the G6 and the B12.

is motivated by a much larger prize that you may be overlooking here. "The deal, announced on Monday, gives Fox access to the more than 100 million households using Roku's platform, potentially helping the cable TV-reliant media company build a larger digital audience, better target ads, and reduce its reliance on traditional distribution." What that statement means is that Fox now has access to data for anyone who owns a Roku streaming device (i.e. Roku 2, Stick, etc.), Roku TV, or any other product sold by Roku. The reason that is a huge deal is because the data will help with marketing. Also, if Fox wanted to get into a streaming war with Disney, then Fox can now make the "business decision" to no longer allow any Disney owned apps (i.e. Hulu, Disney+, ESPN+, etc.) be available on any Roku products in an effort to get consumers/customers to switch their subscriptions to Fox owned apps. I have owned a Roku 2 for quite some time now (at least 10+ years). Currently I have the Hulu/Disney/ESPN bundle to cover my cable subscription plus Disney+ and ESPN+ subscriptions for any content exclusively on those app not included in the bundle. So I am concern that Fox might use this opportunity to manipulate the streaming market to their advantage.

... streaming services cost? I'd like to compare that to what I currently pay for cable and internet.

...for us. My wife keeps telling me that we need to cut the cable because it's too expensive. So, I ask her what services she wants to keep, and I have the ones I want to keep. By the time those are added up, it's about the same as what I'm paying for the VZ Fios bundle with TV/Internet/Landline.

are not wrong - but it's all about the household. In addition, while on the road - which is often again for me - the AirBNB type of places all seem to have ROKU, and it becomes convenient to dial into UTUBE TV to get the channels I usually want. Staying at the hotels is usually not a problem of course, but how long before they cut cable as well?

The two prices certainly close when all the various streaming services are added. My Comcast is a little high, but I have one of the top internet packages. It's probably much more than I actually need.

the internet service in with my rent along with the other utilities. Internet: Cox (no idea the price) Cable: Hulu ($88.99 with bundle) Other Streaming Services: Disney+ ($17.99 with bundle), ESPN+ ($12.99 with bundle), Britbox ($10.99), HBO Max ($10.99), YouTube (Free), and Tubi (Free) I may have 1 more streaming service with a subscription that I am forgetting at the moment. I used to have Peacock and Paramount+, but I cancelled those subscriptions for the time being. Also, I gave you the monthly cost, but I am able to save a few dollars on some of them if I do an annual subscription option. Hulu is monthly with no annual option. Given that I have multiple bundles, I am problem double paying for something. However, I have not found a way to clearly prove it yet. Also, I may have to double pay for something if I want access to certain content because of how they are packaging the various apps.

OK if VT gets a Big-10 invitation, but bad if we don't. If Fox does that and we stay in the ACC, every Roku owner needs to smash that device and mail the parts to Fox. But seriously, Fox isn't going to delete Disney or Apple apps from the Roku devices. Since Roku is a heavy ad platform, I see Fox concentrating on ads.

streaming devices for various reasons. I am assuming that companies have to sign a contract and pay a fee in order to have their app available on a specific platform. Depending on the terms and conditions of those contracts, Fox could decide to increase those rates when the contracts come up for renewal. It probably wouldn't be smart for Fox to pursue that course of action. However, the first shots in the Streaming Wars really hasn't been fired yet. So no one really knows (including myself) how everyone will react in the heat of the battle.

...try to freeze out Disney-owned content from Roku. Streaming devices are not that expensive, and most TVs have at least three HDMI ports. I think most consumers would either purchase a different streaming device that allows Disney content, or ditch Roku altogether. And this is coming from someone who doesn't subscribe to ANY Disney content, including ESPN...I just recognize that I am in the minority in that regard.

different brands of smart tvs and they all are loaded with apps including the ROKU channel. Also my cable box has the same apps.

consider buying a new TV if I don't need a new one? If my Roku 2 goes bad or is no longer supported like my Roku box did a few years ago, then is a lot cheaper to replace the streaming box than to get a brand new TV. Smart TVs are great because they come with a lot of apps already preloaded. However, the downside is that some smart TVs will either limit which apps you can download to add or not allow you download any new apps. If you have a subscription to an app that isn't already preloaded on the smart TV and you can't add the app to the TV, then you are basically limited to only watching that app on your desktop, laptop, tablet, or phone.

brands available in the US. Besides Roku, Amazon has a couple options, Apple has an option, Google has 1 or 2 options, and Vipqv has an option. If the consumer bought a "smart" TV with the streaming device built in, then Fox may be willing to take the chance that most consumers won't buy another (external) streaming device. Particularly if the consumer isn't unable to or can't turn off the internal one and there is a "conflict" between the two smart devices based on how Fox pushes out its updates. Yes, a streaming device is cheap to buy, but a brand new flat screen TV may not be as cheap to buy. For the record, I do agree with you that Fox would be stupid to pursue this route. Particularly since there may be FCC laws which would require Fox to make at least ABC available to its consumers. However, if Disney and Fox get into a streaming war, then I do expect things to get very dirty at time. This just happens to be an example of a dirty tactic that Fox could resort to during the war. Also, it would not shock me if Disney at some point either acquires a streaming device company or forms its own streaming device company to counter Fox's move. ** Edited by VTHokie2000 at 6/17/2026, 12:43:02 AM

ya, ROKU could give them more exposure as a "streaming" channel, but even the BIG's content is finite.

The GoR assigns rights to the BTN, which is 61% owned by Fox. With Amazon likely jumping-in for the next round among NBC, CBS, and of course Fox, this will be madness. I think TV carriers already have very refined data on viewership volume and demographics. But if ROKU really does reveal new insights, Fox will be guiding B1G realignment forcefully.