Lucia Moses

Peacock’s next growth bet: selling subscriptions for other streamers

by with No Comment Xpandfy

Peacock’s next growth bet isn’t a blockbuster show or sports deal.

NBCU’s flagship streaming service is plotting to sell add-on subscriptions to other specialty streamers on its platform, four people familiar with the plans told Business Insider.

Peacock has approached streamers about selling subscriptions to offer viewers content that complements its reality and sports-heavy line-up, these people said. Peacock expects to start with one streamer this year and is likely to limit the offering to a small number of partners.

Starz, which already has multiple distribution partnerships, is one that’s being considered, two insiders said. Starz declined to comment.

Two people briefed on Peacock’s pitch saw it as a way for smaller streamers to reach new subscribers in a relatively uncluttered environment, and they hoped Peacock would eventually offer features such as the ability for streamers to offer free samples of their shows.

They described Peacock’s terms as favorable compared to Amazon, which has a large business selling subscriptions to programmers big and small, from HBO Max to Crunchyroll. Amazon’s channel terms vary by partner, but two partners told Business Insider in 2025 that Amazon’s subscription revenue cut was over 50% in their deals.

Peacock’s plans come at a time when streaming services — especially outside market leaders Netflix and Disney — face pressure to consolidate as they look to continue growing their subscriber bases while remaining profitable. Overall, paid streaming growth in the US has cooled, while cancellation rates have risen in the wake of price hikes.

Streamers like Peacock are trying to make themselves stickier

TV viewership growth for streamers in the US is largely stagnant, and subscribers are navigating an increasingly complex landscape. Streaming services are trying tactics like discounts and bundling to keep people from leaving their platforms.

Some other streaming platforms have adopted a marketplace approach that’s broader than what Peacock is contemplating. Amazon is by far the leader. Last year, Amazon reported that its “Channels” program accounted for about 25% of US streamer sign-ups, citing Antenna data. Roku, YouTube, and device makers like Samsung and LG also let people subscribe to streamers through their platforms.

Peacock, for its part, already sells add-on subscriptions to NBC Sports Regional Sports Networks, which it shares a corporate parent with. It also sells a bundle with Apple TV+ that involves cross-platform sampling and a discounted price.

Peacock, with less than 2% of TV watch time in the US, has struggled to grow its share of the TV pie, according to Nielsen. That makes it the second-smallest of the subscription streamers Nielsen measures, ahead only of Warner Bros. Discovery (1.4%), which includes Discovery+ and HBO Max.

US-only Peacock also has relatively few subscribers, with about 44 million. Its nearest rival, Paramount+, has around 79 million global subscribers, and both are well behind Netflix, which is No. 1 with more than 325 million subscribers.

Still, Peacock has far more subscribers than many specialty streamers. AMC Networks, for example, reported about 10 million subscribers across its portfolio of streamers, including AMC+, Acorn TV, and Shudder, as of the end of 2025.

“Peacock has been struggling,” said Alan Wolk, a media industry analyst. “There haven’t been a whole lot of reasons to watch it, so giving people another reason to subscribe is a smart idea. If you ask consumers what’s your biggest frustration with streamers, it’s always, ‘I can’t find anything.’ So the more you can put things together under one interface, the happier people will be.”

A global survey by Nielsen in November found more than 46% say it’s harder to find the content they want to watch because there are too many streamers, rising to 51% in the US, with people spending 14 minutes searching for what to watch and 49% likely to cancel because they can’t find something.

The survey also showed 66% of people expressed interest in a guide to present content information across all services.

James Faris contributed reporting.




Source link

A woman in glasses wearing a blue dress standing in front of a bush.

I found dozens of recurring charges on my credit card. I had been wasting $1,600 a year on subscriptions I didn’t even use.

by with No Comment Xpandfy

My 17-year-old daughter told me that she’d been offered a special deal at the Verizon store: access to Apple Music for up to six people for $10 a month. She was desperate to take advantage of the promotion and said the streaming service had an amazing selection of songs.

I said no, not only because we have Spotify, but also because I’d had a rude awakening after New Year’s.

My husband and I were worried about how much we were charging to our credit cards, especially during the holiday period.

We decided to do a financial tune-up, and I was responsible for reviewing the Mastercard statement. We only used it as a secondary payment method if a merchant didn’t accept American Express.

I thought I’d been subject to fraud

As a result, I rarely looked at the bill. This time, however, I printed the statement covering November 11 to December 12, 2025, when we did most of our Christmas shopping.

There were a few transactions for items like coffee at a little café that doesn’t take Amex and some co-pays for doctors’ visits, but there were others I didn’t recognize.

What on earth was Uexton? I’d paid them $19.99 on November 11. Then there was Sportelx, to whom I’d paid $29.55 on November 21. I’d never heard of it.

I Googled to find that Uxeton was a gaming website and Sportelx was a sports news service.

I’d been a victim of fraud on several occasions, and assumed it had happened again.


Subscription mailers

The author accidentally signed up for services she never used.

Lam Kraker/Business Insider



Then, I looked over the rest of the bill and saw payments of $29.99 to ESPN New York, $14.99 to Canva, and $11.95 to Audiobookstore.com. As far as I was concerned, neither my husband, kids, nor I had used any of them.

There was also a $25 fee to Rockin’ Jump, where my son went once a week before getting too old for a trampoline park. Why were we still paying for his membership?

I reviewed the last two months’ statements and realized the suspicious payments had occurred before, on the same day each month.

It wasn’t fraud. The recurring fees were subscriptions we’d signed up for before switching banks and credit cards. Some went back years. We had failed to cancel Rockin’ Jump. I didn’t know how the rest had come about.

Over the next few hours, I racked my brains trying to figure out where they came from. The only thing I could think of was that my spouse or I must have shared our credit card information at some point to get a trial subscription.

We’d wasted almost $1,600 annually

We must have forgotten to cancel at the end of the free or discounted period. The total of our unnecessary payments was $131.88 a month, the equivalent of a family cellphone plan.

Over the years, I calculated that we’d spent almost $1,600 annually on streaming and other services we didn’t touch. It was hard to blame the companies that use subscription models when I had been the one to drop the ball. I felt dumb and ashamed.

I sprang into action, canceling as many fees as I could. In most cases, I found it much more difficult to unsubscribe than to subscribe because of the hoops you have to jump through.

Still, the experience taught me a lesson. It’s no thank you to tempting — but ultimately useless — offers from now on.




Source link