Peacock (Streaming Service) | Page 26 | Inside Universal Forums

Peacock (Streaming Service)

  • Signing up for a Premium Membership is a donation to help Inside Universal maintain costs and offers an ad-free experience on the forum. Learn more about it here.
33 million users...that’s more than those that activated HBO Max...
Again, they refuse to state how many are paying though. I know the ads bring in revenue, but it's so easy to sign up for a free account and never use it again (therefore, they aren't making ad revenue). I'd really love a breakdown oof paying customers vs. those that are signed up for free.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SeventyOne
Again, they refuse to state how many are paying though. I know the ads bring in revenue, but it's so easy to sign up for a free account and never use it again (therefore, they aren't making ad revenue). I'd really love a breakdown oof paying customers vs. those that are signed up for free.
they've already stated they make more money off of ad supported accounts than paying, though, so i don't follow your logic.
 
they've already stated they make more money off of ad supported accounts than paying, though, so i don't follow your logic.
My point is, i'd like to know how many 'dead' accounts they have. If you are paying $15 per month for Netflix you are going to use it. Same for HBO Max. If you can just sign up for, sure, you have an account, but you never actually return to use it.

I get they make more from ad supported accounts, I guess what i'm interested in is how many people are paying. Are they only making more from ad-supported accounts because there's an extremely few amount of people actually paying for the service? That's my question.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SeventyOne
My point is, i'd like to know how many 'dead' accounts they have. If you are paying $15 per month for Netflix you are going to use it. Same for HBO Max. If you can just sign up for, sure, you have an account, but you never actually return to use it.

I get they make more from ad supported accounts, I guess what i'm interested in is how many people are paying. Are they only making more from ad-supported accounts because there's an extremely few amount of people actually paying for the service? That's my question.

So they said previously that it only took 5 hours of watching peacock with ads to equal the same $10 revenue made from a no ads subscriber.

Thats why they give ad based premium accounts for free like candy. Only have to watch 5 hours and they made all the theoretical money loss.

jeff shell mentioned that they based on the hours during the earning calls as well. The hours and adveristing revenue is what they see.

Comedy is really keeping people watching peacock...premier league viewers watch comedies, people who came due to the office watched the comedies. Comedy and Sports are the big drivers
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: RevFreako
My point is, i'd like to know how many 'dead' accounts they have. If you are paying $15 per month for Netflix you are going to use it. Same for HBO Max. If you can just sign up for, sure, you have an account, but you never actually return to use it.

I get they make more from ad supported accounts, I guess what i'm interested in is how many people are paying. Are they only making more from ad-supported accounts because there's an extremely few amount of people actually paying for the service? That's my question.
No, they make more from one ad supported account than one paid ad free account, that's what they're saying. They're clearly doing well enough to be very happy, so the ratio doesn't really matter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rageofthegods
No, they make more from one ad supported account than one paid ad free account, that's what they're saying. They're clearly doing well enough to be very happy, so the ratio doesn't really matter.
The point he is getting at is the number of users doesn't matter when it comes to ads. It is the active users that matter. He is wanting to know is how many of these accounts are actually being used. If I have a free account and am not watching anything then, comcast is making no money off of me through ad revenue. The advertisers want to know how many people are going to see their ad. If they have 30mil users, but only 10mil are active then that is the number advertisers care about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nick and SeventyOne
The point he is getting at is the number of users doesn't matter when it comes to ads. It is the active users that matter. He is wanting to know is how many of these accounts are actually being used. If I have a free account and am not watching anything then, comcast is making no money off of me through ad revenue. The advertisers want to know how many people are going to see their ad. If they have 30mil users, but only 10mil are active then that is the number advertisers care about.
And I'm saying the number must be enough to satisfy Comcast and partners, if orgs like WWE are willing to port their largest domestic source of income over to the service.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rageofthegods
And I'm saying the number must be enough to satisfy Comcast and partners, if orgs like WWE are willing to port their largest domestic source of income over to the service.
Except you need to sign up for either the $4.99 or $9.99 version of the service to watch the WWE content. It's all about subscribers in the streaming game and imo, what Comcast is announcing is a very loose description of the word. I would call the ad-supported accounts as "users", but not "subscribers".

Also, Peacock signed a deal worth roughly $1B with WWE, so of course they aren't going to have an issue coming over to Peacock. A whole crap load of celebrities didn't have a problem with making Quibi content, either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SeventyOne
Except you need to sign up for either the $4.99 or $9.99 version of the service to watch the WWE content. It's all about subscribers in the streaming game and imo, what Comcast is announcing is a very loose description of the word. I would call the ad-supported accounts as "users", but not "subscribers".

Also, Peacock signed a deal worth roughly $1B with WWE, so of course they aren't going to have an issue coming over to Peacock. A whole crap load of celebrities didn't have a problem with making Quibi content, either.
Comparing Quibi to Peacock is like comparing your church's strawberry fair with Universal Orlando.
 
It wasn't a comparison, it was as an analogy. The two obviously aren't the same.
Besides, have they even said whether you need the paid version of Peacock? All I've seen is 5 for ads and ten for no ads.
 
Besides, have they even said whether you need the paid version of Peacock? All I've seen is 5 for ads and ten for no ads.
Can I watch WWE Network on Peacock's free plan?
Though Peacock offers a free streaming option, WWE Network won't be available through this plan. You'll need the Peacock Premium plan for $5 a month or the Peacock Premium Plus plan for $10 a month.

 
Can I watch WWE Network on Peacock's free plan?
Though Peacock offers a free streaming option, WWE Network won't be available through this plan. You'll need the Peacock Premium plan for $5 a month or the Peacock Premium Plus plan for $10 a month.

I stand corrected. Doesn't bother me, I did the annual Peacock plan.
 
Jeff shell statements regarding Peacock

Hey Ben. So, Peacock obviously is primarily an AVOD service. And we have a number of metrics, the one that we that Brian and Mike talked about today is signups with loops every quarter which we reached 33 million this week. People sign up then they use it actively and then the usage per user that drive the amount of hours we saw on advertising.

And we are up significantly over all of our metrics versus what we anticipated going into the business. We are only, we launched this on Comcast just over nine months ago and nationally just over six months ago, so we’re at the very beginning of this business. But we are very confident based on the small amount of time that the business model has adapted the right business model, people are signing up, they are using what we have expected. And advertisers are very interested in buying it.

So, this steady growth is very promising for us and we don’t have anything to reframe at this point, but I think that the performance that is much better than we expected, give us a lot optionality going forward. But we're just going to continue to drive this business model now and focus on the advertising revenue.





Yeah, thanks Brian and John. So, it's obviously, let me start with the office. So the office, we have the office as of January 1st, we've had it now for almost a month, very pleased with how it's doing. Our usage among our customers are actually higher than we think the usage was amongst Netflix customers.

And more importantly what's happening is, we're seeing that people who are watching The Office on Peacock are watching lots of other comedies. So it’s really driving Parks Rec, and really driving Brooklyn 99 amongst others. So, there's kind of an ecosystem of that.

We've talked in previous quarters about how EPL has really worked for us, it was Premier League and how those viewers also came in and to our surprise a much greater percentage of them, then turn them watching other things like Yellowstone and or comedy. So, we believe, there's kind of an ecosystem here, like the whole world of broadcast where people will, we can cross promote people into different things. And that certainly seems to be working and The Office has really worked.

WWE is kind of a perfect property for us, because it allows us to number one, thousands of hours of programming that were behind a paywall that will now put on the free service of Peacock, which will not only enhance the brand of WWE, but we can monetize an advertising. We get the events that were behind a paywall that used to be pay per view, can drive our 499 Premium version of Peacock.

And then remember, we have a big investment in WWE at USA on our linear networks. And so, this kind of perfectly fits into our model of operating the business as a whole and cross promoting and selling advertising clients one platform, one solution, as Linda calls it. So, I think the model that we've constructed here to really kind of leverage our existing linear businesses and drive advertising is working, and I think comedy, sports, two of the success stories certainly so far
 
WWE content confirmed for the free tier, though not Pay per view events.

For those wondering about Peacock's revenue, Peacock revenue is listed in the "Corporate and Other" section of their 10-Q (it's lumped in with revenue from "Comcast Spectator," their sports-team division, but since there haven't been many games we can assume the majority of revenue listed in that section is Peacock).

Q4 ended with 116m in revenue, up from 84m last quarter. Monthly ARPU amounts to $1.17 in this case. Hulu's monthly advertising only ARPU is 5.60. (Before you pour scorn, Hulu is also literally the most established AVOD service on the market).
 
Just letting people know, new era of SNL begins tonight, first post Trump episode. Not getting political but they have other material than him. John Krasinski host w/my crush Machine Gun Kelly. Wanted to post before tonignt, I think it’ll be a good time to join the show.
 
So I’ve never really watched the show so like I know I’m a decade late somewhat lol, but the season of The Voice that’s on Peacock has amazing talent thru the auditions, good for a fun binge I’d say. No spoilers if you’ve seen but anyone needing a simple watch for dinner, while cooking, background this is perfect or even if you’re paying attention haha. Talent is crazy good