Comments
Saar13 t1_iye6l52 wrote
Companies paved the way for streaming as the solution, but now they realize it's not profitable. Too late, as the cable won't come back. Wall Street has already turned its back. Apple and Amazon will inflate sports values until no other company can compete. And that's it.
If you can not afford to use streaming only as a component of an ecosystem or to feed the prestige ego, like the two aforementioned bigtechs, you will die fighting.
LiveFromNewYork95 t1_iyeb7qe wrote
> Apple and Amazon will inflate sports values until no other company can compete. And that's it.
I've been saying this for a while now and people don't get it. Steaming was fools gold, people now believe that paying any amount of money should get them ad free content. Netflix got everyone thinking for years that $7 a month should get them everything they want in streaming with no ads. But Netflix was really just staying afloat so when prices go up that must be greed and when there's ads that must be greed but in reality paying $7 was never going to pay for that. And now we're gonnabe left with the only companies that can afford to use our entertianment as their loss leader
ijakinov t1_iyenz7n wrote
Streaming is profitable. Netflix been profitable for a long time. Disney has always said they plan to be not profitable until 2024 and they’ve been exceeding their own performance targets in the mean time. HBO Max, paramount+ and other have simply been poorly managed and are so at risk at reaching their profitability goals. There’s nothing inherently unsustainable or unprofitable about the business.
Simply having a bunch of money isn’t going to make you successful. All the dead or mediocre performing products and services from Microsoft, Google, and Amazon over the years are great examples of that. Yes they have a lot of money but it’s silly to think they are going to spend most of that money on one business unit. If these companies want to over pay for sports it doesn’t really hurt the people not over paying for them. Streaming isn’t a zero sum game and not everyone is a sports fan.
WordsAreSomething t1_iyegjt2 wrote
>but now they realize it's not profitable.
It is profitable though. The only reason it's not is because there is so much competition in the space that all these streamers were/are overspending to gain/maintain market share.
_srsh_ t1_iye3fhd wrote
corporate greed.. saved you a click
__War_Eagle__ t1_iye4vu4 wrote
Not really it at all.
They are trying to "win" the streaming wars and production cost, along with the lack of returns on licensing content (since they are trying to keep everything in house) is causing the hikes.
Only a.few of these services actually make money, a lot are losing hundreds of millions a year trying to stay competitive.
Why HBO is starting to license out content again.
Appropriate_North893 t1_iye6w7i wrote
>Why HBO is starting to license out content again.
You know what really blows my mind with the Netflix model?
Not putting out their older content digitally for purchase.
Like want to watch 'House of the Dragon' but don't have HBO or want to subscribe to it? Cool, wait till it's done airing and a few weeks later you'll be able to buy it on iTunes or Prime. Easy Peasy.
Want to watch the first 4 seasons of Stranger Things while you wait for the next season to drop? Can't buy it anywhere legally.
It's mental how close to their chests they hold their IP when they could easily be making money off after-airing sales on so many older titles.
I'd buy a Sense8 box set in a heartbeat....but I can't.
WordsAreSomething t1_iyegvw7 wrote
Why would they want to make it so you can pay once to watch something when their entire model is getting you to pay monthly to watch it?
Appropriate_North893 t1_iyehlmo wrote
Aside from the fact that other streamers do it?
How about the fact that I can sub for a month, binge that show (and others if I want) and then cancel....for less than the cost of a digital copy of the show season. So they can get more of my money by offering it this way?
Like this ain't hard.
WordsAreSomething t1_iyem5uv wrote
It's not that hard which is why it's weird that you're being so aggressive about it.
If they offer the one show that you want to watch somewhere else than your incentive to subscribe is 0.
If they don't then you have to subscribe for at least a month to watch it. That is when they try to hook you with everything else they offer so you stay on for multiple months.
They don't care about making more upfront because they can make more in the long run by getting people into their platform and keeping them. Which they have been very successful doing.
Most other streamers allow for purchase because that's what they did before they entered streaming.
Appropriate_North893 t1_iyenrvf wrote
I maintain it's an asinine business model.
WordsAreSomething t1_iye3vrd wrote
A lot of these streamers don't make money so I don't see how the issue can be greed.
AgentElman t1_iye4srr wrote
This is the internet. Where people expect that content creators will simply give away content for free and not show any ads and that attempting to get paid for creating content is seen as greedy and evil.
Where the two main complaints are:
Why do companies keep trying to make money off of their content?
and why do companies keep making content for people who pay for it instead of people like me?
Carolina_Heart OP t1_iye6u25 wrote
It's a decent article, The Verge is good sometimes they just need a better editor
milkyteaz7 t1_iyeeg6z wrote
I don’t mind Netflix getting more pricey. Its worth it for me since I get the option of a ton of diverse international content especially for Asian dramas especially the new releases
tigersanddawgs t1_iye6p8p wrote
Because streamers don’t really make money historically but got by on “growth” and investor money during a low interest environment.
Now that rates are up companies have to try and make money and have in cut costs and increase rates accordingly