Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

donuteater111 t1_iycthvw wrote

From a selfish perspective, I don't mind since I have Amazon but don't have HBO Max. From a logical perspective, you're absolutely right. The whole aftermath of the merger has left me so baffled with how much of a wrecking ball stance they've taken with their properties. I'm glad we may still be able to get these properties in some form though.

19

ijakinov t1_iydbg5y wrote

I don't see what's unlogical about it. They will likely make more money licensing it out and take a lot less risk. Even before the merger many DC animated shows didn't last very long. Now you are going to have someone who is not your sister company footing the bill and ordering a shit to of shows, it's great money for them and very low risk versus keep trying themselves with their own moeny to see what works.

9

[deleted] t1_iydmlj6 wrote

[deleted]

4

ijakinov t1_iydn82u wrote

That’s just what people assumed would happen but it doesn’t make sense to not make content for other people willing to pay if they don’t plan on making it for themselves. And for other content contrary to popular belief Warner* can’t just put stuff on HBO Max for free it cost money and the business is bleeding it.

3

[deleted] t1_iydnkzq wrote

[deleted]

0

ijakinov t1_iydsgbx wrote

But they don’t want or care for this type of content. If they weren’t making it for amazon they probably wouldn’t be making it at all. HBO max is not just bleeding money they can’t even get eligible users to use the service they bad churn, technical problems and struggling to get new hit shows. They growth is extremely slow, companies usually burn money for hyper growth.

The reasons to make a streaming service is to make money eventually and not simply be in the business of making content for other people who may or may not buy their stuff. The service was arguably poorly managed. They burnt a bunch of money and don’t have a lot to show for it.they even burnt bridges. You can justify losing the money if you don’t have problems gaining, retaining and enticing customers. But even still this strategy during these economic times is no longer favourable as it was maybe a year ago.

HBO Max is simply not interested much in animation as part of their new strategy. But the higher ups aren’t going to prevent some of their subsidiaries from doing business because one subsidy doesn’t want to do it. Maybe Disney blocks this today, I don’t know if that’s a real rule but they’ve been willing to make stuff for other distributors in the past. Unless there’s strong reason to believe you shouldn’t make it at all if you aren’t going to make it for yourself regardless of the money because you maybe believe it would hurt the overall company indirectly. Then maybe. But at face value it’s a lot more money than doing nothing.

2

MulciberTenebras t1_iydjnre wrote

But now instead of having all the DC stuff on one app... they're gonna sell it off to multiple ones. It's bullshit for viewers to have to pay different services to watch just because the company is too cheap to keep it on the same one.

3

ijakinov t1_iydmth8 wrote

That’s nothing new they’ve always made content for anyone willing to pay for it. It’s either they don’t make it at all for themselves or anyone or they make it for other people.

And it’s not being “cheap”. The company has more debt than it’s worth to buy and it loses hundreds of millions of dollars every 3 months. In the last 6 they’ve lost $1.1 Billion.

4

PayneTrainSG t1_iye5fdg wrote

I think trying to sell some TV to someone who will pay a lot more than what you can get for it on your own service is very logical, and probably one of the more obviously smart deals to make. If Amazon wants to overpay for some original Batman show that would otherwise not get made, it's a win-win-win for the IP holder, studio, and customer.

2