That would be true if each of these services had enough unique content to stand on it's own. Netflix does, Amazon does, and HBO does if you take their entire historical cannon into account. The rest of the services (Starz, Cinemax, Hulu, Showtime et al) have 1-2 great exclusives and a bunch of old so-so content.
I shouldn't have to pay for 5 additional instances of Netflix to get one instance of Netflix worth of quality content. You were late to market and lost, deal with it and list your content on Netflix or Amazon, band together to form a joint competitor, or service a niche market like what Crunchyroll did with anime.
If you don’t want to subscribe, then don’t. But these services are cheap compared to what they’re replacing. The average cable bill is over $100. These streaming services are the a la carte channels everyone was always saying they wanted in the bad old days when content was bundled together in cable packages.
What we have today is far from a la carte. Yesterday: if you want shows 1, 2, and 3, you have to purchase cable bundles A, B, and C, even if you don’t watch 99% of the content in those bundles, since the shows were spread across those bundles. Today: if you want shows 1, 2, and 3, you have to subscribe to streaming service A, B, and C. There is almost no difference, except now you’re paying three separate companies instead of one for 99% of content you don’t watch.
You can buy shows and movies a la carte on iTunes and Amazon Video if you want. Perhaps a company should create a $9/month streaming service where each customer gets to choose their catalog personally.
Most of these services are the same a la carte premium channels that already existed 10 years ago for roughly the same price (HBO, Starz, Cinemax, and Showtime). Little has changed except the content delivery mechanism and availability of content on demand.
> Little has changed except the content delivery mechanism and availability of content on demand.
What? You don't need to pay $100 for cable anymore, how is it that nothing has changed? Anyway, I think arguing with you is pointless, pirates will always find a way to justify their behavior.
A. I've never advocated for piracy anywhere here, so I'm very confused as to where you got that from. If my intent was to pirate, why would I even be a part of this discussion? Please engage in honest discourse or don't bother posting.
B. If I have to pay for a live sports package and 5 streaming networks to watch what I want, then I'm not really saving much money (if any). A move to a la carte content should result in a substantial cost savings, not a marginal cost savings. Netflix has set the bar at $10 per month for access to a massive catalog of content across networks. By default, this means no one (except maybe HBO) should be charging anywhere near this amount of money for access to their content library which is not nearly as deep or as high quality.
Right, now you spend for Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, HBO, Showtime, Stars, CBS, and soon Disney. Plus Crunchyroll if you like anime, plus a sports package for sports.
If this keeps going $100 will seem like a bargain, and piracy will surge.
I also think it’s rude and out of line to tell someone that arguing with them is pointless. Do the mature thing and just stop responding, or the even more useful thing and actually try to have the conversation.
>Right, now you spend for Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, HBO, Showtime, Stars, CBS, and soon Disney. Plus Crunchyroll if you like anime, plus a sports package for sports.
And why are you subscribed to every single streaming platform? Do you actually need to watch every single show you might possibly like?
I’m not, but neither is that the point. Obviously no one needs any of this, it’s always a matter of want. The question is how much it costs to get it, today, yesterday, and tomorrow. People crowing about the downfall of cable packages while ignoring splintering subscriptions for the same content are missing that point, don’t you think?
The point is that it seems media companies, in their greed, have forgotten that streaming only works when it offers something better than piracy. A dozen subscriptions that cost more than a cable package did is offering less, with more impediments to use than a Kodi box. The model will, as a previous poster said, fail. The attempt turn everything from software to hardware into a subscription service, because it’s the easiest way to milk money isn’t some god-given right of corporations either.
Now you can yell about entitlement and whatever else, and I’m not wading into that mess, just explaining how it is based on past precedent.
I think he is simply addressing the argument that today’s environment (multiple streaming services each with exclusive content) is any different than yesterday when it was multiple cable bundles each with exclusive channels.
You're speaking as if there are only two models: pay a lot for everything or pay for individual channels or shows. I want neither of those things. I want the Spotify model, where I pay 9.99 per month and I get 80% of all music across genres. I'm willing to pay for 1-2 of such services but not 5-6.
I shouldn't have to pay for 5 additional instances of Netflix to get one instance of Netflix worth of quality content. You were late to market and lost, deal with it and list your content on Netflix or Amazon, band together to form a joint competitor, or service a niche market like what Crunchyroll did with anime.