If the loss in revenue from turned-off consumers unsubscribing is less than the revenue gain from ads from people who just live with it, then it’s good for the business. That’s the world we live in now
I am one who can’t live with it. Ass are so brutal and why I never had cable as an adult. I was streaming out of the gate.
Saw an interesting… Ad I guess… on prime for a new show. I click it. 2 minutes of ads it says in the top right. I just immediately quit and switched to Netflix lol.
People are willing to pay for it. It’s that easy.
The people that moved to streaming to get away from commercials switched a long time ago. Others watched the streaming sotes that had commercials because it was free or aignificsntly cheaper than cable.
Of course being greedy companies means they want both the subscriptions and the ad revenue.
No commercials was a bonus for a bit, but I think most people actually went to streaming services because it was both cheaper than cable, and you could watch on demand instead of according to TV scheduling
It was definitely part of the appeal. I got into arguments with people that Netflix would eventually succumb to ads. I’ve also been warning people about not owning digital content from back when all iTunes purchases came with DRM (or maybe they still do, does iTunes still exist?).
I think this is a bug part of it.
Average person doesn’t care about the details if their convenience is satisfied. It’s why so many continue to use Facebook even after the Cambridge Analytica scandal (which is still in the courts), and exposure of their tracking pixels.
Convenience. That’s enough for most people. It’s why we traded our personal data for free email accounts with Google, etc.
That’s what enshittification is. Make something good, draw people in, they make your service a part of their lives, and then you fuck them in the ass.
The best situation is giving money to a company that’s not shitty. The second best situation is piracy. The third best situation is letting yourself get fucked over. It’s really up to the companies whether or not we have the best situation. It’s up to all of us to have the basic dignity to not get screwed over by the worst option, and to choose the second one when they try.
That first paragraph, I’m stealing that quote.
Because it worked with cable tv back in the day so it will work again if its allowed to. Stop giving companies your money as a general rule.
Do you know what else eventually happened with cable? People cutting it by the millions when there was finally another choice.
It’s interesting that my family went from wasting time siting in front of a big screen tv paying massively for cable channels we never used, to cutting the cable and only paying for 2-3 streaming services at a time
But it’s even more interesting we continued down this path so our down time is dominated by small screens and somewhat interactive media instead of passively watching. If I stop paying for streaming media, my teens wouldn’t notice. It would just be the people here who would notice, as I complain more about doom scrolling and reaching the end
if you are paying for any streaming service that has advert breaks, you are the reason there are commercials. imagine if subscribers walked away when they were introduced!
Most people don’t get streaming content because commercials most people got it because that is where they content is and you can choose. When you want it.
Streaming services didn’t make money when money was cheap to loan. Now money is expensive to get. Company needs to make profit rather than constantly taking in funding . Commercials make money. It kept tv and radio afloat. Streaming is still better than tv
People 15 years ago used to pay for most television from cable. Netflix, back then renting DVD’s, made a paid streaming service by buying the rights to stream for pennies on the dollar.
We’re now at a point where streaming is what makes money for most shows, so there isn’t the subsidy coming from cable or broadcast like there used to. A TV show is expected to only make its money on streaming.
It turns out people don’t want to pay the full price for content, so streaming companies are experimenting with ads to fund the difference.
It turns out people don’t want to pay the full price for content, so streaming companies are experimenting with ads to fund the difference.
Who exactly determines what “full price” is? This reads like a statement from music executives in the 1990s when they were charging $25 for a CD with 10 songs on it and claiming piracy was costing them quadrillions of dollars. With inflation, that equates to just under $50 per CD today. Is that full price or is full price whatever people are willing to pay at any given time?
Full price is being able to guarantee that you make your money back on the average release.
That isn’t really possible to calculate for as you don’t know how many people will buy ‘XYZ’ until after the fact.
Say two separate movies cost $1M to make and only 5k people watch Movie A while 100 million people watch Movie B. According to this, Movie A would need to cost $200 per copy, while Movie B would cost $0.01. The “full price” would be constantly fluctuating so how could you apply it to the first hundred people who watch the movie? What about the last hundred to watch it?
Full price is just code for “what we want” not necessarily what it takes to recoup their investment. These companies want profit and they want every release to be as popular as something like End Game so they’re going to claim “full price” is whatever it takes to reach that $10 billion goal.
It is possible to price because studios are playing the odds. They might make money on one show but lose money on three others. Uncertainty gets baked into a lot of the initial decisions.
And we are seeing that production budgets are getting slashed on television shows compared to a decade ago because the streaming money doesn’t compare to cable money.
The line always has to go up. If the company stops picking up new subscribers, then their profits stagnate. And that makes investors unhappy. So to avoid that, they start to jack up the price to keep the line going up. And if that isn’t enough, they then start throwing ads into the services.
The line must always go up.Oh my sweet summer child, let me tell you a tale of cable television…
Demand and offer meet where they meet.
Prep for removal of gate keeping bandwidth with met neutrality.
GOP will gut NN again, leaving the door open for paying for additional bandwidth. Startups won’t be able to compete if they’re slower, so the big companies will have a captive market just like cable companies used to.
This gives them the ability to squeeze. More money per customer with less customers is cheaper to manage than more customers at less per-person cost.
Because they can. The objective of any company is to squeeze as much profit as they can. It’s more lucrative to offer tiered services where you have to pay extra for no advertisements so they do it. If they realize enough people are leaving because of it they will reverse it.
They ran on cheap prices and no commercials to get people hooked. Now that they dominate the market, they raise the prices and include ads for increased revenue.
