In the days leading up to a potential blackout of NBC channels on YouTube TV, NBCUniversal made a seemingly outlandish claim. “Google, with its $3 trillion market cap, already controls what Americans see online through search and ads—now it wants to control what we watch,” the company said. While NBC did not elaborate on what exactly that meant, we’ve since learned that Google (which owns YouTube TV) wants to fundamentally change how programmers like NBC distribute video in the streaming age. In addition to carrying NBC’s broadcast and cable channels, Google also wants YouTube TV to serve streaming content from Peacock, NBC’s separate streaming service. (For now, the companies have agreed to a short-term deal extension to avoid a blackout.) Why is this a big deal? If Google gets its way, it will give customers one place to watch all of NBC’s programming, tearing down a longstanding divide between pay TV packages and standalone streaming services. While that ultimately makes sense for viewers, it’s probably not something NBC and its programming peers want. What the YouTube TV and NBC dispute is about As I often tell folks who are trying to cut cable TV, streaming TV options typically fall into two buckets. The first bucket includes standalone streaming services such as Netflix, Disney+, HBO Max, and Peacock. They offer a mix of original and library programming, including exclusive shows and movies that aren’t available on cable. The second bucket consists of live TV streaming services, also known as cable replacements, or vMVPDs in the TV industry (the acronym stands for virtual multichannel video programming distributor). These services replicate the cable experience with a big bundle of live TV channels, cloud-based DVR service, and a library of on-demand programming. YouTube TV is the largest of these services with an estimated 10 million subscribers. Others include Hulu + Live TV, Fubo, and Sling TV. The distinction between these buckets used to be pretty clear, but in recent years the lines have blurred. Standalone streaming services increasingly carry content that was once exclusive to cable channels, and live TV providers have started bundling up access to individual streaming services that have their own exclusive programming. (DirecTV, for instance, offers a bundle of entertainment channels, Disney+, Hulu, and HBO Max for for $35 per month.) These changes are happening because traditional pay TV bundles are becoming worthless for anything but news and sports. The best new shows moved over to standalone streaming years ago, so distributors want to bundle up those services as a way to preserve value. But surely you can see the problem, right? If YouTube TV starts offering bundled access to services like Peacock, people might spend less time using the actual YouTube TV app. The future could be one in which subscribers must sign into a bunch of different apps to watch everything that comes with a YouTube TV subscription, which isn’t great for YouTube and isn’t ideal for viewers either. Enter “ingestion” So when Reuters’ Aditya Soni and Puck’s John Ourand report that YouTube TV is seeking “ingestion” of Peacock’s content, they mean that YouTube wants to solve the problem of sending subscribers elsewhere. YouTube TV doesn’t want to just bundle Peacock subscriptions with its service, it wants the full Peacock catalog to be available directly inside YouTube TV. NBCUniversal doesn’t like that idea. It wants people spending time inside the Peacock app, where it can collect viewing data, make more money from targeted ads, and promote more Peacock content. When the company says Google “wants to control what we watch,” it’s likely alluding to YouTube being in control of the experience, plus all the advertising and data collection that comes with it. (Also, NBCUniversal is owned by Comcast, which has its own plans to aggregate streaming content, so it might not want to cede ground to a competitor.) Not every programmer is entirely opposed to “ingestion.” Philo, for instance, says it will bring HBO Max and Discovery+ content into its own app early next year, and Fubo will add ESPN+ programming to its app in the coming weeks. Amazon has also built a thriving business selling subscriptions to other streaming services (including Peacock’s ad-free tier) and offering their content through its own Prime Video app. Still, programmers are unlikely to give up complete control of their content to third-party aggregators, which means skirmishes like the one between YouTube TV and NBC will keep happening with each new carriage renewal. While Hollywood loves to complain about how streaming destroyed the pay TV bundle, it’s not all too eager to let streaming companies build it back up again. Sign up for Jared’s Cord Cutter Weekly newsletter for more streaming insights. Read...

Sony Interactive Entertainment New Zealand reported a rise in annual profit to NZD $1.22 million despite lower cash reserves and increased costs in 2025. Read...

We all think of wireless when it comes to smart home and home entertainment—Wi-Fi, Zigbee, Bluetooth, Thread, Z-Wave, and what have you—but a surprising number of smart devices depend on good, old-fashioned wired ethernet for the best performance.  The Philips Hue Bridge? Needs an ethernet cable. Got an Apple TV streaming box? It does Wi-Fi, but ethernet makes it better. That smart hub? An ethernet cable would certainly boost its reliability. Running a PlayStation 5 or Xbox Series X? A respectable K/D ratio demands ethernet.  All those ethernet cables and ports will add up, though, and most Wi-Fi and mesh routers only serve up a handful of ethernet connections—or, most likely, only a single extra port.   That’s why I’ve been investing in ethernet switches, and my favorite—this unmanaged 5-port gigabit ethernet bridge from TP-Link—is just $13 during the runup to Amazon’s October Prime Day, good for a 35% savings. If you’re looking for more ports, this 8-port configuration is selling for $29.99, or 25% off the list price. I have three of the 5-port TP-Link bridges in my smart home: one sits under my desk, connected to my PC, my Philips Hue Bridge, and my HDHomeRun over-the-air TV tuner. The link port is connected to my mesh Wi-Fi router, and the fifth port is connecting to… yes, another ethernet bridge.  My second bridge lives in a steel cabinet in the corner of the office, and it’s all about the Raspberry Pi’s–four of them, to be exact. Those Raspberry Pi boards run a series of locally hosted applications, including HomeBridge, an app that lets me bring non-HomeKit smart devices into the Apple Home app; Home Assistant, an open-source smart home platform I’ve been tinkering with; and Plex, a self-hosted media server and DVR that works with my HDHomeRun TV tuner. My Raspberry Pi systems will work just fine over Wi-Fi, but a rock-solid ethernet connection makes them far more reliable, especially for streaming media.  Finally, my third TP-Link ethernet switch sits in the living room behind my TV, where it’s connected to my Apple TV 4K, my PlayStation 5, and my Denon AVR-x1600H, ensuring perfectly smooth streaming video, cutting down on gaming latency, and preventing audio dropouts when streaming tunes via AirPlay.  Setting up these TP-Link ethernet bridges is a snap; because they’re unmanaged (meaning they can’t assign IP addresses on their own), it’s really just a matter of connecting the link port to a nearby Wi-Fi router or mesh hub and then plugging in your ethernet devices. You can have multiple ethernet switches downstream, meaning you can daisy-chain them if necessary. An AC adapter with a small wall wart supplies the power.  I’ve been rocking these particular TP-Link switches for years now and have never had any problems. I highly recommend them if you’re running out of ethernet ports in your smart home or home theater setup—the more the merrier.  Snag a TP-Link TL-SG105 5-port gigabit ethernet switch for $12.99Buy on Amazon Read...

At a glanceExpert`s Rating Pros Extremely thin and easy to pack High brightness with anti-glare panel make for comfortable viewing 180Hz refresh rate with Adaptive Sync Cons Uses Mini-HDMI input instead of full-sized HDMI Mediocre contrast ratio and color performance Currently a bit expensive compared to the competition Our Verdict The Arzopa Z3FC serves up a high-refresh 2560×1440 IPS-LCD in a slim, light package, though it’s a tad more expensive than it should be. Price When Reviewed This value will show the geolocated pricing text for product undefined Best Pricing Today Best Prices Today: Arzopa Z3FC Retailer Price Arzopa $199.99 View Deal Check Price comparison from over 24,000 stores worldwide Product Price Price comparison from Backmarket Best Prices Today: Check today’s prices Most portable monitors are meant for basic productivity, but that’s not always true. The Arzopa Z3FC is a large IPS LCD portable monitor with an 180Hz refresh rate that aims to be of use both for office productivity and gaming. It’s successful, but its launch price is an obstacle. Read on to learn more, then see our roundup of the best portable monitors for comparison. Arzopa Z3FC specs and features The Arzopa Z3FC is a step up from the budget portable monitors that retail around $100 or less, and it provides some upgrades. The Z3FC has 2560×1440 resolution which, of course, is superior to the 1920×1080 resolution that most budget alternatives provide. The Z3FC also has a speedy 180Hz refresh rate, which is high for a portable monitor. Display size: 16.1-inch 16:9 aspect ratio Native resolution: 2560×1440 Panel type: IPS-LED Refresh rate: 180Hz Adaptive sync: Yes, AMD FreeSync HDR: None Ports: 2x USB Type-C with Power Delivery and DisplayPort, 1x Mini-HDMI 2.0 Audio: 2x 1-watt speakers Additional features: Built-in kickstand Dimensions: 13 x 8 x 0.39 inches Weight: 1.72 pounds Price: $229.99 MSRP, $199.99 typical retail The Arzopa Z3FC has an MSRP of $229.99, but I don’t think it was ever sold at MSRP (which is not unusual for an Amazon product listing). It’s more typically available at $199.99. Even that is towards the high end of where I expect this product to land as it ages. Its predecessor, the Arzopa Z1FC, was introduced at $259.99 but has sold as low as $96.98. I’d expect the Z3FC will gradually limbo closer to that figure. Arzopa Z3FC design The Arzopa Z3FC combines an aluminum frame and rear panel with plastic bezels to produce an attractive, durable feel. Despite its extremely thin profile—it measures less than 4/10-inch thick—the Z3FC feels solid when handled and doesn’t easily show flex. Don’t get me wrong: You could absolutely snap this thing over your knee if you wanted. But the same could be said of the iPad Pro. Big, thin devices are never bomb-proof, but the Z3FC feels nice. Matthew Smith / Foundry Its thin profile means the portable monitor is, well, portable. It weighs in at roughly 1.7 pounds, which is a tad lighter than average for a 16-inch portable monitor. Arzopa avoids using a bump-out to accommodate the ports and the kickstand retracts fully into the monitor’s case, both of which make the display easy to carry. Yet despite its small size, the kickstand supports use in both portrait and landscape orientation. A sleeve is included, as well. It looks okay but includes a flap that is secured with velcro. While the carrying case largely does its job, it doesn’t offer much padding, so I wouldn’t trust it alone to protect the monitor when packing it in checked luggage. The same can be said for most sleeves included with portable monitors, though. Arzopa Z3FC connectivity Connectivity is a mix bag with the Arzopa Z3FC. It includes two USB-C ports, each with DisplayPort and Power Delivery, and a HDMI port. So far, so good. The HDMI port is mini-HDMI, though, which is a bummer. While the Arzopa Z3FC does include a HDMI to mini-HDMI cable, mini-HDMI is much less common overall. You may have difficulty finding a cable around an office, or for sale in a store, if you leave the included cable at home. Matthew Smith / Foundry Of course, you could just rely on USB-C, which might be easier. The USB-C ports support Power Delivery to power the monitor when connected to a USB-C port that provides enough wattage. The specs don’t state what’s required, but an 18-watt power source was adequate. The USB-C ports support power pass-through. That means you can connect a USB-C source with power to one USB-C port, then use the portable monitor to charge a USB-C device connected to the other USB-C port. A USB-C power brick is not included, but will be required if you plan to deliver video to the Z3FC over HDMI, or if you use a USB-C video input that lacks power. The lack of a power brick is a minor disappointment, but most competitive portable monitors also ship without a power brick. Arzopa Z3FC menus, audio The Arzopa Z3FC’s menu system offers a wider range of options than most. It includes not only the typical brightness and contrast but also several color gamut modes, RGB calibration, and a 4:3 aspect ratio mode. As simple as these might seem, they aren’t guaranteed on a portable monitor. Some alternatives only provide brightness, contrast, and sharpness adjustment. Matthew Smith / Foundry Adjustments are easy, too, as the monitor includes two buttons and a volume rocker. The buttons are used to enter or exit menus and the rocker is used to select or adjust options. Overall, the Arzopa Z3FC’s menu can’t quite match that typically provided by Viewsonic, but beats budget portable monitors like the MSI Pro MP165 E6. A pair of 1-watt speakers can be found on each flank of the Z3FC. They’re weak, providing barely adequate volume even at maximum. The speakers are okay for a podcast but otherwise of limited use. The Arzopa Z3FC’s menu system offers a wider range of options than most. Arzopa Z3FC SDR image quality The Arzopa Z3FC isn’t expensive, but I wouldn’t say it’s a budget portable monitor—at least, not at its current typical retail price of $199.99. That means the monitor’s image quality matters. It scores well in several areas, though in others it feels pressure from OLED competition. Matthew Smith / Foundry Brightness is a positive for the Arzopa Z3FC. It comes close to 400 nits of SDR brightness, which is great for a portable monitor. This level of brightness is excessive for most situations, but portable monitors are likely to be used in areas where you have no control over the lighting, like a conference room or airport lounge. The Z3FC’s high brightness will make the monitor more comfortable to use in bright rooms and near large, sunlit windows. Matthew Smith / Foundry Contrast, on the other hand, is a miss for the Z3FC. Most portable monitors with an IPS-LCD panel struggle with contrast, and the Z3FC comes in towards the bottom of the pack. That means the image can look flat and dull. It’s not a problem in Microsoft Office, but disappointing when playing a game. Portable monitors with an OLED panel, like the Innocn 15K1F, are a much better choice for entertainment. They provide a deep, immersive image that easily stands out. Keep in mind, however, that price-comparable OLED portable monitors will have a 60Hz refresh rate. That’s a trade-off you’ll need to weigh. Matthew Smith / Foundry The Arzopa Z3FC’s color gamut is good, or mediocre, depending on your perspective. It covers 99 percent of sRGB as well as 78 percent of DCI-P3 and AdobeRGB. As the graph shows, that’s average to above-average for a portable monitor with an IPS-LCD display. The Z3FC’s color gamut is enough to provide good color volume and a vibrant image. However, the Z3FC’s color gamut is far behind the Innocn 15K1F’s OLED panel, and will significantly lag OLED alternatives in general. OLED provides an incredibly rich, hyper-saturated look that many will prefer. Matthew Smith / Foundry The Arzopa Z3FC achieved modest results in color accuracy. Its average color error isn’t bad, but the average includes noticeable errors in colors such as blue and cyan. The overall impression is that the monitor can look a bit too red or orange. That’s also represented in the monitor’s color temperature of 6300K, which is a bit warmer than the target of 6500K. Gamma, on the other hand, was solid with an on-target gamma curve of 2.2. Content generally looks as bright as it should, and while the monitor’s overall contrast isn’t great, it does a fine job of preserving detail in dark areas of a scene. Sharpness is a highlight. The 16.1-inch panel has a resolution of 2560×1440. That works out to about 182 pixels per inch. That’s a higher pixel density than a 27-inch 4K monitor (at about 163 ppi) and much better than a 27-inch 1440p monitor (at roughly 110 ppi). High-resolution video looks great and text looks sharp. So what’s the verdict? I think the Z3FC’s image quality is fine, even good. It benefits from a decent color gamut and high brightness, two traits that help it deliver an attractive image when used in a bright room. It’s less impressive in darker rooms, as the limited contrast ratio becomes more noticeable. The main decision you’ll need to make is whether you’d prefer an IPS-LCD display with high brightness and a fast refresh rate, like the Z3FC, or an OLED competitor with superior contrast and color gamut, like the Innocn 15K1F. Arzopa Z3FC HDR image quality and motion The Arzopa Z3FC includes HDR, but it’s nothing to write home about—or, if you did, you might use language your pen pal wouldn’t appreciate. While HDR is supported, the monitor’s limited contrast ratio and brightness means there’s not much, if any, benefit to using it. The image looks a bit different, but not better. I recommend sticking to SDR. This is not a problem exclusive to the Z3FC, however. All portable monitors suffer bad HDR to varying degrees. It’s a direct result of their portability and low pricing. The Viewsonic VX1655-4K-OLED is the only portable monitor I’ve tested to deliver passable HDR—but it retails at $519.99. The Z3FC’s motion clarity benefits from the IPS-LCD panel’s 180Hz refresh rate, which is high for a portable monitor with 2560×1440 resolution. A higher refresh rate translates to reduced blur in fast-moving and rapidly changing images, and the improvement is obvious, particularly when compared to a 60Hz alternative. Arzopa lists a pixel response time of 9 milliseconds on the monitor’s Amazon page. That’s not great—a desktop LCD-IPS gaming monitor will typically quote a response time of 0.5 milliseconds to 5 milliseconds. Overall motion clarity is solid for single-player titles and cooperative games, though esports fans with a critical eye and fast reactions should keep expectations in check. While the Z3FC’s motion clarity isn’t perfect, its portability and price should be kept in mind. Most portable monitors have a much lower refresh rate and, as a result, have much more noticeable motion blur. OLED alternatives will beat the Z3FC, but those with a 120Hz refresh rate start around $250 ($50 more than the Z3FC) and go up from there. The Z3FC is a price-to-value middle ground for people who want acceptable motion clarity in games but still need to be mindful of their budget. Should you buy the Arzopa Z3FC? The Arzopa Z3FC is another solid portable monitor in the company’s line-up. It provides good image quality and a fast 180Hz refresh rate for $199.99. It also benefits from slim, attractive design and an easy-to-use menu system. With that said, pricing doesn’t currently work to its favor. Arzopa’s older Z1FC, which is similar but has a slightly slower 144Hz refresh rate, can be had for $109.99—a much better deal overall. I expect the Z3FC’s price will gradually be reduced, but at the moment it’s too expensive for what it offers. Still, the Z3FC provides high brightness, decent color performance, slim design, and good motion clarity. These traits make it an appealing general-purpose portable monitor and also useful for gaming on the go. Read...

Disney is raising prices on most of its streaming services again, and the subtext is clearer than ever: If you’re not bundling, you’re wasting money. The price hikes, which take effect on October 21, push the standalone cost of Disney+ to $12 per month with ads and $19 without, while Hulu’s ad-supported plan is increasing from $10 to $12 per month. While Disney’s various bundles will also cost more, the price hikes for those services aren’t as drastic, and in some cases aren’t increasing at all. (Yes, the timing is terrible, with Disney’s temporary suspension of Jimmy Kimmel last week leading to a wave of Disney+ and Hulu cancellations, but it’s also coincidental. The company has raised prices every October since 2023, and it told Bloomberg that it planned the latest round months ago.) This was all too easy to see coming. Disney and its peers have latched onto the idea that when people bundle services together, they’re less likely to cancel. They are now taking those incentives to their logical conclusion, in which bundled pricing provides cover for price hikes across the board. Disney price hikes compared Here’s a full list of Disney’s 2025 streaming price hikes, which take effect on or after October 21: Streaming ServiceCurrent PriceNew PriceDisney+ (with ads)$10/mo.$12/mo.Disney+ (no ads)$16/mo.$19/mo.Hulu (with ads)$10/mo.$12/mo.Hulu (no ads)$19/mo.$19/mo.ESPN Select$12/mo.$13/mo.ESPN Unlimited$30/mo.$30/mo.Disney+ and Hulu (with ads)$11/mo.$13/mo.Disney+ and Hulu (no ads)$20/mo.$20/mo.Disney+ and Hulu (with ads) with ESPN Select$17/mo.$20/mo.Disney+ and Hulu (no ads) with ESPN Select$27/mo.$30/mo.Legacy Disney+ (no ads), Hulu (with ads), and ESPN Select$22/mo.$25/mo.ESPN Unlimited with Disney+ and Hulu (with ads)$36/mo.$36/mo.ESPN Unlimited with Disney+ and Hulu (no ads)$45/mo.$45/mo.HBO Max with Disney+ and Hulu (with ads)$17/mo.$20/mo.HBO Max with Disney+ and Hulu (no ads)$30/mo.$33/mo.Hulu + Live TV (includes Disney+, Hulu, and ESPN Unlimited)$83/mo.$90/mo.Hulu + Live TV (ad-free Disney+, ad-free Hulu on-demand, and ESPN Unlimited)$96/mo.$99/mo.Some observations: As before, the “Duo” bundle of Disney+ and Hulu is only $1 more than getting either service a la carte, either with or without ads. On their own, Disney+ and Hulu will become $2-per-month pricier with ads, but as a bundle the price only increases by $2 per month total. Although ad-free Disney+ is getting a $3-per-month price hike, the bundled price for ad-free Disney+ and Hulu stays the same. While the cost of Disney’s “Trio” bundles with ESPN Select are increasing by $3 per month, newly launched bundles with ESPN Unlimited (which includes all of ESPN’s cable programming) aren’t changing. (A limited-time promo also knocks the price ESPN Unlimited, Disney+, and Hulu down to $30 per month for one year.) Warner Bros. Discovery CEO David Zaslav recently argued that HBO Max is “way underpriced.” Don’t be surprised if the new bundle price accounts for an eventual HBO Max price hike. Pushing bigger bundles The overall trend is similar to what played out with ad-supported streaming plans several years ago. Originally pitched by programmers as a way to bring streaming prices down, in the end they merely provided cover for more price hikes. (To wit: At $12-per-month, Disney+ with ads costs nearly twice what the ad-free version sold for in 2019.) Looking ahead, we’re likely to see a bigger push toward larger TV packages with more streaming services thrown in. An early example is DirecTV’s MyEntertainment plan, which includes ad-supported Disney+, Hulu, and HBO Max; plus, a collection of cable news and entertainment channels (no sports or local broadcasts) for $35 per month. The cost for that package is not increasing. Likewise, Spectrum has packed a slew of streaming services into its TV Select plans, whose non-promotional rates start at $125 per month. The streaming offerings include all of Disney’s services, HBO Max, Paramount+, Peacock, and AMC+, but of course require paying for an entire cable TV package. Comcast, meanwhile, is doing a $15-per-month bundle of Netflix, Peacock, and Apple TV+ for Xfinity internet customers. That’s only $4 per month more than the standalone cost of Peacock after it drastically raised prices over the summer. Disney’s latest round of price hikes will inevitably push more people toward bundling, and that’s by design. With ever-higher standalone rates, these bundles are starting to feel less like a deal and more like a necessity. Sign up for Jared’s Cord Cutter Weekly newsletter for streaming TV insights. Read...

As Pato Alvarez appears before the court on minor charges, his lawyer sounds off on his client’s critics. Read...

When you’re a gamer, life gets expensive fast. Between your gaming rig and peripherals, console and controllers, games and subscriptions, it’s easy to quickly blow your entire budget and then some – and things are only getting more expensive. G2A.COM is a great place to look for discounts on everything digital, offering to save you money on more than 90,000 games, online subscriptions, e-learning courses, gift cards, PC software, and more. But it seems almost too good to be true, so is G2A.COM safe to use? Trusted by 35 million users in 180 countries G2A.COM isn’t an online shop, it’s a marketplace where buyers and sellers can trade digital items. From game keys to gift cards, and from streaming subscriptions to software licences , you can find pretty much anything and everything digital on the platform. G2A.COM doesn’t buy or sell these digital keys, it simply provides the platform, infrastructure, and payment processing to streamline sales and purchases. Such a marketplace could be littered with would-be scammers, but G2A.COM creates an environment of trust by demanding its sellers undergo strict verification processes before they can sell their digital goods. Payment methods are multiple – with more than 400 global and local methods – and secure, so you’ll find a way to get your in-game gold or whatever else you need without any trouble. Providing a secure platform is a top priority for G2A.COM. It has a cyber defense team that is tasked with continually improving its AI-supported security solutions, providing all sorts of tools to protect users from the moment they enter the site until they are back in their chair, blowing up worlds and decimating their digital enemies, streaming a movie or learning online. Your safe, reliable gateway to digital entertainmentVisit G2A.com G2A.COM Your best gate to play, connecting gamers, developers, and creators G2A.COM does more than facilitate sales, it provides a direct link between developers, publishers, and players, making sure everyone gets a good deal. The company invests in content creators, too, running campaigns that give up-and-coming Twitch personalities more visibility and rewarding viewers. Ultimately, variety and choice is what keeps gamers coming back to G2A.COM, which is the world’s largest online marketplace of its sort. If you’re into Minecraft and want some coins, you can find multiple offers for less than you’d pay elsewhere. Robux for the kids? Available! If you want LoL Riot points, Platinum for Diablo, or Fortnite V-bucks, you’re covered. You can find keys for tens of thousands of titles across all categories, from action to adventure, RPGs to MMOs to sports. You’ll even find keys for the very latest titles, such as Borderlands 4. G2A.COM has more to offer than simply games, it boasts more than 90,000 of digital offerings. You’ll also find online subscriptions, from Spotify to YouTube Premium, Canva to ChatGPT Plus, Duolingo, and even DoorDash DashPass. Computer software is available, too – whether you want a Windows 11 Pro key, Adobe Creative Cloud, or Bitdefender, there’s something for everyone. Got a birthday coming up? Gift cards for Apple, Netflix, PayPal, Amazon and more are all available at G2A.COM – often with some crazy discounts! G2A.COM Exclusive perks with G2A Plus Make G2A.COM your one-stop destination for digital entertainment. Sign up to the free G2A Plus loyalty program to earn points with your purchases and convert them to savings or subscribe to the $2.99/month G2A Plus Premium scheme to unlock monthly rewards, discounts on top titles, exclusive member promotions, plus faster assistance from tech support when you need it. Game more for less with G2A PlusView Offer Read...

Entertainment-starved Kiwis are lapping up tickets to the biggest show in town. Read...

Samsung launches Vision AI Companion on select 2025 Smart TVs, enhancing interaction with generative AI for personalised, smarter home entertainment. Read...

You don’t need a full-priced pay TV package to get local channels and sports anymore. While YouTube TV and Hulu + Live TV cost upwards of $83 per month, new skinny bundles from DirecTV, Fubo, Sling TV, and even Comcast offer live sports for less. New standalone options from ESPN and Fox present even more ways to save money. But depending on what you want to watch, some of these bundles will work better than others. The situation reminds me a bit of cord-cutting’s early years, in which every live TV streaming service came with some notable omissions. Below, I’ll help you sort through them all to find the best sports bundle for your needs. Streaming sports packages compared Here’s a chart with all of the sports bundles available as of September 2025: Jared Newman / Foundry You can also view a Google Sheets version of this chart. I took some liberties with which services to include in the chart, most notably omitting full-size pay TV packages such as YouTube TV ($83 per month), Hulu + Live TV (also $83 per month), Fubo’s standard packages (starting at $98 per month after regional sports fees), and DirecTV’s Signature packages (starting at $85 per month). Those packages include a broader mix of entertainment channels, so one of them would be a better choice if you’re trying to fully replicate a cable bundle. For the services I did include, it’s helpful to think of them in terms of what each one is missing. For instance: DirecTV MyNews: Offers local channels, but no other sports channels. DirecTV MySports: No Tennis channel. Fubo Sports: No NBC or other Comcast-owned channels, and nothing from Warner Bros. Discovery (such as TNT and TBS). Xfinity Sports & News: No league-specific channels. Sling TV Select: Only works for sports if the local channels it carries are available in your particular market. ESPN Unlimited bundles: Missing at least two of the big four local channels and many less-popular sports channels. Note that with DirecTV’s skinny bundles and Sling Select, local channels aren’t available in every market, and Fubo is only selling its Sports bundle in select markets for now. In all cases, you’ll need to check their websites for availability in your area. As for Xfinity’s Sports & News bundle, it’s only available in Comcast’s cable markets, although it doesn’t require a cable box. You can also access it via the Xfinity Stream app on Roku, Fire TV, Apple TV, Samsung TVs, and LG TVs. If you’re wondering why most of these sports-focused bundles also include cable news, that’s a whole other story. Fox has reportedly been unwilling to uncouple Fox News from its broadcast and sports channels, so there’s likely some reluctance by other programmers to unbundle as well. Which is the best sports bundle? The great thing about these new packages is that there is no one-size-fits-all answer as to which one is best. If you’re only trying to watch your local NFL team and can’t pick up the broadcast with one of our favorite antennas, for instance, DirecTV MyNews will be your cheapest option. Conversely, antenna users might use ESPN Unlimited’s bundles to supplement what they can get for free over-the-air. Fubo Sports’ lack of NBC could also be fine if you can do without Sunday Night Football, while DirecTV MySports comes closest to meeting all your sports needs (albeit at a higher price). What each of these services provide is a modicum of choice and flexibility in an industry that’s long been bereft of it. As such, they’ve recalibrated how much you’ll need to spend to watch both your local broadcast channels and live sports. Sign up for Jared’s Cord Cutter Weekly newsletter for more streaming TV advice. Read...