Recent searches
Search options
This article makes an argument I’ve been pointing out for a while. The studios had Netflix envy and started trying to compete with Netflix instead of selling them content.
So they went from a profitable business selling shows to Netflix/cable/TV & making movies to an unprofitable business chasing streaming revenue and trying to acquire customers. https://www.latimes.com/business/technology/story/2023-07-21/column-hollywood-sag-aftra-strike-strike-silicon-valleys-magical-thinking
@carnage4life IMO, the studios had no choice. They missed the boat on streaming. So unless they want to be at the mercy of Netflix/Amazon streaming duopoly, they need to pay to make up for that old mistake.
Yes, the studios hold the ip, but if they can only get their stuff in front of audiences at the pleasure of Netflix, then their ip no longer rules.
@tob @carnage4life Studios don't all need their own services anymore than they needed their own theatres.
Consumers will (and have, and do) gladly pay for services that aggregate content and make it easy to find and watch.
Studio streaming services (incl services that became studios!) are falling mostly into either the declining-users category or the unsustainably-subsidizing-growth category.
Consumers just don't want 10+ different services at $15/mo each, all with different apps.
@seanmiddleditch @carnage4life The relationship between theaters and Hollywood is predatory. The studios have a stranglehold on the theaters and so the theaters essentially operate as "independent" subsidiaries of the movie industry.
If Netflix/Amazon were content to operate their streaming services in obeyance of the studios then none of this would be happening.
They are not, so now the studios are playing catch-up (and then crush).
@seanmiddleditch @carnage4life The fact that the studios efforts are losing money chasing users is irrelevant to the long-term plans for these streaming services.
They know they're going to lose money, and likely for a long time. The goal isn't to make money, it's to break Netflix/Amazon (good luck!) and force them into a subservient position to the studios.
@seanmiddleditch @tob @carnage4life I do wonder if a better-managed version of the Hulu model, where studios band together to fund a smaller number of competitors to Netflix/Amazon would be more successful. I'd prefer independent services bartering with studios over even a multi-studio-run option, but it doesn't seem like that's in the cards. Competition is paramount to the health of any industry, but too many options pulling subscribers in different directions does just hurt everyone.
@SeanMarsala @tob @carnage4life I've had the same thought about a shared streaming service; shame that isn't likely anytime soon.
That said, I don't think that the problem right now is "too many options" but rather a complete lack of options. We don't really have service competition right now.
Content is competing for attention/eyeballs as it always was and always will be.
But if you want to see certain content, you have little (if any) choice on which service you must use.