benefits" will primarily be for Bob Bakish, Chris McCarthy and Tom Ryan.

entropys

Never a viable stand alone model. At best churn in and churn out. Meanwhile, losing licensing revenues from more viable streamers. But, MBA weenies have to jump on the latest bandwagon to climb the greasy pole. As long as they have moved on before the proverbial hits the fan, they get to stay clean.

ps, I doubt at this stage Apple TV+ is a serious competitor. Still some years to go for its business model to be competitive.

lkrupp

entropys said:

Never a viable stand alone model. At best churn in and churn out. Meanwhile, losing licensing revenues from more viable streamers. But, MBA weenies have to jump on the latest bandwagon to climb the greasy pole. As long as they have moved on before the proverbial hits the fan, they get to stay clean.

ps, I doubt at this stage Apple TV+ is a serious competitor. Still some years to go for its business model to be competitive.

Why does Apple TV+ even need to compete with this when it provides the quality content it does at the price it does? Take away the back catalogs of these other streaming services and they’re basically worthless. 

darbus69

US CONSUMERS are paying the price for all of their mistakes. I am personally sick of media  companies who split their brand in half i.e. Paramount/Paramount+ and proceed to split their bigger shows between the two services forcing you to pay out the arse in order to watch both Yellowstone/1883/1923. Add insult to injury and we are all paying over the top to watch the ads along with the content. What we need is disrupters to stop all the insanity, for those less fortunate they are stuck watching TVLand and other outdated content - #HavesAndHaveNots…

filemakerfeller

Back in the late 1990s I remember smart people arguing that Amazon was going to be in trouble once all the book publishers created their own online stores.

Fast forward twenty years and we're getting the same arguments about Netflix, except the media companies were actually pretty quick to implement their own streaming services.

Turns out that the first-mover advantage of capturing mindshare actually has some enduring value as long as the execution remains good.

Apple sees a strategic advantage to TV+ and has the profitability to sustain it. Everyone else, including Netflix, is looking at the (lack of) profitability for their streaming service and is feeling pressured to make some changes. Netflix doesn't have another source of revenue, so for them it's existential - but they also have the most cost-efficient operations and probably have the time to wait out the majority of their competitors. Once one of the others throws in the towel they will license their content to Netflix, who will then have an additional revenue stream and get stronger.

chasm

entropys said:

ps, I doubt at this stage Apple TV+ is a serious competitor. Still some years to go for its business model to be competitive.

You might be surprised, then, to learn that Statistic believes Apple TV to have about 75M subscribers worldwide, though this includes people who are getting Apple TV+ through their cell provider or other promotions alongside regular paid subscribers. If you only count regular paid subscribers, that number is around the 46-50M or so, still good enough to be in the top 10 worldwide (right alongside Paramount+, actually) worldwide.

Obviously the top five have nothing to worry about*, but Apple TV+ pretty clearly isn't trying to topple Netflix any more than Apple is trying to destroy Windows. Apple TV+ appeals to Apple's target demographic -- smart, value-conscious, above-average earners -- whereas Disney+ or Netflix are simply trying to get everyone from the unwashed masses on up.

*it might also surprise you to know that the top five worldwide are (in order), Netflix, Amazon Prime, Disney+, and then two Chinese-only SVOD (Streaming Video On Demand) providers, Tencent Video and iQIY!.

Thus, what you need to understand about streaming services is that there are multiple definitions of "success." Apple TV+ appears to be hitting the target it wanted to hit, just as Apple is number one among the type of upscale customers they want.

rotateleftbyte

Almost every Ad break here in the UK on FreeSat over the Christmas/New Year period contained an ad for Paramount+. I guess it didn't bring in the numbers they'd hoped.

Now... if only the endless ads for a certain alarm company were to go away I'd be happy. They must be spending most of their subscription service income on ads at the moment. That is clearly not sustainable.

inspiredcode

Sounds like the right move. Both these services needed more content.

libertykrs

Wonder what the impact of the Apple Paramount + Showtime combo for $9.99/month will be.

danox

FileMakerFeller said:

Back in the late 1990s I remember smart people arguing that Amazon was going to be in trouble once all the book publishers created their own online stores.

Fast forward twenty years and we're getting the same arguments about Netflix, except the media companies were actually pretty quick to implement their own streaming services.

Turns out that the first-mover advantage of capturing mindshare actually has some enduring value as long as the execution remains good.

Apple sees a strategic advantage to TV+ and has the profitability to sustain it. Everyone else, including Netflix, is looking at the (lack of) profitability for their streaming service and is feeling pressured to make some changes. Netflix doesn't have another source of revenue, so for them it's existential - but they also have the most cost-efficient operations and probably have the time to wait out the majority of their competitors. Once one of the others throws in the towel they will license their content to Netflix, who will then have an additional revenue stream and get stronger.

Apple has another business (the real one) that actually pays the bills. That’s the only reason they can dabble in this low margin game to the bottom, content companies never make enough good quality programs to make it profitable, and certainly not long-term at the level Apple is used to. That is why Netflix at the end of the day like Spotify is doomed to be sold off to the highest bidder 5 to 10 years from now that is how content companies slash Hollywood works. The newest sucker in town principle, the sucker at the end of the story ends up paying the bill.

What is sad is that Apple’s involvement in content will not sell one more Apple device. (They sell on their own merit)

edited February 2023

danox

InspiredCode said:

Sounds like the right move. Both these services needed more content.

A bottomless money pit they always will. They needed it at the beginning. They need it at the middle and they need it at the end. Only question is who will be last in line to pay the bill.

m68000

lkrupp said:

entropys said:

Never a viable stand alone model. At best churn in and churn out. Meanwhile, losing licensing revenues from more viable streamers. But, MBA weenies have to jump on the latest bandwagon to climb the greasy pole. As long as they have moved on before the proverbial hits the fan, they get to stay clean.

ps, I doubt at this stage Apple TV+ is a serious competitor. Still some years to go for its business model to be competitive.

Why does Apple TV+ even need to compete with this when it provides the quality content it does at the price it does? Take away the back catalogs of these other streaming services and they’re basically worthless. 

So you consider Paramount plus and the “other streaming services” as worthless?   I don’t.  Just as a sample,  Paramount plus has a ton of Star Trek stuff,  the complete Tom Cruise Mission Impossible movies, along with the complete Mission Impossible original TV series.  Let’s not forget many classics TV shows and a whole lot of international Soccer or football.  I recently noticed many of the James Bond movies are there now too.  Oh,  also some original series exclusive to their service.   Not worthless to me… in fact it’s a favorite steaming service I have.

I don’t know if you have ever heard of Britbox,  but I tried it a few months ago thinking it would be just a few days trial,  but instead it has become another favorite,  have seen several outstanding shows here.  They have Gordon Ramsay and other cooking shows too,  which alone are worth the monthly price.   

edited February 2023

japhey

M68000 said:

lkrupp said:

entropys said:

Never a viable stand alone model. At best churn in and churn out. Meanwhile, losing licensing revenues from more viable streamers. But, MBA weenies have to jump on the latest bandwagon to climb the greasy pole. As long as they have moved on before the proverbial hits the fan, they get to stay clean.

ps, I doubt at this stage Apple TV+ is a serious competitor. Still some years to go for its business model to be competitive.

Why does Apple TV+ even need to compete with this when it provides the quality content it does at the price it does? Take away the back catalogs of these other streaming services and they’re basically worthless. 

So you consider Paramount plus and the “other streaming services” as worthless?   I don’t.  Just as a sample,  Paramount plus has a ton of Star Trek stuff,  the complete Tom Cruise Mission Impossible movies, along with the complete Mission Impossible original TV series.  Let’s not forget many classics TV shows and a whole lot of international Soccer or football.  I recently noticed many of the James Bond movies are there now too.  Oh,  also some original series exclusive to their service.   Not worthless to me… in fact it’s a favorite steaming service I have.

I don’t know if you have ever heard of Britbox,  but I tried it a few months ago thinking it would be just a few days trial,  but instead it has become another favorite,  have seen several outstanding shows here.  They have Gordon Ramsay and other cooking shows too,  which alone are worth the monthly price.   

Britbox is a big favorite in our house too. We got it for a month and still have it 2 years later. 

japhey

Maybe it’s time to just do away with Showtime all together. Have Paramount+ absorb all the lucrative properties, license off the rest, and kill it. Seriously, it’s an ancient relic at this point. Even HBO is evolving. 

I don’t know one person that subscribes to Showtime unless it’s through some kind of promo package. I had one myself for the last few months until I downgraded to Paramount+ only. I found that, aside from 1 or 2 shows, Showtime just couldn’t compete with the other services I use. Not even for $3 a month.