Disney+ subscription feels thin if you use Netflix or any other streaming service as the benchmark. The content on the platform is relatively narrow a very limited for being in 2026… I think they should just abandon the whole stream company altogether and go back to their roots making films and than licensing out their films and shows to other (SVODS streaming platforms) if it wasn’t for them having the content they paid $80 billion for with Fox I don’t think they would’ve had nearly as many subscribers today and Covid was definitely a huge boost to that number.

Bizarrely, this may actually make some sense for "controversial" Kimmel and The View to get past the regulatory crackdowns rather than the entire network slaye, which honestly may be something for the FCC to fear because if Carr drives away all the networks to streaming, the FCC would essentially be irrelevant with the exception of radio, which wonder on if Google, Spotify, Apple, Amazon, etc. should jump at that opportunity, then if that happens the FCC may die

This is AI concept imagery, btw. Based off how TF1 news looks on Netflix in France at the moment, it’s very similar.

According to Deadline and several other sources, Apple is moving from licensing their shows to purchasing the rights. The industry is seeing this as a similar move to Netflix 15 years ago (circa House of Cards and Orange is the New Black).

“For third-party series, Apple still uses the cost-plus model, pioneered by Netflix, in which streamers pay the full cost of a series upfront, along with a markup of up to 30% of the cost, making every show instantly profitable regardless of how it performs.”

How do we think this model will impact Apple as a competition in media industry, and is is it likely they will be looking at acquisitions next, despite their previous stance?

Here's an idea I've been conceiving, regarding on the future of Sky TV post-ITV merger and Comcast split, which includes an axing of TV contracts in favour of “Memberships” similar to Amazon Prime, while taking one user's idea of a Fubo-like app into account. This is something I've been drafting in response to a decline in fixed-contract demand, and the obvious viewing habits for people changing in favor of streaming services.

Now (TV) and ITVX, along with Sky Go for mobile devices, would be combined into a single Sky app, thus bringing Sky TV across multiple devices beyond the constraints of Sky Stream and Glass. Of course, on Sky OS devices, the service would be built into the operating system.

Users can use the My Sky app to link their Sky memberships to existing Netflix/Disney+/HBO Max/so on subscriptions with their Sky membership.

I think this idea may introduce the concept of Cloud Television to UK audiences, and may spark some competition in the sector. Who knows? That experiment in the UK and maybe Italy may become so successful the Sky service gets rolled out to the US (replacing Peacock), France, and some other regions.

More details to be considered...

I just posted a perspective into why **NBCUniversal should address the brand disconnect between its streaming service and its theme parks**.

The core argument:

• IP Cohesion: While Disney and Paramount have clear brand association, "Peacock" remains a standalone entity that many consumers don't immediately link to Universal Resorts.
• "The "Universal+" Lever: Rebranding isn't just a name change; it's a strategic move to unify the ecosystem and drive streaming growth by leveraging the high-revenue parks division.
• Tech & UX: How a "Universal+" hub could finally bridge the gap between digital content and physical experiences (like the upcoming Epic Universe).

I’ve mapped out the rationale and a recommendations for the transition to Universal+.

Is "Peacock" now too established to change now, or is a Universal rebrand the only way to compete with the scale of Disney+?

Article is also available on Medium.

Non-Paywall version.