11–20 of 22 posts
I have Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Disney+, but I spend most of my streaming time on YouTube.
Requiring subscription to three or more services in order to watch your favourite shows is going back to the dark ages. The industry doesn't learn.
Does this study take unwanted streaming service trials into account?
About a 1000 respondents (should be enough), self-selected (could be very bad, if the text that lured people to respond even vaguely hinted at cancellations), and they asked whether respondents cancelled a subscription in the last year, but not whether they took a new subscription (⇒ they can’t conclude anything about subscription fatigue, making the header)
It doesn't actually matter if they add a new subscription to replace the cancelled subscription - what matters is that they bothered to cancel a subscription at all.
That implies that for roughly 7 out of 10 people, they are burdened enough by streaming subscription costs to be actively working on reducing that cost. Even if that simply means that they traded one service for another - they worked to keep costs flat, rather than allocate more budget.
> Regarding ads, 51.98% will deal with ads to enjoy a lower price point, 18.81% will pay to remove ads, and 19.40% report deleting apps with ads. Maybe an unpopular take, but I believe ads are more detrimental to one's mind than the extra $5 to get an ad-free plan. You end up paying well more than the $5 in rumination and buying useless stuff. If ads become more forced or have no option to remove in the future for an…
This sounds like a very weird interpretation of the word "dominate," at best. Emailing someone to introduce yourself, your product, or your services is also "interfering in people's thinking patterns." So is talking to anyone in person or online. So is linking to your book's Amazon page on your profile as a way to "dominate" the minds of people who visit your profile.
YouTube keeps trying to aggrivate me into upgrading to Premium, but at this point I'm not doing it on principal, especially at the outrageous price they expect for family plans. Kids still insist on watching it though despite the constant moans about the ads.
I'd fully switch to Nebula in a heartbeat if a larger percentage of the content producers I watched moved over.
Video content needs its own Spotify moment. The situation is already ridiculous.
> Regarding ads, 51.98% will deal with ads to enjoy a lower price point, 18.81% will pay to remove ads, and 19.40% report deleting apps with ads. Maybe an unpopular take, but I believe ads are more detrimental to one's mind than the extra $5 to get an ad-free plan. You end up paying well more than the $5 in rumination and buying useless stuff. If ads become more forced or have no option to remove in the future for an…
>No person who did not wish to dominate others would choose to use advertising This sounds like a very weird interpretation of the word "dominate," at best. Emailing someone to introduce yourself, your product, or your services is also "interfering in people's thinking patterns." So is talking to anyone in person or online. So is linking to your book's Amazon page on your profile as a way to "dominate" the minds of p…
About a 1000 respondents (should be enough), self-selected (could be very bad, if the text that lured people to respond even vaguely hinted at cancellations), and they asked whether respondents cancelled a subscription in the last year, but not whether they took a new subscription (⇒ they can’t conclude anything about subscription fatigue, making the header)
I think you can draw a fairly firm conclusion that the space is saturated based on this data (although I agree that the self-selection may be problematic). It doesn't actually matter if they add a new subscription to replace the cancelled subscription - what matters is that they bothered to cancel a subscription at all. That implies that for roughly 7 out of 10 people, they are burdened enough by streaming subscripti…
I’m more than fairly sure that didn’t happen, but the data they provide doesn’t exclude it (even knowing that Netflix lost subscribers doesn’t rule out that scenario)
> they worked to keep costs flat, rather than allocate more budget.
If they did, I wouldn’t call that “subscription fatigue”.