So if I pay $15 a month for Amazon Prime, and Amazon owns MGM. Why are they trying to get me to pay $6 a month for MGM+?

Submitted by MetroStephen53 t3_10l10me in television

I just saw an add for MGM+ and wasn't aware of it's existance until now. I know that Amazon acquired MGM recently (except James bond?) for billions of dollars.

Is it truly Amazon trying to squeeze $6 more a month out of people by getting them to sign up for this additional streaming service? Or is there something else going on that I'm unaware of?

I definitely would not put it past Amazon to take advantage of the general public's lack of knowledge about what they do and do not own. It all just seems so... Greedy? Desperate?

Maybe someone can shed some more light on the situation.

8

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

RectifiedUser t1_j5txdkl wrote

MGM+ used to be EPIX they just rebranded it.

51

__War_Eagle__ t1_j5uechu wrote

Why does Disney charge me for Disney+, ESPN+ and Hulu?

44

ozmega t1_j5vsnfb wrote

people complain about all this shit, and yet, they keep making tons of money, why do u think game pre orders is still a thing after years of people complaining?

7

Chataboutgames t1_j5tyank wrote

Buying another media company =/= every facet of those companies blending in to one product. It's really that simple. Who Amazon owns has nothing to do with the value offering they're pitching with Amazon Prime.

23

reddig33 t1_j5u11or wrote

The problem is if MGM doesn’t have enough programming to support stand alone subscriptions. I guess we’ll find out. Personally, I’d just farm out the content to other channels to bring in revenue, rather than try to make it a single channel.

7

Nobodycares2022 t1_j5u8tjo wrote

Duh! It's pretty simple: More money, More money, More money!

14

PoppysPen t1_j5tzj6p wrote

You want to hear something worse?

First Prime "channel" I ever added was Shudder, because we like horror. We got hooked on the Boulet Brothers Dragula and we watch the entire latest season as soon as the new episodes come out and the very last episode, the one which declares this season's winner... is not on Shudder. It's on Paramount+. Watch the entire season on one channel, but to see the finale of the contest, I have to sub to another fucking service.

12

Delicious-Tachyons t1_j5ueqjs wrote

wild thing about some of the channels on Amazon Prime - some overlap. Like AMC+ gets you more than AMC

3

muad_dibs t1_j5wfh6c wrote

Yeah, I saw that too. You Shudder, Sundance Films, IFC, plus live channels. I only got it to watch Pantheon but will still cancel.

1

MetroStephen53 OP t1_j5u1mvo wrote

Wow that is absolute bullshit. What shitty companies we've replaced cable with. I was never old enough to pay the cable bill, but I grew up with it. I wonder if it would be better at this point?

2

0KdQ6 t1_j5wvccl wrote

If Disney owns Disney+ and Walt Disney World how come my Disney+ subscription doesn’t get me into the parks for free?

11

Cyrano_Nose t1_j62b14l wrote

No you are right!

Capitalism is sacred. We shouldn't be whining about the over splintering of streaming services.

1

FartyButtFart t1_j5tz06b wrote

So they get $21/mo instead of $15.

10

LiveFromNewYork95 t1_j5ty2wm wrote

Is there much to explain? Amazon owns multiple streaming services, it's not that hard. Disney owns Disney+, ESPN+, and (mostly) Hulu. A business is allowed to own multple revenue streams

9

MetroStephen53 OP t1_j5u4my9 wrote

Yeah that's true. I guess that's basically the same thing. But at least Disney and Hulu seem like they have different audiences they're going. Amazon Prime could use some more good shows as it is.

−8

Orleanian t1_j5x4mfy wrote

Fleabag, Vox Machina, Invincible, Expanse, The Boys, Sneaky Pete, Reacher, Jack Ryan, Kids in the Hall, League of Their Own, Rings of Power, Devil's Hour...

I mean jesus how much more do you want?

2

mr_showboat t1_j5txsgz wrote

It's not about them taking advantage of anyone's lack of knowledge, it's because they make the rules. Amazon decides what goes on its platform (or platforms). If they think that they can make more money by having separate services, then that's what they'll do.

Don't get me wrong, it feels shitty... but we're long past the days of streaming services really trying that hard to win you over with blockbuster acquisitions.

4

ijakinov t1_j5u8ojs wrote

Because MGM+ is a seperate business that they bought and they are leaving it as is. Just because they own both doens't mean they have to merge both. In the same way if I owned a gym and a yoga studio I'm not going to force everyone to only use gym membership to access both when not everyone wants the gym membership. And if it doesn't help the gym business enough, I'm not going to make the costs of my gym business even higher by adding additional costs to it.

They aren't taking advantge of lack of knowledge because them owning both means nothing. It's a business decision if they want to merge products.

4

QuintoBlanco t1_j5ui2p1 wrote

This is some weird logic.

> I know that Amazon acquired MGM recently (except James bond?) for billions of dollars.

They charge you more to make that money back.

I don't like defending large companies, but streaming services are bargains because you can cancel them by the month.

You can pay $12 and watch everything you really like on MGM+ and cancel after two months. I actually watched MGM+ for free for a month.

That is great value.

As for Prime itself, you can cancel that as well and subscribe again when they have added more shows/movies you want to watch.

4

im_a_dick_head t1_j5ux4xj wrote

Amazon purchased MGM for a LOT of money, so they will need to earn that money back, hence the extra fee for it, at least they aren't forcing you to buy it to use Prime Video.

3

jogoso2014 t1_j5up8zt wrote

It’s still a different service.

It’s like Hulu and Disney+ and it just happened.

2

cronedog t1_j5vs2ni wrote

If Amazon spend billions on showtime, would you then expect them to give way ShowTime at no extra charge?

​

What if they bought HBO? Free as well?

2

Jawkurt t1_j5vug8l wrote

When I buy a nestle candy bar why don’t I also get Cheerios?

2

burnabybambinos t1_j5twawe wrote

You're paying $15 a month?

I'd look into that.

1

MetroStephen53 OP t1_j5twz3i wrote

I guess i pay $139 per year. Google search says if you pay monthly for prime it's $14.99

2

mike10dude t1_j5udi9a wrote

outside of the united states they have started putting MGM+ stuff on prime video if its not already on other streaming services or tv channels because of old contracts

1

cityonahillterrain t1_j5ws3pm wrote

We did the one week free trial of MGM+ and holy shit, Condor is way better than it has any right to be. Best spy thriller since Homeland IMO.

1

SchoolNASTY t1_j5u2iuf wrote

the same reason a restaurant upcharges you for extra add ons.

0

tambarskelfir t1_j5u3p46 wrote

I'm pretty sure it is because 15+6 is 21 which is more than 15

0

meowskywalker t1_j5u9c69 wrote

This is that “why should I have to pay for DLC when it should be ‘part of the game’?” logic. If you don’t think they provide enough content for the purchase price, don’t pay that purchase price. But they don’t magically owe you all content they’ve ever produced or own for one price just because you want it.

0

DrRexMorman t1_j5ujzux wrote

>Is it truly Amazon trying to squeeze $6 more a month out of people by getting them to sign up for this additional streaming service?

Yes.

0

theyusedthelamppost t1_j5vjxax wrote

>Amazon Prime, and Amazon owns MGM.

Amazon Prime is not the same thing as Amazon. Prime is just one of the services that Amazon sells. MGM+ is another.

Your question is like asking if you buy a Nissan Maxima why do you also not get a Nissan Murano. Just because you buy one product with the word Nissan in the name doesn't mean you get every product that company makes.

0

twbrn t1_j5ub0gi wrote

Because then you'll be paying them $21 per month, of course.

What, you're shocked that Amazon is greedy?

−1

skellener t1_j5tw609 wrote

Corporate greed.

−2

ArchDucky t1_j5u1na2 wrote

Because >!Fuck you!< thats why.

−2