Behind the Numbers: Beyond the Bundle — What Will Shape the Streaming World Next?

Audio by Marcus Johnson, Paul Verna, and Daniel Konstantinovic | Mar 17, 2025

On today’s podcast episode, we discuss the next waves to hit the streaming world: which platform will emerge as the streaming hub, how will “content tiers” change viewer behavior and subscriptions, and can streaming maintain sizeable enough audiences for awards shows and Presidential debates? Tune in to the conversation with Director of Podcasts and host Marcus Johnson, our Senior Editor Daniel Konstantinovic, and Vice President Paul Verna. Listen everywhere and watch on YouTube and Spotify.

Episode Transcript:

Marcus Johnson (00:00):

Struggling with out-of-stocks, phantom inventory or lack of shelf data? Well, Trax's Signal-Based Merchandising is designed to give you real-time visibility into what's happening in stores and on shelves so you can take action when and where it matters most. Visit traxretail.com/EMARKETER to get started today.

(00:26):

Hey gang, it's Monday, March 17th. Paul, Danny, and listeners, welcome to Behind the Numbers, an EMARKETER video podcast made possible by Trax. I'm Marcus, and today, we'll be discussing the next wave to hit the streaming world. And for that conversation, I'm joined by vice president of all things, based in Maine. You're not the vice president of all things based in Maine; that's where he lives.

Paul Verna (00:48):

There's a comma in the sentence, is that right?

Marcus Johnson (00:52):

The Mayor of Maine, Paul Verna.

Paul Verna (00:55):

Great to be here. Happy St. Patrick's Day to those who celebrate. And to those who don't, probably no harm in going along for the ride, but no judgment.

Marcus Johnson (01:06):

Stop putting green stuff in the river though, okay, Chicago? What are we doing? Senior editor, based in New York, Daniel Konstantinovich.

Daniel Konstantinovic (01:13):

Hello. Happy to be here.

Paul Verna (01:14):

How you doing?

Daniel Konstantinovic (01:14):

No strong thoughts about St. Patrick's Day.

Marcus Johnson (01:17):

You do? Let's get into it.

Daniel Konstantinovic (01:18):

No, I said I've got none. I've got none. No, I don't want to go there.

Marcus Johnson (01:22):

Nearly derailed this whole episode.

Daniel Konstantinovic (01:24):

Yeah.

Marcus Johnson (01:24):

Okay. I'm going to derail it right now by talking about the most walkable city in the world. So I know what you're thinking; it's got to be somewhere in Texas. It's not. I'm kidding, of course. I'm in Austin right now. My friend convinced me the other day that we should drive to a place to eat that was quite literally across the road. I could see it and we drove there, because that's the kind of people we are, apparently. That's what they've made me into. There was a Visual Capitalist article by Kayla Zhu, wrote up some research from M. Bruno, et al. and the Economist that looked at the world's most walkable cities. They counted ones that are over half a million people, so not the tiny ones, or small ones, I should say. Ranked by the average time to walk to key amenities, and the share of residents within a 15-minute walk of key amenities: schools, hospitals, restaurants, shops, things like that. Can you guess number one?

Paul Verna (02:18):

Are we talking just in the US or worldwide?

Marcus Johnson (02:21):

Worldwide. And I can give you a hint if you want the hint.

Daniel Konstantinovic (02:27):

I'm going to throw a shot in the dark, pre-hint. I'm going to guess Tokyo.

Paul Verna (02:31):

Okay. And I'm going to say Venice.

Daniel Konstantinovic (02:34):

Oh, that's a good one.

Marcus Johnson (02:36):

That is a good one. So the hint was going to be that 45 of the top 50 were in Europe. Paul's Venice is not on the top 20, but Italian city Milan is number one.

Daniel Konstantinovic (02:53):

Number one?

Marcus Johnson (02:54):

Number one. Takes about six minutes to walk to key amenities. Then it's Copenhagen and Turin, again, in Italy. Kyoto in Japan was the most walkable non-European city, so right country, Danny-

Daniel Konstantinovic (03:07):

Thank you, thank you.

Marcus Johnson (03:08):

On the list coming in 28th though, which is remarkable, Vancouver in Canada was the highest-ranked North American city in the overall list, at 53rd, which is low.

Daniel Konstantinovic (03:22):

Wow. Yeah, that's-

Marcus Johnson (03:23):

Yeah. Why are all most walkable cities in the world in Europe? Why are most of them in Europe? Primarily because these cities were established long before the advent of cars, Ms. Zhu points out, but also because they prioritize walking through urban redesigns, national walking policies, and strategic initiatives as well. So it's not just because of the history part, their real intention to keep their cities walkable.

Paul Verna (03:47):

Where is Amsterdam on the list?

Marcus Johnson (03:50):

Oh, I've got the top 20 here. So if it didn't make the top 20, then I'm not sure. It's not on here.

Paul Verna (03:57):

I'm just wondering, because for biking [inaudible 00:04:00]-

Daniel Konstantinovic (04:00):

Yeah, yeah, I was going to say number one for biking. Yeah.

Paul Verna (04:03):

Yeah, but Copenhagen is as well. That's why I was wondering, because Copenhagen is almost like Amsterdam, in that everybody bikes, but obviously everybody walks too. So it'd be interesting to see how those two factors correlate.

Marcus Johnson (04:16):

Yeah, that's a good point. Longest pedestrian street in the world, the Strøget, I can't pronounce it, but in Copenhagen. So that one definitely makes a lot of sense. Top 10: Milan, Copenhagen, Turin, Dublin, Lyon, Munich, Paris, Marseille, Genoa and Edinburgh. That's the top 10. Anyway, today's real topic: beyond the bundles, what will shape the streaming world next?

(04:48):

All right, so gents, the last few years we've been talking a lot about bundling and the wave that hit the streaming world, the Disney Plus/Hulu/Max bundle, the Disney Plus/Hulu/ESPN+ bundle, the Stars/MGM+ bundle, and there's an AMC+ one. And some have worked out quite well. Brad Adgate of Forbes was noting the Disney/Max bundle, Disney Plus, Hulu and Max, launched in July 2024, and has to date been a success, according to Antenna. The first six months, over 20% of new Max customers had subscribed to the bundle. And 80% of the near 2 million that subscribed in the second half were still subscribing three months later, so able to hold on to those folks as well.

(05:25):

So that was the bundling wave. Now it's time to discuss a few other waves that are being made. One is the concept of the streaming hub. Our Garjo Savilia was writing that YouTube is revamping its TV app on connected TVs to integrate more third-party streaming content directly into its homepage, think Apple TV+ and Prime Video. It says expected within months. The redesign aims to prioritize paid subscriptions from services like Peacock, Paramount+ and Max. The aim here is to position YouTube as a one-stop streaming destination, Garjo notes. Daniel, I'll start with you. Can YouTube be the household streaming hub?

Daniel Konstantinovic (05:57):

In some ways, it kind of feels like it already is. I mean, it's in fact one of the, if not the, top competitor in digital video. It's making big gains year over year in TV viewership. In fact, I think they came out with a stat recently that more people are watching YouTube on TVs than they are on their phones, which is a really big shift. So they absolutely could. I mean, with these streaming hubs, I think that these are an effort to meet consumers where they are and just offer them access to a whole huge slew of content without having to leave the interface or the app that they're familiar with. And if YouTube is already number one, that's a very familiar place to make that transition.

Marcus Johnson (06:46):

I mean, Paul, to what Danny's saying, there's YouTube, based on viewers, so not the whole population, but if you look at viewers, YouTube is the third in terms of where people spend most of their time. Netflix first, but over one hour of Netflix; people spend over an hour on Netflix. Spotify second, 54 minutes, obviously music, 54 minutes a day. And YouTube is third with 51 minutes a day. So it's doing well there and it's doing well. Nielsen Gauge, YouTube, the main app we're talking about, 11% of all TV time is spent on YouTube, all TV time, not just the streaming bit, all TV time, 11% spent with YouTube. However, I am surprised that folks would kind of cede that much control to a rival streaming service, so to speak.

Paul Verna (07:31):

Yeah, I think YouTube occupies a very interesting space in this spectrum, and I think Danny touched on this, just talking about the transition from mobile to CTV. So now YouTube is predominantly a CTV platform, however, that's only when you compare it to how mobile-centric it had been up until maybe three, four years ago. But when you compare it to an Amazon Prime, an Apple TV, a Peacock, a Netflix, YouTube is still very spread out among different devices. So I think what YouTube is trying to do is become more and more TV-like. And in order to do that, I think it has to improve the user experience in terms of the interface and accessing it on a TV.

(08:25):

But I think the other key thing in terms of being a content hub is, as you pointed out, Marcus, you have to have partnerships, right? No one is just going to suddenly make their streaming platform available on YouTube unless there's something in it for them. And so far that hasn't really happened with YouTube. I think YouTube is the common denominator of all videos that are posted by certainly individuals and creators and increasingly media companies, but that doesn't necessarily carry over to a standalone streaming service. So as of right now, either Google hasn't pursued those kinds of deals, or maybe there's just not enough of a win-win for their partners. But in order to get to that place, you really do have to cut deals with these rivals, essentially. And obviously what has to be in it for them is either subscriber growth or revenue growth or both. And if they've made that calculus and they're not going to get there by giving up a portion of their ad revenue or even their subscriber revenue to YouTube, then it's going to be a hard nut to crack for them.

Daniel Konstantinovic (09:38):

But it seems like something along those lines might already be happening with Prime Video, because they have definitely become a big hub for all of these different streaming services. I think the most recent one to join in or launch a tile on Prime Video is Apple TV. So if you're one of these smaller streaming services like Apple TV that's struggling to gain significant subscriber growth, since the market's really saturated, a platform like Prime Video that has this enormous baked-in audience is clearly appealing. And they're willing to cede some amount of revenues or whatever the cut that Amazon takes in order to be in front of more people. So yeah, I mean, I think that you're certainly right. YouTube is not there yet, but I think it may already be happening for [inaudible 00:10:31]-

Marcus Johnson (10:30):

Yeah, that's a good point. YouTube has a few partners. And they're already doing this, it's just hard to find. So if you go to YouTube and then you go on the left-hand side, you go down to movies and TV, and then in there, if you go down to primetime channels and you scroll across, there are some folks; NBA TV, you can get your subscription through them, Paramount+, Max, Stars, the WNBA, AMC+, a few others. So there are some partners, but smaller ones, similar to what Amazon has, as Daniel was mentioning.

Paul Verna (11:00):

Yeah. But I think the key there, Marcus, that you hit on is hard to find. And that's where the user experience comes into play. YouTube, frankly, has obviously a lot of strengths, but clear interfaces and clear branding have not been their hallmarks. And I think what these partners are looking for is a place where somebody's going to turn on their smart TV and, if they're on the YouTube app, instantly be able to navigate to that Amazon tile or the Apple TV or whatever it might be. I think that's going to require some substantial redesign or re-engineering on Google's part.

Marcus Johnson (11:39):

Especially because, maybe this isn't a problem, but I saw it as something that could be quite confusing for folks ... Kurt Williams, YouTube's senior director of product management, was telling the information: "The vision is that when you come to our TV app and you're looking for a show, it will just blend away, whether that show is from a primetime channel or that show is from a creator." I would want to know the difference. I would want them to be separate. So I'm wondering if it's going to be harder for someone like a YouTube because there is so much user-generated content there in the first place.

Daniel Konstantinovic (12:10):

Yeah, I mean, I think there's a big distinction there. Yeah, I mean, YouTube does not have its own premium content offerings, which is why I think despite being the CTV leader, it is viewed differently from a Netflix or Prime Video or what have you. And I think that distinction is really important. They can't just mesh it together and have a smooth experience, in my opinion.

Marcus Johnson (12:33):

Yeah. Netflix probably has something to say about this as well, because they're trying to be an entertainment hub of sorts. They have TV shows and movies obviously that they've made, that they license. They have live content now, showing American football games, or just football games is what is what you call them in America, because it's implied that it's American football, because you're in the country ... or wrestling. Now they've got WWE RAW. They have games they're adding as well. So they're trying to be an entertainment hub of sorts. But YouTube has something to say about that, apparently.

(13:02):

Let's talk about another trend, potential wave, that could be hitting streaming, because it's kind of already happening. Warner Bros. Discovery's Max streaming service said it will keep CNN Max news and its B/R sports offerings free on higher tiers of its service, but they will no longer be available on its cheapest ad-supported basic tier. And that was David Bloom of Forbes. Basically what they're saying there is if you are paying for the premium tier, you'll get news and sports. If you're not, you're paying for the cheaper one, then they won't be available on there. Paul, how will content tiers, this idea of if you're paying for a lower level subscription plan, you're only going to get certain amounts of content and you're going to have to level up in terms of how much you pay to get access to more content, more types of content, how do content tiers, in your mind, how are they going to change viewer engagement and subscriptions?

Paul Verna (13:53):

Well, to your point, it's already happened in the sense that Netflix and Disney Plus, by rolling out their ad tiers, they've inherently created different levels of access and viewers get different content depending on which tier they're signed into, or at least they will get an ad-free experience versus an ad-supported experience. What's interesting about Warner Bros. Discovery is they're kind of at a different point in their trajectory. They've definitely struggled. They had a lot of trouble re-signing some of their sports licenses, so they basically lost out to some of the big tech players when it comes to live sports. And they seem to be in a place where they're still prioritizing user growth.

(14:44):

And as we've discussed on this show before, many of the more established services have at some point in the past two or three years pivoted from focusing on user growth to focusing on revenue generation. Obviously Warner Bros. Discovery is trying to do both, but the play that they just announced strikes me as a way to boost the subscriber counts, and the revenue will presumably fall into place as they grow their base. So in some ways, this development is more of the same in terms of a streaming service creating different tiers and playing around with what its own sweet spot is with how it monetizes those tiers. But it's also an indication to me of where Warner Bros. Discovery is compared to a lot of the other services, some of which are also struggling. But I think Warner Bros. Discovery has had a tougher time with all of its content, news content, sports content, entertainment content.

Marcus Johnson (15:50):

Yeah. Danny, it wasn't clear to me when I subscribed to one of the Netflix tiers, the ad-supported one, that I wasn't going to get access to all the content. And so I'm wondering whether that's going to have to be a point of emphasis, that you're going to have to make it clear what you're going to get and what you're not going to get by paying more or not paying as much for some of these tiers.

Daniel Konstantinovic (16:15):

Yeah, I mean, I certainly think that that could be a problem, although there are ways to get around that. If you, say, are a customer who subscribes to the cheapest tier, not realizing that this means you don't have access to sports, I think that there are pretty easy ways that Warner Bros. Discovery or any streaming service could surface the fact that like, "Hey, this big sports event is coming. You don't have access. Click here to up your subscription," or something like that.

Marcus Johnson (16:43):

That's a great point. That's a great point, yeah, and that's a great way for them to get people hooked onto a certain sports package, is by making sure that they will join those milestones during those events. They are telling people about them. But what I was saying is, I guess with sports, it's a big category, because it's kind of like with cable, right? It's a proven concept because that's what we used to have with cable where people would be like, "Okay, you want basic cable, fine. Do you want the sports package? Do you want the movie package? Do you want the whatever?" And if it's a group, it's fine, but when it's with individual shows, you are not going to get some films and TV shows. Which ones? We're not going to tell you exactly which ones you will and won't get. I wonder if that's more confusing for the consumer.

Paul Verna (17:25):

I think it is confusing. And consumers are increasingly selective about these services and savvy about turning them on and off. So churn is an issue. And I think streaming services are going to have to be somewhat more transparent than they've been about what you actually get when you sign in to a given tier. You mentioned Spotify before, Marcus. The music streaming services I think have done a better job of delineating exactly how-

Marcus Johnson (17:54):

How interesting.

Paul Verna (17:55):

... like for example, like Amazon Music, if you subscribe to the paid version, you're going to get like ... I don't know how many million tracks. But if you don't and you just do the free ad-supported, you're going to get like maybe 2 million. And they make that pretty clear, so does Apple Music. So I think that kind of reckoning is probably coming to streaming services, because frankly, they have not been very transparent about what they actually give people for what they pay.

Marcus Johnson (18:27):

So we're talking about the hub, YouTube trying to be the hub of streaming for the household. We've talked about the different tiers, different types of subscriptions that you can have with different types of services. We'll go down a level further now and talk about the types of content specifically on those services, and particularly content which still is able to pull in large audiences. So we're talking about a programming that pulls in tens of millions of people.

(18:56):

So this year's Super Bowl, which is kind of the gold standard of large audiences, pulled in a record near 128 million viewers. But the Super Bowl is the gold standard for a reason. It's in a tier all by itself when it comes to live event audience viewership. The second-most watched show every year is also a football playoff game. It kind of changes year to year, but typically it's a football playoff game, with less than half the audience.

(19:23):

In fact, you have to go down to 11th place on the most watched shows or programs of the year list to find a non-football event. The presidential debate pulling in about 20 million people. And right behind that in 12th place was last year's Oscars. The Grammys was in 19th. Even they pulled in 18 million viewers last year. So still a substantial audience, given they were in a world of fragmented viewership. The Grammys viewership, though, fell nearly 10% year-on-year, to 15 million. Globes viewership in January ticked down 1%, from 9.4 to 9.3 million. ABC said their total viewership for this year's Oscars, including Hulu, was up 1%, to reach 19.7. So a mixed bag. Danny, can streaming, where a lot of these shows have moved over to, can streaming maintain sizable enough audiences for award shows, think these kind of second or third tier events?

Daniel Konstantinovic (20:19):

I think definitely. I mean, these streaming services have ... something like Netflix has millions of subscribers. I think that if you are the rights holder to one of these big live events, it's certainly attractive to partner with the streaming service because they can expand your reach. You can still partner with linear TV. It doesn't necessarily exclude you from non-streaming broadcast options. And these streaming services have shown that they're willing to pay a lot of money for access, exclusive access to these live events, because even if you know Grammys viewership or Golden Globes viewership is down 10%, 15% and is sort of plateauing after the pandemic, that is still a somewhat guaranteed audience of many millions of people. And that's something that's very attractive to advertisers and big budget advertisers. That's that space that you can charge a lot of money for.

Marcus Johnson (21:18):

Yeah, and you were telling me that the Thanksgiving Day parade eclipses all these guys, all of these award shows in viewership.

Daniel Konstantinovic (21:25):

Yeah, that is a very interesting one. I don't have the numbers handy, but the Macy's Thanksgiving Day parade just renewed its contract with NBCUniversal.

Marcus Johnson (21:35):

I think you told me when we talked about it the other day, I went and looked, 31 million record viewership last year, which is staggering. It's higher than any of these guys.

Daniel Konstantinovic (21:46):

And viewership across demographics too. Imagine a family on the couch on Thanksgiving morning. That's the umbrella of age ranges watching this event together. So definitely a big advertising opportunity. And something that's interesting about it that just speaks to what I was saying about streaming services being willing to pay a lot of money for these events is that when negotiations first started for streaming rights for the Thanksgiving parade, Macy's was reportedly asking for as much as three times the previous contract's value. So just really capitalizing on the hunger among streaming services for these events.

Marcus Johnson (22:27):

Yeah. Paul, where do you stand? Because it's a hard one to figure out. I'm looking at Academy Awards viewership from 2000 onwards. It used to be about 46 million people tuning in, so a huge audience. It kind of maintained that through to 2014, and then has just been in free-fall up until the pandemic, where the low point was 10 million in 2021. It has rebounded, but to use Danny's word, it's kind of plateaued now at 19 to 20 million. I mean this is just one of them, but where do you see award shows viewership going in the future?

Paul Verna (23:06):

I don't see that they're going to grow a lot from where they are. I think what is happening is the distribution of viewers is shifting increasingly towards streaming as it becomes more available and more prevalent in the viewing population. And I think that in the case of the Oscars specifically, because it is a Disney property, it made sense that it's streamed on Hulu. But I saw that the New York Post reported that there's some tension between the film academy and Disney. So I guess there are some conversations with Netflix about carrying it. So this could be one of those things like some of the big sports events that shifts to a non-affiliated streaming property, not affiliated with a broadcast network.

(23:53):

But I think in terms of the total audience, one thing I'd like to highlight is just how politicized these types of shows have become. And I'm not talking necessarily about the shows themselves pushing buttons politically. I think the Oscars went out of their way this year to try to be apolitical. But just the nature of discourse in this country and how divided everything is means that the Oscars are seen as sort of like the Hollywood elite, which is typically liberal-leaning. So I think that kind of shuts out a lot of the audience. And because this trend has been happening, the gulf has been widening over the years that you singled out, since 2014, 2015 or so, I think that is going to be a limiting factor. So even if more of the viewing is happening on streaming services, which seems inevitable, I don't know if we're going to see an overall rise in the number of people who tune in.

Marcus Johnson (24:56):

Yeah. Yeah, that's a great take. Yeah, it might not be able to get back to where they were, but might not have to because they fell from a very high number and they're still at a very high number, even if they're going to cut viewership in half. Also, another bright spot is key demographics doing well. Oscars reaching post-pandemic highs for adults 18 to 34, about 3 million viewers. That's up 30% year-on-year, which is great. And then viewership for adults 18 to 49, also reaching its peak since 2020, with about 6 million people. That's up 20%. And that's all we have time for for today's episode. Thank you so much to my guests for hanging out with me today. We first thank Danny.

Daniel Konstantinovic (25:31):

Yeah, no problem. Always a pleasure.

Marcus Johnson (25:33):

Thank you to Paul.

Paul Verna (25:34):

Thank you, Marcus. Great being here.

Marcus Johnson (25:35):

And thanks of course to the whole editing crew: Victoria, John Larson, Danny Stewart, who runs the team, and Sophie, who does our social media. Thanks to everyone for listening in to the Behind The Numbers show, an EMARKETER video podcast made possible by Trax. Sarah will be here on Wednesday for the retail show, for a conversation all about ageism in beauty.