Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

It’s not a zero-sum game for Apple TV+, Netflix, and Disney+

onezero.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 187 posts

Re: It’s not a zero-sum game for Apple TV+, Netflix, and Disney+

#111

Post by lm28469 »

dijit wrote: post #84

Woman I know cycles her subscriptions, consumes what she has on backlog and then just moves onto the next. It seems to work for her, although I don't think I'd be comfortable doing that because I would miss out on pop-culture references. (I mean, one only has to look at imgur.com for a few minutes to notice a lot of Mandalorian memes, the cynic in me even considers that this might be due to Disney shilling that conte…

> I would miss out on pop-culture references.

What's wrong with that ?

Re: It’s not a zero-sum game for Apple TV+, Netflix, and Disney+

#112

Post by cyborgx7 »

fluffything wrote: post #107
yxhuvud wrote: post #101

It is not a zero sum game, because when there are enough of them I can't be assed anymore and I will simply torrent the content instead. The same way you usually never paid for single networks when you bought cable stuff but just bought a bundle with a whole bunch of them.

It might not be a zero sum game for them, but it definetely is a zero-sum game for me. When I want to watch something, I just want to click it and watch it. This is the API that my torrent tracker gives me for free (Airplay to Apple TV works great for this). I'm willing to pay for a service that I use a lot and gives me an API that's at least as good as this. But it doesn't make any sense for me to pay for 5 services…

I'm still baffled by the reasoning that leads to all the DRM theater. It does nothing. the moment a piece of content reaches streaming apps, it's on every torrent and free streaming platform.[1]

All it does is that it makes the user experience of paying customers worse. Can't use their preferred video player. Can't use a frontend that puts all the content together. Can't save it for later to watch online, unless the platform has that functionality built in, usually in a restrictive and clunky way.

[1] I'm, of course, talking about platforms that aren't as aggressive about getting rid of copyrighted content as youtube.

Re: It’s not a zero-sum game for Apple TV+, Netflix, and Disney+

#113

Post by [deleted] »

saluki wrote: post #16

I currently subscribe to all three of these and Amazon Prime, and it's less than 1/6 of what I paid for directTV before cutting the cord 9 years ago, and I don't even always keep my subscriptions active all year. I like this way better, and there can be lots of winners. No way one streaming service can provide and create everything. Plus that's not good either, choice is better.

[deleted]

Re: It’s not a zero-sum game for Apple TV+, Netflix, and Disney+

#114

Post by eloisant »

alain94040 wrote: post #27
illuminati1911 wrote: post #2

"For months now, journalists, industry insiders, and consumers have opined on who will “win” the streaming wars and why." The more streaming services there will be, the more likely it is that only thepiratebay and torrents will win.

It's amazing how we have gone full circle in the last 15 years or so. In the old days, people complained about their cable tv bill: why do I have to pay for 250 channels when I only watch 5 of them? Let me pay only for what I watch. Now that the future is here, people are complaining that they need to sign up for too many streaming services. Why can't I just pay once for a bundle and get everything I need? I'm just a…

I just don't understand why video content can't be the same as music.

Content providers licence their content to all the streaming services, they all have the same catalog, and customer pick once based on the UI, pricing, service. etc.

Re: It’s not a zero-sum game for Apple TV+, Netflix, and Disney+

#115

Post by cyborgx7 »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #108
erik_seaberg wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> maybe people think the prices are too high Absurdly high. Game of Thrones costs $167 on Amazon, which is more than binge-watching it eleven times using one-month HBO subscriptions.

How many hundreds of hours of entertainment for $167? Granted it has almost no marginal cost for the seller, but as you said, you can buy HBO for a fraction of $167 and still watch it. People just like to complain. It has never been cheaper or easier to instantly consume media, yet there is no satisfaction (because they’re comparing it to stealing the media, which is illogical of course). Of course, there are legitim…

> It has never been cheaper or easier

That's exactly the thing though. It has been easier. We all remember it being easier, when we pirated something.

The actual sentence should be "it has never been easier while also getting to pay for it". That's just not a very compelling case.

Re: It’s not a zero-sum game for Apple TV+, Netflix, and Disney+

#116

Post by heartbreak »

ollie87 wrote: post #103
yxhuvud wrote: post #101

It is not a zero sum game, because when there are enough of them I can't be assed anymore and I will simply torrent the content instead. The same way you usually never paid for single networks when you bought cable stuff but just bought a bundle with a whole bunch of them.

Yeah, I've got subscriptions to multiple services now (Amazon, Disney, Netflix, and I have a satellite TV subscription too). I used to run a very slick seedbox that would auto download all the stuff I wanted and then stream it with Plex, I had accounts with all the top private trackers. It's getting to the point now where I'm sick of paying so much money and the idea of that seedbox is far more appealing. It's not ju…

The Force Awakens is on Disney+, for what it’s worth. All of Disney’s released content is either on D+ or running out a contract on Netflix.

Re: It’s not a zero-sum game for Apple TV+, Netflix, and Disney+

#117

Post by _v7gu »

Mindwipe wrote: post #90
Dylan16807 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It costs more to buy four episodes of a single show than an entire month of a typical streaming service. That is not the "let me pick my channels" service that people often ask for.

It is, because a la carte is always significantly more expensive. It results in higher transaction cost overhead, more risk, more cash flow volatility etc. A la carte is significantly more expensive in literally every industry, globally, for a reason.

Human behavior does not (and should not) care about the cost structure. As binge watching is popular, having digital content priced over 15$ (or whatever the monthly price of the streaming service that also hosts the content) limits the sales to an incredibly niche audience.

Re: It’s not a zero-sum game for Apple TV+, Netflix, and Disney+

#118

Post by alistairSH »

ollie87 wrote: post #103
yxhuvud wrote: post #101

It is not a zero sum game, because when there are enough of them I can't be assed anymore and I will simply torrent the content instead. The same way you usually never paid for single networks when you bought cable stuff but just bought a bundle with a whole bunch of them.

Yeah, I've got subscriptions to multiple services now (Amazon, Disney, Netflix, and I have a satellite TV subscription too). I used to run a very slick seedbox that would auto download all the stuff I wanted and then stream it with Plex, I had accounts with all the top private trackers. It's getting to the point now where I'm sick of paying so much money and the idea of that seedbox is far more appealing. It's not ju…

AppleTV (the device, not the service) does a decent job of searching across streaming services with a single remote.

Currently, I use Amazon Prime Video, Netflix, and periodically subscribe to HBO Now for a month or two to catch up (then cancel for 10 months).

Edit: As noted below, The Force Awakens is on Disney+ now. You can rent it on iTunes.

Re: It’s not a zero-sum game for Apple TV+, Netflix, and Disney+

#119

Post by TheHypnotist »

alistairSH wrote: post #118
ollie87 wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I've got subscriptions to multiple services now (Amazon, Disney, Netflix, and I have a satellite TV subscription too). I used to run a very slick seedbox that would auto download all the stuff I wanted and then stream it with Plex, I had accounts with all the top private trackers. It's getting to the point now where I'm sick of paying so much money and the idea of that seedbox is far more appealing. It's not ju…

AppleTV (the device, not the service) does a decent job of searching across streaming services with a single remote. Currently, I use Amazon Prime Video, Netflix, and periodically subscribe to HBO Now for a month or two to catch up (then cancel for 10 months). Edit: As noted below, The Force Awakens is on Disney+ now. You can rent it on iTunes.

If Apple (or anyone for that matter) could managed to search through a larger variety of subs, that would be incredible. That's what this streaming market needs.

Re: It’s not a zero-sum game for Apple TV+, Netflix, and Disney+

#120

Post by alistairSH »

cyborgx7 wrote: post #115
lotsofpulp wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many hundreds of hours of entertainment for $167? Granted it has almost no marginal cost for the seller, but as you said, you can buy HBO for a fraction of $167 and still watch it. People just like to complain. It has never been cheaper or easier to instantly consume media, yet there is no satisfaction (because they’re comparing it to stealing the media, which is illogical of course). Of course, there are legitim…

> It has never been cheaper or easier That's exactly the thing though. It has been easier. We all remember it being easier, when we pirated something. The actual sentence should be "it has never been easier while also getting to pay for it". That's just not a very compelling case.

Is pirating something really easier? Maybe I've been out of that game for too long, but between finding good/complete torrents of content, avoiding my ISP finding out I was doing it (and sending me nastygrams), needing to keep a server up and running to download/store media, juggling front-ends as they evolved (Plex hasn't always been around), ...

Today, I have a single device (AppleTV), a single remote, and can stream just about anything I want. And that content is either bundled with Netflix or Amazon, or available to rent for $5 or so. And I don't have to break the law to do it.

Post reply on HN