Skydance's Discovery+ Prices Increase By Up to 20% (arstechnica.com) 56
Discovery+ has raised prices for new subscribers, increasing its ad-free plan from $10 to $12 per month and its ad-supported plan from $6 to $7. The hike comes shortly after Paramount Skydance acquired Warner Bros. Discovery. Ars Technica reports: The new prices take effect for new subscribers immediately. Current subscribers to the streaming service, which primarily features unscripted content, like reality shows and documentaries, will receive 30 days' notice before the new prices take effect, starting with bills issued as of November 12. [...] However, a Skydance spokesperson told Ars Technica that the pricing changes were in the works before Discovery+ knew about the merger's closing date and were not planned in anticipation of a merger.
The spokesperson said that Discovery+'s prices are regularly evaluated to ensure that they are in line with the content and experience that the service offers, and the new prices reflect that. Discovery+ has increased its prices three times since launching in 2012. Before today, the most recent price hike occurred in January 2025, when ad-based monthly subscriptions increased from $5 to $6, and ad-free plans went from $9 to $10.
The spokesperson said that Discovery+'s prices are regularly evaluated to ensure that they are in line with the content and experience that the service offers, and the new prices reflect that. Discovery+ has increased its prices three times since launching in 2012. Before today, the most recent price hike occurred in January 2025, when ad-based monthly subscriptions increased from $5 to $6, and ad-free plans went from $9 to $10.
I don't buy that (Score:3, Insightful)
"However, a Skydance spokesperson told Ars Technica that the pricing changes were in the works before Discovery+ knew about the merger's closing date and were not planned in anticipation of a merger."
I don't buy that for a second. There's no way that they'd plan a price hike for next year. Next quarter, or next month, but not a year out. On the other hand, if they were planning it for a year, that means that it would be in their SEC filings and someone would have commented on it.
On the gripping hand, convincingly lying to Ars Technica is to be applauded.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, I believe it's possible they were planning to hike prices whether the deal went through or not, but I also believe that they laughed like this while they did it: "Mwahahahaha!" ...and all held their hands up in front of themselves, alternately drumming their fingertips together excitedly or dry-washing them with a mischievous gleam in their eyes.
Re: (Score:1)
"+1 Interesting," but not "+1 Funny?" You people are weird.
Re: (Score:1)
You shouldn't. But when have corporate spokespeople been on the hook to tell the truth to the public? Regardless, Skydance gotta pay for all that debt they acquired when they picked up Warner somehow. Supposedly, Warner Discovery was carrying over $30 billion in debt before the acquisition.
Re: I don't buy that (Score:2)
Supposedly, Warner Discovery was carrying over $30 billion in debt before the acquisition.
Really? By 'soaking' Discovery + subscribers for an additional $12/year ($1/month x 12 months) it will take how long to pay off $30BN in debt?
Re: (Score:2)
That is only one of many ways that Skydance will attempt to squeeze customers. Just wait.
Re:I don't buy that (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: I don't buy that (Score:2)
It's been almost 2 years since their last price hike, that seems pretty consistent with their historical pattern of price hikes.
This really seems more to be a coincidence that a nefarious, underhanded way to somehow beat for the merger on the backs of Discovery+ subscribers.
Mostly trash (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I used to Discovery for its new MythBusters episodes. After the series ended, Discovery is useless. They used to have documentaries too back in its old days.
Re:Mostly trash (Score:5, Interesting)
MythBusters is unwatchable in its original form.
Do yourself a favor and find a copy of SMythBusters. It's a streamlined edit that removes the ridiculous constant recaps that make up a disturbingly large percentage of the show.
It's a show for people who are curious about experimental discovery (and blowing things up). Those are people who usually can pay attention for five minutes at a time without being reminded of what they're watching so they don't lose track.
And while I recognize Adam is talented in addition to being an entertainer... somewhere out there in the multiverse is Jamie's version of the show where you get more into the design, build, and results analysis and there's less time taken up by Adam being goofy for the camera to keep the low-quality viewers watching. I would love to see that show.
Re: (Score:3)
Adam has told numerous time over on Tested that there were some issues with the production teams that both he and Jamie agreed on, but they had to go along with some of their forced gimmicks for "entertainment purposes". However, this also lead to the production teams being changed around a bit due to on-going concerns about what to focus on, and is also why each season looks different as they kept trying a lot of different things. Most infamously was the "peeing on the third rail"-episode in which Adam got
Re: (Score:2)
"Jamie's version of the show"
Jamie's version of the show is the one with Adam. He specifically recruited Adam because he know with just Jamie there was no show.
Re: (Score:2)
Kind of. The show isn't Jamie's version, it's Jamie's compromised version. He did the compromising because he knew he couldn't draw and keep a broad audience on his own. Which is likely true and absolutely disappointing.
I don't think he's even particularly interested in being on camera - there's probably a reason Adam is all over YouTube and Jamie isn't. Which is also a bit of a shame from my perspective - I would prefer more info than infotainment, as much as I did enjoy watching the Mythbusters blow s
Re: (Score:2)
Fuck this, release the Snyder cut!
Re: (Score:3)
I think I still have some Discovery documentaries I recorded on VHS somewhere. No monthly fee to retain those. I would have to find a VHS player to watch them, though.
The enshittification of the Discovery Channel, I think, inspired the film Idiocracy. All the shows they have now, look like a bunch of extras from the film running around.
Re: (Score:2)
Their YouTube channel is surprisingly good. Tons of content.
Rotate monthly. (Score:5, Interesting)
The best way to make streaming cost effective is simply to subscribe to a different service each month. If you insist on continuously carrying a suite of services, the value per dollar drops off. But maintain a single service in rotation, and there has never been a better media entertainment value for your dollar. It's vastly better than cable ever was.
Of course sports junkies have a different scenario...
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Rotate monthly. (Score:2)
Re:Rotate monthly. (Score:5, Insightful)
The best way to make streaming cost effective is simply to subscribe to a different service each month. If you insist on continuously carrying a suite of services, the value per dollar drops off. But maintain a single service in rotation, and there has never been a better media entertainment value for your dollar. It's vastly better than cable ever was.
Of course sports junkies have a different scenario...
That is until they jack up the monthly prices. Which will happen, then they cheapest way to get a service will be bundling... then bundling will be the only way to get it, no Disney without having to buy a package that includes a bunch of crap you don't want, 2 dozen reality TV services to get the one service you do want. It'll be like cable again
Right now we're in the consolidation phase where established players take over smaller ones, after that comes the monetisation phase and that's when enshitification solidifies. In the old MS style Embrace, Extend, Extinguish, we're at the Extend part.
I've already run up the Jolly Roger again, sigh, streaming was good whilst it lasted but sadly it was never going to last that long.
Re: (Score:2)
>I've already run up the Jolly Roger again, sigh, streaming was good whilst it lasted but sadly it was never going to last that long.
Seriously. It's not even the price, I'm blessed enough (today) to handle the expense. But the hassle is big, the UI is bad, and participating in the shittiness of it feels bad. I want to see creators well rewarded, but this is just too much PITA. I have crunchyroll and a rotating one for the kids, I've switched to reading, old dvds, and watching it friends' houses. It's pro
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I don't even bother with that. There's just so much content out there that there's no need. Streaming only content? Doesn't exist in my world - and there's still way too much content available legally for me to ever watch.
There's just so much competition for your attention that there's always something I can do, between books I haven't read, TV shows I haven't watched (OTA, any
Re: (Score:3)
"There's just so much competition for your attention that there's always something I can do"
Speaking of which, everyone and his uncle's dog want you to "subscribe" to their UTube channel or substack. Regardless that it usually doesn't cost anything, how many 10 minute spots could anyone reasonably watch without their brain taking them out back and shooting them in the ass.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with resorting to piracy is that they think we are rejecting their prices, which they think they can combat with more ads and tighter security.
If we are in fact rejecting their bad customer relations and bad business practices and bad products regardless of price the only way to send that message is to not engage with their products or their businesses.
Some things are not worth stealing.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with resorting to piracy is that they think we are rejecting their prices, which they think they can combat with more ads and tighter security.
If we are in fact rejecting their bad customer relations and bad business practices and bad products regardless of price the only way to send that message is to not engage with their products or their businesses.
Some things are not worth stealing.
At this point, it really doesn't matter what they think. By adding more security and ads, they're just forcing more and more people to the alternative, which is piracy when you're running a media cartel where everyone is in cahoots.
Re: (Score:3)
Not just sports junkies. A very significant group of people don't watch streaming to be entertained by streaming. They watch *specific show* to be entertained by *specific show*. For those people, chopping and changing is not a viable strategy since they want to watch specifically show X at specifically time NOW.
Re: (Score:2)
Well those people have a self inflicted problem. I can't help them. But I don't know what end they are driving at. Periodic episode erooo pi s takes immediate gratification off the table anyway. If they can't just wait until the last episode drops to binge the series they're doing it wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with that. The issue is that if you look around enough you'll probably find those people with self inflicted problems are likely in a great majority.
If they can't just wait until the last episode drops to binge the series they're doing it wrong.
The modern world has shifted to the point where we're no longer reading through TV guides to find out what is on cable / TV next week. In many cases people find out about a series after the last episode dropped, and then they want it *now*. Add to that the number of people who use their streaming service as a planning tool ("add to my list" or "favourit
Re: (Score:2)
"My family doesn't want to" is the argument I cannot refute. But it is a choice. And I'm not even down on the choice. It's called discretionary spending for a reason, and if that's where you choose to spend it you aren't making a bad choice. Just not a frugal one.
I'm really only pointing out that with a small amount of restraint you can have a wonderful palate of content for under $25 a month.
Re: (Score:2)
Until streaming providers start doubling the price of the monthly plan to offer a 50% discount on an annual plan.
Re: Rotate monthly. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Baked into your reply is the bald assumption that it's okay to pirate. I think it's stealing and it's not okay. So your point may be valid for you, but not for others and not for the law.
Besides... your way carries costs too. VPN subscription, time spent searching torrent sites, storage , and non tangible costs like inconvenience. Finding out you grabbed the French version without multi language tracks... finding extra files in the torrent... streaming from a NAS if you consume in your living room...
Re: (Score:2)
This is the only way to keep it interesting. Services have limited content, so why sit on a subscription waiting for more, better content from Apple etc when it's probably months and months away? Watch the good stuff, rotate. You don't have to sift through the same garbage to finally break down and watch something you didn't want to see in the first place.
Piracy has never been that appealing (Score:2)
We had a good few years at some point, with a reasonable offer that fulfilled a need: pay a subscription to Netflix, get lots of films and series. Those times are long gone and that's no consumer's fault, the culprit is the greed of the rich wanting to get richer. Hit them where it matters by making it unprofitable to be greedy. I'm not paying for multiple subscriptions, that's stupid, I am not a resource to be milked for profit. Unlike with music, pirating video content made for mass consumption has never
Re: Piracy has never been that appealing (Score:2)
Iâ(TM)m told, piracy has never been easier.
Re: (Score:2)
I am 100% with you here. I prefer not to sail the high seas but it's nearly impossible - and even more so with the way sports is spread across WAY too many services. Screw the capitalists.
In other news (Score:2)
Piracy still free.
I don't do Discovery (Score:2)
but I do get Paramount+ (for the Trek) , AppleTV (for the F1), PBS docs, BBC Select, Xive, ShoutTV, BritBox, AcornTV, StarZ , Peacock, Curiosity , and whatever comes standard with Prime Video
But we were told (Score:2)
This was for the benefit of the consumer.
Mass Exodus (Score:3)
I've heard that Zoomers are fleeing anything funding Paramount/WB products now that funding of IDF is such a straight line. They might need higher fees to offset the volume losses.
I'd probably do so too if I had been. Not sure how people have time for such things in this environment.
Re: (Score:2)
According to my extensive calculations, approximately 0.03% of zoomers spend any time thinking about a connection between Paramount and the IDF.
Re: (Score:2)
I've heard that Zoomers are fleeing anything funding Paramount/WB products now that funding of IDF is such a straight line.
I'm sure all 5 subscribers who are keyboard warrioring all over Twitter about this, that qualifies for people "having heard" a trend was happening, won't affect their bottom line much.
Hint: Fuck all people care about it, but it's fun to report about it as a filler item in the news.
Predictable (Score:2)
No merger in the world has ever resulted in lower prices. But their justification is somewhat original -- "We're gonna have to charge you more just because we're so awesome!"
Good (Score:2)
Always good to know that I will be saving even more money by not subscribing to that drek.
Never, and I mean NEVER (Score:2)
I will never pay a dime for any content from Skydance or Paramount (and that includes Disney).
Never, and I mean NEVER. I'll pirate it or I'll skip, no big deal. There is literally nothing that I can think of on TV that I'd pay to watch.
Discovery+ was always the outlier (Score:2)
Who cares? (Score:2)
I'd be ok with a price increase if the content weren't either garbage or boring as hell like it is now. And while we're on the subject, is anyone here old enough to remember when TLC was called The Learning Channel? There's nothing on there worth learning about. It could easily be renamed The Trainwreck Channel.
subscribe to the garbage hose (Score:2)
"which primarily features unscripted content, like reality shows and documentaries"
People still watch that drivel, and are willing to pay for it. Amazing, humanity. The only documentaries worth watching any more are the ones with Sir David Frederick Attenborough in them.
Just sayin... (Score:2)
The joys of consolidation (Score:1)