A lot of ESPN game programming is already available on ESPN 3.

This is just going to be their existing HBO Go service available to people without HBO accounts also.

HBO doesn't really have programming currently shown on Hulu Plus or Netflix. They have a deal with Amazon to show their old shows for people with prime services but that it is it.

On a related note, CBS announced that they are launching a similar service
https://tv.yahoo.com/news/cbs-launch...130005123.html

About the same price as HBO Nordic currently, even though it doesn't seem like it will offer as much content....

Well, I was pretty stoked... but there's no way I'd justify $15 a month for it. I'll stick to the older Prime content and buying the Blu-rays of the shows I like as they come out.

I'm interested, but the more cable alternative spring up, the more the bill adds up to being just as much as cable. Sure, you're probably paying to get what you want more often than with cable, but Netflix, Hulu Plus, HBO, Amazon Prime, and so on... adds up.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/Dz9XYIiTkh0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I thought the phrase referred to the fact that you need some sort of set-top device to watch the streamed shows on your TV: a Roku, Apple TV, PS4, etc.

Which you can only use if you have certain providers. You are already paying them a fee by having a provider who offers the service. Not the same.

I don't think so. Over The Top (OTT) is also used for VoIP services like Skype. And I've seen it used for Instant Messaging apps too. Using an internet service to bypass the traditional phone/mobile services.

As long as the signup and cancellation process is easy, you could just subscribe for a few months of the year and binge watch. That's more or less what I do with the channel itself.

That's why I dropped Century Link for the internet. I assumed they had ESPN 3 and I assumed wrong.

Charter a lot cheaper for the internet while Century Link has fees galore. I got internet,voice and TV cheaper than having the internet alone with Century Link( bundled of course).

I think this is a good spot to remind everyone they can get the WWE Network for $9.99. How much? $9.99.

Maybe Premium networks.

Cable can't afford to lose ESPN. Which is a huge reason why ESPN's rates are through the roof

they should offer live streams of the HBO channels

Hmm... might have to pull the trigger on this.

Or Larry Sanders?

Exactly. This is why I don't think a la carte channels will catch on or I don't think people realize that it might not be as good of a deal as they think. If each channel offered itself individually for say $5 or $6 a month each even if you only want five channels that's still going to add up pretty fast. Maybe not as much as a cable or satellite subscription but overall you'll pay quite a bit for less content. The only thing I could see is if the parent companies do like they do now and bundle certain channels and offer a discount on a package of channels versus an individual channel.

Alan Sepinwall on Hitfix.com has a good write up on this. He mentions the same thing. A la carte may sound good in theory for some, but if every network starts their own subscription based service, the costs are going to add up. That's why the bundling of channels is IMO for Directv, which I have, makes more sense to me financially. yes, I don't watch everything I have, but at least it's more affordable that everything is bundled up and I'm paying 1 lump sum and the convenience of having everything there sitting waiting for me. I don't want to log on to 10 different apps to watch White Collar, Mad Men, Hawaii Five-O, American Horror Story, True Detective etc. etc.

A sports network like ESPN is charging around $5-6 per month, but that is bundled up with several different channels. Imagine how much it could cost by itself? Could be $10-25 per month for all we know.

HBO is already ala carte, though available in bundles with other premium channels. They can afford to do this and they barely run ads. I don't think the non premium channels can afford to incur the advertisers wrath if they offer themselves up ala carte digitally and risk viewers shifting away from regular TV.

I thought the real problem with ala carte is that it would mean the death of most of the niche networks. While that may seem like a boon to many who don't watch them anyway, I think we'd be surprised at what channels went away or had to drastically cut costs to survive.

Ok, forget everything I just said, since CBS is trying a subscription model. sigh.