Disney will remove content from Netflix and launch its own streaming service

Netflix house at MWC
Netflix house at MWC (Image credit: Android Central)

Disney and Netflix will soon part ways. Rather than take a spoonful of sugar, Disney has announced that in two year's time, its content will no longer have a friend in Netflix.

Fortunately for Disney fans, the company announced it will have its own streaming services with the bare necessities: Disney content. This also includes Pixar movies, but not the Netflix Original Marvel TV shows Daredevil, Jessica Jones, Luke Cage, Iron Fist and the upcoming Defenders series. There was no mention if the Star Wars or Marvel movies would remain on Netflix or be part of Disney's world. The company said that after an initial U.S. launch, the streaming service would go international. Disney also announced that ESPN will get its own streaming service launching in 2018.

The launch of another streaming service means consumer dollars will be stretched even further, but that's just another sign that we're in a whole new world. Perhaps things will swing back around, and this whole exercise would have just been a circle.

Of life.

  • No, I will not be paying for another streaming service.
  • This! ^^^ Flicked via the  BlackBerry keyboard on my PRIV.
  • My damn thoughts exactly.. So annoying. Everyone has to have their cut.
  • But but but competition?!
  • Problem is, there is no competition in this case. If you want Disney content, you will have no choice but to pay extra for it.
  • Of course, another thing u have to pay money for.
    And people wonder why people torrent.
    It's all about the money.
    Always will And it Always will be.
  • I mean, that is literally the reason people make films and shows soooo.
  • So what? You think companies should make movies and distribute them for free? Why should Disney pay a cut to another company simply to distribute their content when they could earn 100% for their investment in making the film in the first place? I will never understand this mentality of people who believe content should be cheap or free. Companies make movies to MAKE MONEY. If you don't like it then don't pay and don't watch.
  • Hmm I thought it worked the opposite that Netflix paid Disney for the media rights to stream their content. Guess I'm misinformed.
  • Yes, Netflix pays Disney...but they make less margin than if they were to distribute it themselves. The point is...why do people expect that content should be rock-bottom priced or that companies should not be trying to maximize their profits? That is the definition of business and capitalism.
  • They should try, but there's going to be a limit. Think of physical products, is there a store for every single brand? It's not as easy as saying "I don't want to split my cut", middle men have existed since the beginning of time. Disney is going to have to figure out if it's more profitable to have their own service that has fewer subscribers where they get the whole cut or to have their content on a service where they get a smaller cut per subcriber but has many more subscribers. It's a risk, but Disney is one of the few content holders that in aggregate (abc, Disney, Marvel, ESPN) could have enough to be a decent package.
  • They don't pay Netflix, it's the other way around. My guess is, Disney decided to eliminate the middle man be able to take in the entirety of the profits (for their non Marvel properties at least, more on that later). I'm not asking for anyone to do anything for free, but I'm sorry this is getting out of hand. Should every single provider have their own streaming service and charge a monthly fee that's almost the same as what Netflix or Hulu are charging for multiple service providers? Think about that once. Each network running a streaming service for $5.99 a month. That will add up pretty damn quick. And you can bet that companies that own multiple networks, like Turner, will charge more than that if they have multiple networks to offer. So at that point, how is that any better than simply having cable? In that scenario, you pay a flat fee for a bundle of channels. Granted, with streaming you could pick and choose each channel and not have a bunch of channels you don't watch. But say basic cable costs $50, that would net you 9 streaming subscriptions at $5.99 a pop, whereas you probably get at least 50 channels for around the same amount. That's 1/6th the cost per channel. If this keeps up, it could kill the streaming industry and push cord cutters back to cable or satellite. Which may be the impetus behind this. On another note, one of the articles I read on this said that Netflix's Marvel properties like Daredevil will remain on Netflix, for now. Seems a little ridiculous that Netflix footed the bill to make them and may end up not having access to them in the future. If that's the case, how is that fair to Netflix? Is Disney going to give them a share of the profits from their streaming service for content Netflix paid for?
  • "If this keeps up, it could kill the streaming industry and push cord cutters back to cable or satellite. Which may be the impetus behind this." That's exactly right. People think, "oh, I'm going to cut the cord and save money" Why would content providers want that? In addition to content providers pushing to have their own delivery services and cut out the middle man, as you rightly describe, we will also simply see the cable companies who are delivering the internet service simply raise the prices on that side if cable tv subscriptions decline. Either way both the content providers and the service delivery providers are going to make money for what they produce/deliver.
  • The streaming industry can't/won't be "killed", there are so many people streaming on their phones.
  • There is no company or industry to big to fail or be killed. Look at Nokia, how many people would've imagined their fall to where they are now? They were THE largest phone or in the world. Not of just any one country, the world. As I and other have stated, the combination of both rising costs to cut the cord and the opposing issue of data caps not only from cell provider but also from ISPs make that a possibility. With streaming, you're using one service to allow another to operate. The more links in the chain necessary for something to happen just means there's more chances fro something to go sideways. With cable or satellite, you don't have to worry about having an internet connection, the data caps associated with it, or the bandwidth necessary for a quality viewing experience. If these companies continue to introduce their own standalone streaming services, they could end up pushing the cost of service well beyond what cable or satellite companies charge. Also, many people don't have both a home and cellular data package, which increases the likelihood that they will run out of data. That isn't an issue with cable or satellite. They also don't put a strain on data networks, they're standalone networks specifically for media consumption, and only for their own services. Streaming services have to share their network with the entirety of the internet. There are a lot of factors that could kill streaming as it is now. It's one thing to have a couple of companies offering media from multiple networks or studios. But to have each one with their own service charging almost as much per month as what the providers like Netflix or Hulu when they have a fraction of the content of what Netflix or Hulu does is ridiculous. And with networks making some content exclusive to their streaming service (Star Trek Discovery for example), they're only inflaming the issue. Their gambit to bypass established streaming companies that offer multi-network content may end up biting them in the rear. This new Star Trek series may end up falling flat on it's face due to that, and could possibly hark the franchise in the process. People don't want to have to pay a separate fee to different companies to get their media, they want to pay one or two fees and have access to more content. It's one of the reasons Netflix and Hulu became as popular as they are. They were a cable alternative without the high fees. Make it be more expensive than cable, and what's the benefit other than instant viewing (something cable and satellite have now with their OnDemand service). If HBO had made you pay them separately to view their offerings, they may not have ended up where they are today. People don't want a lot of hassle.
  • Plus, When you consider that the ISP's are putting data caps on people. I have a triple play package (with 600Mbps Internet), but it comes with a 1,000 GB Cap before I get charged extra. I have a free 6 month Netflix subscription and we share a Hulu Subscription with family. In the last few months (kids out of school) we have hit 750-920 GB of data on God knows what. I suspect the cloud based DVR may be the culprit along with the streaming of Youtube and other content.
  • Less people will watch their content because most people will not want to pay for yet another service on top of whatever else they are paying for.
  • Not true at all. Disney caters to be very specific demographics and people within those groups will want the content. Therefore, they will pay for it through whatever medium is made available. Supply and demand 101.
  • Get gigabit internet with unlimited usage and torrent everything you like!
  • If only gigabit internet was available everywhere...
  • I think new cars are over priced, I'm not about to steal one.
  • I think it will come full circle, and ultimately land back at cable companies as they become the cheaper collectable option. Every channel is building an online content option at this point. And yes, most of which are free leveraging your cable provider... but these services cost money to maintain, and you can bet your butt they're not doing it out of the kindness of thier heart. They will all go the way of HBO; offering the cable option, but also offering an online 'ala carte' option. And like all greedy companies, they'll likely land on a monthly $10 price point, which will grow over time. And that's fine when you have one fee or two (I.e. Netflix & Hulu) but with individual channels going the wayside (like HBO/Disney), we're going to see fees creepup fast. Mind you, Disney charges $12 every thirty minutes for parking and over a thousand dollars a year for an annual pass... What do you think they're going to charge for full access to their video collection??? Competition is good though, right? No, not in this case... While all these channels fight for your attention, many are very unique. For example, I like HBO for it's unique shows ($15). I like the History Channel for thiers ($10). My wife loves the ID channel and lifetime ($10 each). That's $45, and it doesn't include everyday shows you'll see on Netflix (another $10). I guarantee Disney will be $20 a month, if not far more... So if you have kids?? It'll add up quick.
  • I still only Netflix and Hulu. When channels or content drops off I just wave goodbye. Each of my kids has only been interested in one movie at a time (and that movie over and over again). We only allow a few hours a week screen time anyway. If Disney wants to go away, so be it.
  • Funny, I posted this same sentiment just now and this was the next comment I read.
  • Part of the reason people cut the cord in the first place is to save money, what's the point of streaming content if cable becomes the all-inclusive and less expensive option? Other than portability, of course. And currently they have streaming service of sorts with the Disney Roku apps which refuse to let quite a few people sign in with their providers, I hope they get that worked out before they try yet another one.
  • Yes, eventually it'll be the same as cable, maybe there's room for a middleman provider to streamline the streaming experience across all the different content companies, which is essentially cable in disguise.
  • The last time I had cable I lived with my parents, it's expensive and full of ads while rarely having anything good on.
  • Time to fire up utorrent again.
  • Exactly!
  • Yeah, a little thievery never hurt anyone /s
  • Theft is the millennial way, expecting people to work for free to provide them free services. Very easily traceable too, and with net neutrality going the way of the dodo, your ISP will be able to throttle, and even terminate your service for using torrents. Years ago my roommate got caught torrenting movies, Comcast crippled our internet speeds so bad it was like dial up, couldn't even log into Xbox Live because it timed out. Was great having no internet until I moved.
  • Probably many others will follow Disney's path: Fox, Universal, Sony, etc. Companies with a large catalog of movies and shows that will try to get money on their own.
  • Cutting the cord is becoming increasingly more expensive.
  • Amen but shout out to Kodi.
  • Only if you have to have all these companies' content. As far as I'm concerned, I'll pay what I want and not a penny more. If Disney leaves Netflix, then we just won't watch their content anymore.
  • Right. With stand alone streaming services you can choose what "channels" are important to you. Hulu yes, HBO Now no; Netflix yes, Disney no. It's waaaay better than being forced to buy 150 channels, 140 of which I won't watch. And when star wars or whatever Disney content drops that I'm actually interested in, I'll just rent that one item from Google Play and be done with it. Simple.
  • Kodi and plex all day
  • Those are just methods of playback, they're useless without content.
  • For sure. It's driving me to the point where I don't care about what streaming services have to offer anymore. I'll pay Dish for access to football from Sept to Feb, and then suspend my service. Netflix is there for the kids. Xbox Live for gaming.
  • Lol that's rediculous man. They see all that money Netflix is making. All these streaming services nobody will pay for blah.
  • Yet Netflix is like $20B in debt.
  • Didn't know that lol... I dont care for the streaming services anyway. I just assume they are making that much because everyone has Netflix lol
  • That is a massive over simplification. They're in debt short term as a strategy for long term growth, hence their investors aren't at all worried. This is something many successful businesses and have done for years.
  • It's almost as if some people don't understand how business is SUPPOSED to work.
  • As of 7/31/17 it was $4,836,502,000 (far from 20 Billion). All/Most companies carry debt.
    Equity was $3,112,500,000 of which $1,416,010,000 is Retained Earnings (profit from operations net of all liabilities). https://ir.netflix.com/financials.cfm?CategoryID=282
  • Man, you all really took offense to my comment. Are you guys shareholders or something? I was merely stating the headlines I've seen lately, which all stated Netflix was $20B in debt. Lighten up, Nancies.
  • And people still ask why a buy blu rays.
  • The best version of your content and its yours.
  • I'm the same way. Building up the movie collection. 
  • That's the thing. If it is a movie I know I love, want to watch more than a handful of times, and would be sad if I suddenly couldn't, then I buy a physical copy.
  • I still don't own a way to play blue rays, I've been digital for a decade. 🤣 I do understand the desire for physical media, I just don't care to have a movie collection because I don't watch most movies more than a couple times.
  • This really sucks. I watch Netflix all the time and i like a lot of Disney stuff. Im letting hulu go because i cant afford 2 streaming services. Now this. Im at an age where i want to work a little less not more. Rant over.
  • Def sucks.
  • Cable bundled with the internet that you HAVE TO PAY FOR ANYWAY is a helluva lot cheaper than stacking all these baby services on top of one another and then paying almost as much for the internet alone to be able to use these myriad services as internet+cable.
  • That assumes you need these services. A lot of people are content with just one. Our household is absolutely happy with our gigabit internet and Netflix sub. We turn on HBO now literally only when GoT is on and that's that. Super cheap compared to cable.
  • Yeah, that’s not how most regular families do TV. Diverse interests, kids, multiple rooms, etc, If it works for you, for now, that’s great. Get a little older, have 2 or 3 kids, and the need to pump content into at least 3 rooms. If I were just a lone tech geek, and I mean that in a good way, living all by myself, then sure, good internet and a Roku would be all I needed.
  • You know I think there's more and more people like my wife and I that are just doing their thing, living together and not caring for cable. At least I know that's the majority of the ever increasing amount of young professionals we live near and work with. I'd be curious to see some stats in the actual break out. Even still, smart TVs and a Netflix sub that allows 3 simultaneously streaming devices would suit that need I'd imagine, while bring cheaper.
  • You do you, and enjoy.
  • Comcast 50Mbps bundled with digital cable and HBO ended up being about $180/mo for me before I finally got rid of cable. Standalone 50Mbps plus Netflix 4K, ad-free Hulu, and HBO Now works out to about $105. That was a few years ago, so maybe they've changes their rates to something less completely insane by now, but I don't see myself going back to bundles services ever again, especially if I'd still be stuck with their god-awful X1 set top box.
  • Ha! I would love to have my x1 box back. It is so much better than any other user interface I've ever used. Now that I've moved to a place with no Comcast I'm stuck with cable boxes that seem like they are from the dark ages.
  • The UI was certainly a lot better than the competition, but the hardware was just so underpowered. When I would actually through the channel guide, it too two or three seconds to refresh every single time I would hit page up or down. Picture quality was really good, but navigating the on demand menu took forever, and launching the titles was slow as hell, too.
  • Lol with Kodi who needs any of it . Cut the cord .
  • Kodi is just a playback mechanism, without content it's useless.
  • If this includes all current programming on the Disney channels (XD, FreeForm, etc) and legacy Disney shows, count me in.
  • If they remove Gravity Falls from Hulu, I swear I'll... write a mean comment about it on some future AC post, probably.
  • Wow this is really a dumb move. No one wants to have all these different streaming services just to watch specific content. I hope other companies don't follow and end up doing this
  • No one will want to pay for a separate streaming service just for Sony or Universal or whatever content, but I think Disney is probably the exception to that rule.
  • HBO is also an exception.
  • Pretty soon we will have several streaming services. Cable not seeming so expensive anymore.
  • Ummm....... why are you writing this article? Shouldn't Ara be writing this? I thought she was the sole gatekeeper of all things Disney. She is gonna be mad. And if she says she's not, she's lying.
  • I was directing a live newscast, or I'd be all over this, going over the implications for Hulu (who got a big Disney film/tv portfolio this year), how this could compete with/augment Disney Movies Anywhere, and where this is eventually headed: people subscribe to this instead of the cable channels.
  • MF.
  • Since it's Disney...it will be the most expensive too.
  • True.
  • Well, if I had children, it might be a compelling thing, but as it is, nope. Of course, I happily pay $7/mo for BritBox, and enjoy the crap out of it, so I'm sure there may be enough people out there that would care enough for this to make it worth their while.
  • Not interested and from the comments on multiple sources, most people aren't either.
  • Streaming services are starting to become like PC gaming where you have to have multiple accounts/apps to access all the content you want.
  • everything Is moving so fast - I'm surprised they still have box office movies - where does all that $ go - if they budget 30 million including salaries set budget etc. But gross worldwide 500 mil or even a bil - heck even 100mil is seen as a FAIL - I know Tom Cruise takes a percent of the total sales - which is way better than a one time fee - I want to see GOTG Vol 2. Didn't warrant a trip to theaters - but it's out today only to own it for $20 - now I know there's a version out online but I've tried watching it but it doesn't look so clear - I think movies should be out 4-5weeks then go straight to stream - I'll pay a fee to watch a movie - I'm always paying $2.99 $4.99 to watch a flick at home - versus stream for free - but this whole everybody doing their own thing is cumbersome and frag
  • At least Disney's digital copies are truly cross platform and easy to use. Put in your code, get your movie in iTunes, Google Play, or any other library linked to your account.
  • ...what o_O . Why did you pick my comment to reply to .......why are you still here....
  • well Disney can keep it, staying with Netflix I do not watch that much Disney. I will save my dollars for where they will go further.
  • Some people may be encouraged to use BitTorrent instead.....
  • Hopefully those people are discovered and prosecuted.
  • More fragmentation please. Let us have an account for each channel. That would be best, yes? And then we can all subscribe to each individual channel. Oh wait, my cable provider had that years ago and still does...oh boy...here we go again... 😐
  • Amazon already do Channels where you have to pay the basic sub and then extra for more content. This is the future folks! Companies making more and more money while offering less
  • Thanks Disney. Just what we need, another proprietary streaming service (here's looking at you CBS). No thanks.
  • This is the Great Experiment. How much will the consumer take. All the content creators saw how Netflix is doing and wanted in. Now we are seeing what that means. Disney is n a strong position. That said people are getting tired of dying by a thousand cuts. What this will mean is there will be a shakeout coming soon. Who will be left after that is a good question. Netflix yep along with Hulu that's kinda a given. These others not so much. CBS is trying this BS with all access. From the negativity they are getting from tying this to STD. It's quite possible that this will be one of the first victims of the consumer purge. I know I for one won't be participating in this. Many like me won't either. One thing I do know is that Kodi and BitTorrent are going to be quite busy for the foreseeable future.
  • What gets me is that OTA (CBS,ABC,NBC,FOX) require a login to stream online what I can already watch for free (well OTA). They charge the cable/sat providers a fee to carry the national and local channel (to help pay for the content that has paid commercials). If I'm already paying Comcast for my channels, WTH do I want to pay CBS for All Access to watch "current" shows. Maybe I can see paying for access to the catalog of previous stuff. I just heard about the new STD series, but if all access is $10 a month, that isn't worth it to me!
  • Uh huh...becuse I'm going to pay for a Disney streaming service when they have a fraction of movies compared to Netflix or Hulu or Amazon.
  • I only use mailed Netflix disks.... will that be effected?
  • Netflix disc mailing operates on a completely different license model. This article relates to streaming, so the disc delivery service will not be affected by this change.
  • Difficult to say but yes, they could option to pull those as well, just to be greedy. But they probably won't since that means having to deal with physical media rental and they might now want to spend the money to put that in place. All up to the Diz.
  • The mailing service isn't normally affected.
  • I pay for three services: Netflix, HBO Go, and PS Vue. I'm not paying for more. 🙄
  • People cut the cord to avoid all the high prices cable providers charge and instead take the cheaper route of streaming services, but that's gradually increasing due to all the different services that need to be paid for to get the content you want to watch. Might at well go back to torrents and set up Kodi and Plex.
  • Wow look at all this ******** and moaning. If it's such a financial burden then don't pay for it. Go to a library for the free DVDs or here is a concept have them ready and play outside. Quit your whining already!
  • Whoa there, you a shareholder holder? Let the people protest with their keyboards and dollars.
  • Hope they have a good supply of tissues with a their crying over something so unimportant.
  • Everyone's values differ. This might have been huge for others but not for you and I.
  • You seem to be doing your fair share of crying over people crying yourself, js. If it's so unimportant, why are you ******** about it?
  • Only so many dollars to go around. Disney can probably do this successfully but it can get ridiculous with the amount of networks. Like the CBS one. I'm not paying for that even though I probably would watch the Good wife sequel. Divide it up to much and people are more likely to pirate things too.
  • I can't believe that Ara didn't pen this article! Lol
  • Everyone wants competition, now you have it. Start complaining about that now.
  • Doesn't make s