271–280 of 335 posts
Mods, I suggest a title change to something like, “Ads coming to Prime Video”
Editorializing titles is generally frowned upon on HN, even if your suggestion is accurate
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Editorializing titles is generally frowned upon on HN, even if your suggestion is accurate
That's true, but in this case I would argue that the title "An Update On" is itself aggressively editorialized into fake bland neutrality. Correcting that is very different than the normal prohibition on title changes.
For example when Google says it, they’re probably killing off a service.
Like imagine a streaming service where you could rent shows for a couple weeks for almost nothing, with a huge catalog. People would be all over it.
Instead, they are looking at how to segment people that are using their service into groups that get a shitty experience or pay a bit more per year.
I did look at Amazon just to browse the items and get a feel for it, there might be foreshadowing here as that's what I used to use brick and mortar stores for pre-pandemic, before ordering on Amazon.
this time, I was amused by the shipping times in comparison to Uber Delivery. I haven't seen same-day delivery in a while but these were 2+ days, either way I don't even like "by 10pm, I swear, maybe".
so... hm, maybe I can cancel Amazon Prime. shipping was the only thing keeping me, and prime video comes in handy rarely and its stuff I still have to pay for. the same paid catalogue is everywhere.
This is dumb. I have been subscribed to Prime for almost a decade now. I wish there was a tier that was lower cost and didn't include Prime Video as I never use it nor have any plans to use it. They justified Prime price increases by adding all these fringe "benefits" and now they're charging extra for those benefits, and the price of Prime keeps rising YoY. No thanks.
> No action is required for Prime members While I understand why it needs to be stated, it was such a funny line in the middle of this announcement. This is also one of these cases where it goes out in US and some select western countries first, and they will shape the evolution of the product before it hits the rest of the world. I'm pretty much hoping there's a big uproar in the first countries, because otherwise i…
This is dumb. I have been subscribed to Prime for almost a decade now. I wish there was a tier that was lower cost and didn't include Prime Video as I never use it nor have any plans to use it. They justified Prime price increases by adding all these fringe "benefits" and now they're charging extra for those benefits, and the price of Prime keeps rising YoY. No thanks.
That’s pretty close to what they’re doing here. Now you’re no longer subsidising an ad-free video service if you don’t use it.
Ads completely detract from the user experience watching movies. Amazon should know this.
TLDR: Amazon prime video is introducing ads. Ad free will be $2.99 extra per month.
So, $2.99/month * 12 = $35.88/year. Are they really saying that they are going to make less than $36USD per year from viewers being served ads? Otherwise, why would they allow an ad free experience if it is leaving money on the table?
Perhaps anticipated churn from users who are heavy video users but will not tolerate ads?