331–340 of 788 posts
If every studio thinks I'm going to pay them $10+ a month to stream their content, they are going to be very mistaken. I can't imagine that a lot of people want to spend the collective hundreds of dollars to sign up for all the streaming services. It's almost asking to drive people to torrents. Now, if Disney does something like $30/year or something really affordable - sure. I might do that on a whim. I guess it's a…
If every studio thinks I'm going to pay them $10+ a month to stream their content, they are going to be very mistaken. I can't imagine that a lot of people want to spend the collective hundreds of dollars to sign up for all the streaming services. It's almost asking to drive people to torrents. Now, if Disney does something like $30/year or something really affordable - sure. I might do that on a whim. I guess it's a…
oh and plex.
yeah, it's getting to be too much.
If every studio thinks I'm going to pay them $10+ a month to stream their content, they are going to be very mistaken. I can't imagine that a lot of people want to spend the collective hundreds of dollars to sign up for all the streaming services. It's almost asking to drive people to torrents. Now, if Disney does something like $30/year or something really affordable - sure. I might do that on a whim. I guess it's a…
I for damn sure won't be subscribed to more than 1 at the same time. I would alternate every month. It makes no sense to be subscribed to all the things.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean no offense, but I found amusement in this post. It used to be that people hated cable bundles so much that they would say they would rather pay $10/month a channel for the few they watch rather than the $80/month for a bundle of hundreds of channels with only a few worth watching. Now that we have that, are we living the dream? No, we want it for a tenth of the cost.
Maybe because people have a little bit more pricing data than they used to and know what $10 of programming is worth. Your $80/mo cable bundle is split something like: $12 taxes, $43 ESPN, $9 Viacom and the rest split by everyone else. $10 buys a lot.
First, consider the experience then and the experience now. Before, only a single person could watch pre-scheduled content (unless you have an extra device to record). Now, multiple people can watch any show they want in parallel.
And your way of splitting the money is silly. At the end of the day, you were paying 80$ but were only interested in a very small portion of the content. Now you're getting that same content you cared about, but for a far smaller cost.
I understand production companies wanting to have control over the distribution of their content, but consumers are not going to want to signup and pay for multiple streaming services.
Are there any companies out there working on a solution where they can 'buy' subscriptions in bulk from all the various streaming services, package them all under a single streaming product, and sell that to the consumer?
Maybe when I am 60, 70 or 80 the film industry will get their shi* together and finally agree on a solution that has long been found in the music business. For a truly complete platform, I would FOR SURE pay more than the 10$ a month for Netflix. 20, maybe 30! But then I want it ALL. All films they have in storage. I mean, it is 2017 and there are a lot of films I can't find on Netflix, Amazon Prime or, when I am in…
The fact is that Disney is extremely savvy and knows how to produce content that sells with a nearly 100% success rate. They are simply a marketing and merchandising machine. They use the vault the way diamond miners do- to restrict supply of extremely coveted goods so that they can charge premium prices for them. It's good business and it keeps things that are decades old in constant demand so they can charge higher…
Time to dig out that torrent downloader on my NAS, it seems. Why can't the movie industry learn from the success of Spotify? No one is pirating music any more because Spotify has everything and their dog without geo restriction (at least as far as I am aware), and those who want to buy music can buy unprotected stuff from Apple Music... only the movie industry is bent on total control and profit extraction.
...Learn from the success of a business that has literally never made a profit in it's entire history?
Maybe I can sell my streaming account on to someone whilst I'm not using it, by it/one back when i need it?
That might actually force open syndication and put paid to monopolistic practices.
If every studio thinks I'm going to pay them $10+ a month to stream their content, they are going to be very mistaken. I can't imagine that a lot of people want to spend the collective hundreds of dollars to sign up for all the streaming services. It's almost asking to drive people to torrents. Now, if Disney does something like $30/year or something really affordable - sure. I might do that on a whim. I guess it's a…
If every studio thinks I'm going to pay them $10+ a month to stream their content, they are going to be very mistaken. I can't imagine that a lot of people want to spend the collective hundreds of dollars to sign up for all the streaming services. It's almost asking to drive people to torrents. Now, if Disney does something like $30/year or something really affordable - sure. I might do that on a whim. I guess it's a…
If all major studios pull their content from Netflix, then it will not have the large library size anymore. Also Disney is currently in a strong position for this right now. They released ~10 movies in 2016 and had the 4 highest grossing films of 2016. This, of course, assumes that Marvel and Lucasfilm properties are put on the Disney streaming service (I would expect that Touchstone label will not be included in thi…
Exactly! It is obvious that Netflix and Amazon are pivoting to be more like HBO and Showtime. Apparently, as they reach out to a global audience they need to rely on original content to avoid costly licensing disputes [1].
[1] https://www.wired.com/2016/12/amazon-netflix-look-shows-key-...