| ▲ | CamouflagedKiwi 4 hours ago |
| I don't know. I never really had a sensible option to watch Game of Thrones legally, it's a little late for that now but presumably this would mean it's on Netflix which would be significantly better for me. (I guess useful for House of the Dragon now). I don't think I care much about the upcoming Harry Potter show but if I did want to watch that, I'm not sure what my options would be, and Netflix seems better than me having to take out _another_ subscription. Obviously having one monopoly streaming service would be bad, but in the meantime having more of them is also not great for consumers since they each charge a flat fee so you have to pay more to see shows from different studios. The ideal would be something more akin to music streaming where you can more or less pick a provider these days, but video streaming doesn't seem to be moving there in any hurry. |
|
| ▲ | 2muchcoffeeman 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Just have one subscription at a time and then pirate the rest of it. They all had their chance. They blew it. |
| |
| ▲ | philipallstar 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > They all had their chance. They blew it. This is so silly. It's like saying "Sweet manufacturers all had the chance to sell the same sweets, and they blew it. So I just nick most sweets." Just say "I don't like paying for things and can get away with this, and my ethics only work in public or when I'm forced to obey them." And then we're done. | | |
| ▲ | scottyah 36 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I agree overall, but it is a lot different when each further thievery requires no additional work (since you're not streaming from them). It'd be more like paying someone each time you walk in your door, for the lifetime of the door. In this case they can also take the door off anytime they want, put ads on it, or do pretty much whatever they want. |
| |
| ▲ | umanwizard 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The comment you're replying to said "legally". | | | |
| ▲ | IncreasePosts 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Or...don't pirate and rotate streaming services. Just because a new show drops doesn't mean you need to watch it next week | | |
| ▲ | NoGravitas an hour ago | parent [-] | | There are certainly people who do this with free trial subscriptions when a show they want becomes available. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | Arainach 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Far better for consumers to be able to binge Game of Thrones/Silicon Valley/whatever and cancel HBO Max than to have to pay twice as much for a subscription to both libraries to get either. |
| |
| ▲ | sbarre 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Yeah until Netflix adds tiered pricing for content and you end up paying more than what Netflix + HBO Max together would have cost because Netflix is the only game in town for that content.. I think like all media consolidation this will send a lot of people back to the seven seas.. | | |
| ▲ | autoexec 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | The seven seas can't stop netflix from canceling good shows though. |
| |
| ▲ | ghaff 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I'm actually a little surprised that, some discounts for annual subscriptions notwithstanding, the streaming services haven't done more to discourage short-term jump on/jump off subscriptions. But they have the data and I don't. I assume there's enough stickiness and inertia that most people are not canceling and restarting services all the time. I know I don't. I just decide I don't care enough about most content (and don't really watch much video or binge watch anyway). | | |
| ▲ | WorldMaker 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | A big part of the reason I keep my Paramount+ subscription month-to-month despite mostly just watching Star Trek on it is that they sold me a pretty good annual plan discount. Annual plans are a big factor in the stickiness of Amazon's efforts. Especially with Amazon's dark patterns around trying to make people forget they pay it (and making it hard to cancel). It is curious there aren't more explorations in increasing stickiness. Though admittedly cable's biggest trick (long term contracts) is maybe thankfully out of reach for most of the streamers. | | |
| ▲ | ghaff 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Bundles, where they exist, are a big stickiness factor. Especially during COVID, getting stuff delivered to my door before I'd have gotten around to the hassle of going to the store, was a big factor in making Prime more useful to me than it already was. Apple is less pronounced but I'm very much in the Apple ecosystem so TV+ isn't really a big adder. >Though admittedly cable's biggest trick (long term contracts) is maybe thankfully out of reach for most of the streamers. Yeah. You make too much of an on/off ramp for just a streaming service and that's a hard pass for me. |
| |
| ▲ | eloisant 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | As you say, most users probably don't bother stopping/starting subscriptions. Besides, if they make it harder to cancel some users might not subscribe in the first place in fear of being locked in. They're probably making more with users saying "I'll subscribe now but cancel when I'm done watching this show" then don't bother cancelling. | |
| ▲ | nonameiguess an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | As much as people complain, maybe if I was still 22 and dirt broke, I'd do something like that, but more likely I just wouldn't watch TV. I didnt own a TV back then and it was fine. Now, sure, I don't exactly like being nickle and dimed from a pure intellectual perspective, but these streaming services are what? Like $15 a month a pop? That's 1/40 the cost of groceries. It's annoying but makes no difference and isn't anywhere near worth the hassle of starting and stopping. If it was a $120 a month gym subscription or the old cable bundles I used to pay $200 for, then it's getting to the point that it's worth caring about. The stickiness is probably just that. Even as they raise prices, it's still less than we're paying for pretty much anything else. Gas, electricity, food, housing. Cut Netlix and well great, I just reduced my monthly spend from $5000 to $4980. Really making a dent there. I can retire comfortably now. It's almost as patronizing as the old avocado toast thing. Avocado toast might be overpriced and nowhere near worth it, but it isn't the reason anyone is broke. | | |
| ▲ | ghaff an hour ago | parent [-] | | I do keep a vague eye on subscriptions/credit cards/etc. that I'm really not getting value out of over the course of months. But, yes, if you're either poor or optimizing points on an airline or whatever is sort of a hobby, then sure. But otherwise, it's just not very interesting to many of us and involves mental overhead we can just live without. |
|
| |
| ▲ | Mindwipe 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Which is why it won't happen, what would the revenue benefit of that be? In the medium term you'll get a D+/Hulu-esque split with maybe a discounted bundle of Netflix and HBO Max together - the evidence is pretty strong that bundles reduce churn. If they ever do go to one library, it'll be because Netflix feel they are able to push prices to the same level as both services combined. |
|
|
| ▲ | skywhopper 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| lol at the idea that Netflix would ever produce something as high-quality as GoT or HotD. Those days will soon be over. |
| |
| ▲ | gopalv 15 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | > produce something as high-quality as GoT Netflix is a different creature because of streaming and time shifting. They don't care about people watching a pilot episode or people binge watching last 3 seasons when a show takes off. The quality metric therefore is all over the place, it is a mildly moderated popularity contest. If people watch "Love is Blind", you'll get more of those. On the other hand, this means they can take a slightly bigger risk than a TV network with ADs, because you're likely to switch to a different Netflix show that you like and continue to pay for it, than switch to a different channel which pays a different TV network. As long as something sticks the revenue numbers stay, the ROI can be shaky. Black Mirror Bandersnatch for example was impossible to do on TV, but Netflix could do it. Also if GoT was Netflix, they'd have cancelled it on Season 6 & we'd be lamenting the loss of what wonders it'd have gotten to by Season 9. | |
| ▲ | afavour 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The Crown is absolutely a prestige TV show. Stranger Things is also high quality and high budget. You could probably include Bridgerton in there too, it's not my kind of show but I can still recognize that it's a well put together one. | | |
| ▲ | SunlightEdge 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Its subjective, and full of nuance, but I do feel that Netflix has its own style that is very different to HBO's style. Consider the witcher vs game of thrones or black mirror pre-netflix vs post netflix. Its not black and white though, as Netflix animations (Castlevania, Pluto etc.) are amazing TV, but personally I would much rather watch a HBO show than a Netflix one - especially if its a fantasy/science fiction one where Netflix's style isn't one I find appealing. | |
| ▲ | quickthrowman 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Nothing that Amazon has produced comes even close to what HBO produced between 1995-2015. Netflix programming is cargo cult TV. | |
| ▲ | ToucanLoucan 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The problem is all the crap kills the prestige. HBO remains what HBO is because they don't put out 600 other shows besides Game of Thrones that are utter garbage. Netflix is the Walmart of entertainment at this point. Yeah you can find basically anything there- and VERY occasionally, you'll find something damn good- but you're wading through a sea of mediocre shit to do so. And like, personally I unsubbed forever ago because I'm not interested in subsidizing all the garbage to get the occasional Frankenstein. Meanwhile I've maintained an HBO subscription for that entire time. Obviously I am but one data point here and I know my opinion is in the minority, but yeah. I don't pay attention much to Netflix. | | |
| ▲ | Mindwipe 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | The HBO Max that had "Fboy Island" yeah? HBO was never what you thought it was, and HBO Max definitely wasn't. |
|
| |
| ▲ | giancarlostoro 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Until Disney killed it because "they didn't like the numbers" the Avengers series, including Dare Devil, Luke Cage, etc were highly regarded by all my friends at the time. I don't know why Disney screwed that up colossally outside of wanting the show within Disney Plus. | | |
| ▲ | giancarlostoro 40 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Lol I wrote Avengers instead of Defenders, not sure why the downvote, but it was a really good series of shows, it was highly recommended on Netflix at the time any time a new season came out. Disney just wanted to pull it into Disney Plus that much is obvious considering they've only just started to do that, with the same cast. Not only this, but there's also Stranger Things, which imho had too many long breaks between seasons. Black Mirror was another one that was really popular. Squid Game as well. Narcos is another and one of my personal favorite shows of all time, really captures a lot of details that I had no idea about as known by the DEA agents who went after some of the biggest drug lords of our time. They also fund and produce some of the best high quality documentary series. https://screenrant.com/marvel-netflix-tv-show-cancellations-... |
|
|