Certain irony in these companies splitting their content and now considering merging it back.
I'm glad I could contribute to their lack of profit by simply not paying any of them.
this post was submitted on 28 Dec 2023
294 points (98.0% liked)
Technology
59039 readers
3158 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Arr. Well done me matey.
Ahoy!
It seems pointless, but in practice what this is going to lead to is inovators getting absorbed by established media conglomerates.
They would still control it more than they did in Netflix, so it's still upside in their eyes.
load more comments
(27 replies)
Streaming platforms should not be allowed to produce content and vice-versa. That’s how it was with movie theaters. Ever wondered why there are no Paramount theater, or MGM theater and so on? Because studios aren’t allowed to own theaters.
It's basically the Live Nation/TIcketmaster issue. They sell the tickets to the events at venues they own. Conflict of interest much?
Live nation/ticketmaster is worse than that, if you try to open a venue without giving then a cut in some way they'll blacklist you from the industry.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Yep.
Like lots of "disruptions" it was just getting ahead of regulations and lobbying to prevent/stall them.
3rd party streaming providers and ending exclusivity contracts would fix streaming overnight, and studios would still make an insane amount of money.
Not many people are going to sign up for a 7th streaming service to watch The Office, but millions of people would have it on if only for background noise.
Have the streaming service pay studios per hour watched.
It's up to the streamer to balance how much they charge consumers and how much they pay studios to remain profitable.
As of 2020 move studios can own theaters
yeah exactly. and hopefully being banned from making shows will motivate them to finally work on their terrible UIs. it’s so annoying that so many streaming services still lack basic functionality and have almost no customization options.
its so insane these companies are competing with each other over what’s on their service instead of how pleasant it is to use their service.
Yep. Because as long as the content is exclusive, the ui isn’t a selling point.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Ah, yes. The "find out" stage of the "fuck around and find out" lesson from thinking "we can do Netflix ourselves." Nice work, assbags.
It takes an MBA to make shitty decisions, make 3,000% higher compensation than the average employee, and then turn around and layoff others because of your own shitty decisions. I think you're being real kind with the assbag label there. I'm thinking a term like "parasitic shit-cunt" gets slightly closer but I just can't think of anything derisive enough that satisfies the enmity I have for them.
I don’t want Netflix to even do Netflix anymore. Competition is healthy so if they all merge and there’s only 2 that’ll be bad imo
Competition is good but I really don't want to pay $15 to $20 a month for 5 different streaming services just to ensure good competition.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Honestly, I'd much rather movies and shows be like music. I could subscribe to Apple Music, or Google Play, or YouTube Music, or Tidal, or Spotify, etc. That's competition. Not spreading it out all over. Too much fragmentation can be bad for consumers too. It's why I've been doing my best with buying stuff I really want instead of streaming it. Some stuff I can't buy, and I get that. But others, I'm doing my damnedest to own it so I don't need to subscribe for it.
Side note: I know it (streaming movies like music) is a pipe dream that'll never happen. But still, one can dream.
I get what you are saying, but I want fewer subs. Thanks.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Lol. They're not dealing with boomers who don't know how to pirate anymore. We grew up learning how to pirate as kids who won't deal with that bullshit.
I wish. Many kids today seem clueless about that. Many don't even get how file systems work.
This is very true, and I'm betting a big part of why streaming services are doing this is they know they can get away with it more than they could have with earlier generations who just pirate everything when the services aren't worth what they cost.
load more comments
(1 replies)
lol I was just yesterday saying that I fully expect these to fold and all the content to go back to Netflix where the studios can earn passive income with no more expense than paying their lawyers to write contracts.
Why aren't people using our service? Should we lower prices? Provide better shows and services? No no, we're business people not people making a product. Cut and merge!
With our enshittification powers combined...
The Money Guys never think about the backend.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The world’s largest traditional entertainment companies face a reckoning in 2024 after losing more than $5 billion in the past year from the streaming services they built to compete with Netflix.
Disney, Warner Bros Discovery, Comcast and Paramount—US entertainment conglomerates that have been growing ever larger for decades—are facing pressure to shrink or sell legacy businesses, scale back production and slash costs following billions in losses from their digital platforms.
Beyond their streaming losses, the traditional media groups are facing a weak advertising market, declining television revenues and higher production costs following the Hollywood strikes.
But as the traditional media owners struggle, Netflix, the tech group that pioneered the streaming model over a decade ago, has emerged as the winner of the battle to reshape video distribution.
“For much of the past four years, the entertainment industry spent money like drunken sailors to fight the first salvos of the streaming wars,” analyst Michael Nathanson wrote in November.
Earnings for its most recent quarter soared past Wall Street’s expectations as it added 9 million new subscribers—the strongest rise since early 2020, when Covid-19 lockdowns led to a jump.
The original article contains 933 words, the summary contains 187 words. Saved 80%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Here's an idea, friendly to corps because it's the only damn way it would happen. A "nonprofit" foundation with the backing of all major studios. The studios provide the infrastructure while the "nonprofit" uses most of their low subscription fee to pay for content. The rest goes towards market research that is provided to the studios and open sourced at the end of each year.
How is this friendly to corps lol
Quick, corps, double down on enshittification so we never are enticed to give you corporate clusterfucks another chance to deceive us.
Honestly though, the fact that enshitfication was ALWAYS the plan for these businesses is why we shouldn't of let them get as much market share in the first place
view more: next ›