Re: Disney+ Streaming

[Mel Beckman <mel () beckman org>]

I concur. This is silly off-topic. You don’t have to go home, but you can’t stay here, according to NANOG guidelines. 

-mel 

> On Nov 13, 2019, at 4:57 AM, Bryan Holloway <bryan () shout net> wrote:
>
> 
>
> > On 11/13/19 1:06 PM, Niels Bakker wrote:
> > * mikebolitho () gmail com (Mike Bolitho) [Wed 13 Nov 2019, 12:05 CET]:
> > > This has gone well beyond out of scope of the NANOG list. Discussing who
> > > watches what kind of content has nothing to do with networking. Can you
> > > guys take the conversation elsewhere?
> > On the contrary.  This discussion informs eyeball networks' capacity planning requirements for the upcoming years.
> > It'd be nice to go from anecdata to data, though.
> >     -- Niels.
>
>
> Indeed ... as an eyeball network, this is all very relevant.
>
> Another aspect that hasn't been mentioned in this thread (I think), is that besides there being a potential 
> saturation of streaming services, there's also the backroom dealings between content and content-providers.
>
> Here's some data: Netflix just lost "Friends", one of its most popular offerings (and probably more than a blip on my 
> bandwidth graphs) to HBO Max. This is but one example, but, as a whole, stuff like this is very important for 
> capacity-planning.
>
> Not saying it's gonna happen, but if Disney "lost" the Star Wars franchise to, say, Amazon, you better believe there 
> are likely to be traffic shifts. (Yes, I know they own it.)