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

Too Many Video Streaming Choices May Drive Users Back To Piracy

techdirt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 556 posts

Re: Too Many Video Streaming Choices May Drive Users Back To Piracy

#501

Post by cgriswald »

madengr wrote: post #385
lucasverra wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

simpler method trick 1) Create virtual card 2) Switch payment method to new card 3) Delete virtual card 4) Cha ching !

My credit card is stolen every other year. Somehow XBox live (for my son) has no problem figuring out how to keep charging me, despite the number changing.

Credit card companies will often honor recurring payments on a “real” card number reported stolen. This is for your convenience so a stolen card doesn’t mean a cessation of all services. You’re supposed to update these companies with your new number.

That’s not going to happen with a virtual card you canceled.

Re: Too Many Video Streaming Choices May Drive Users Back To Piracy

#503

Post by noelsusman »

pixelbath wrote: post #496
noelsusman wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what confuses me about the current conversation around streaming services. It seems like everyone just wants cable again.

"everyone" in this instance being "parties that stand to profit from this business model." I don't think consumers want this at all, and I'd even go so far as to argue the only reason cable still exists as a service is that no company has found a cheap way to stream live sports.

Reading this thread, and other similar ones on different platforms, it seems like people definitely do want to pay one monthly fee to a single company that provides all of their entertainment needs. That's just on-demand cable.

Ironically, some of the cable companies have figured out how to stream live sports for cheap. I pay my cable company $25 a month for live streaming of ABC, Fox, NBC, CBS, ESPN, ESPN2, NFL Network, Fox Sports, NBC Sports, TBS, Food Network, National Geographic, and CNN.

Re: Too Many Video Streaming Choices May Drive Users Back To Piracy

#504

Post by camel_Snake »

scarface74 wrote: post #18
sbarre wrote: post #6

"May" drive them back? This has already happened in my circles.. People who had cut the cord but all but walked away from casual piracy and signed up for Netflix and HBO (and probably Prime Video because they had Amazon Prime already) are openly talking about the fact they're definitely not signing up for more streaming services, and are seeking out torrenting again for the stuff that's being pulled from Netflix (esp…

“Your circle” unless it includes families with small kids, isn’t Disney’s primary audience. Most normal middle class people aren’t going to go through the trouble of pirating movies and setting up a Plex server and then worry about setting up their router to get a good connection while they are away from home and even then deal with the abysmally slow upload speed of the typical home network instead of spending $8 a…

There are VPS out there geared towards Plex/Torrenting. Mine costs ~$15 a month and came with all the bells and whistles installed, though I did some tweaking because I enjoy it.

No need to worry about your home network speed or configuring your router, it's about the price of 1 or 2 subscription services, and I get to curate my collection of TV shows I watch so I just log in and see which new ones are available.

I suppose the setup could be onerous of you find technology intimidating, but once it's working it's an absolute breeze to use.

I do agree, however, that Disney's target audience is the 'I need a faux baby-sitter' type.

Re: Too Many Video Streaming Choices May Drive Users Back To Piracy

#505

Post by holy_city »

kerkeslager wrote: post #490
holy_city wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not really a comment on value-add, more on content consumption habits. All I know for sure is that exclusive content is the biggest factor in lowering churn and showing it up front in a catalog is the best way to get people to know it exists. And if you keep them on your platform, they're not going to even think about typing a query into a browser to find out what to watch next - you've already told them.

> And if you keep them on your platform, they're not going to even think about typing a query into a browser to find out what to watch next - you've already told them. It is sad to me that this is how you consider your fellow human beings. Putting aside how disrespectful this assumption is to your users, I don't think it's true for all your users. It may be true for enough of your users that it looks like a good idea…

I don't personally think that (nor do I work for any of those businesses directly), that's just the design goal of streaming platforms. They're hyper optimized to keep users subscribed, and whether or not natural viewing/discovery habits play into that and are exploited is up for debate.

>It may be true for enough of your users that it looks like a good idea in A/B testing

It's really impossible to say since everyone's numbers are biased and no one shares them. But what I was getting at originally was that the use case highlighted by OP was not the common case. Users don't search various services looking for a specific piece of content, they usually pull up to follow what they were watching previously or to browse a catalog, where the twisted incentives come into play is when a user finishes the content and the platform tries to keep them hooked.

>I'd guess there are enough users who don't want to be treated like a child being told what to watch

I mean that's fair, but also a bad characterization. There are certainly bad incentives at play when you want to do everything to keep content discovery in a feedback loop, but there's not exactly an alternative when the people you need to license content from are your streaming competitors.

>Ultimately, I think bundling content with your platform and trying to force users to buy one to have the other is anticompetitive

I get the arguments for that, and I agree with some of them. But right now services compete on the merits of content itself, and as a result we have more content being created that's more diverse and at lower prices. When HBO Max and Disney+ go up we'll see how massive back catalogs affect the space, but right now the prevailing wisdom is to throw money at content creators - and I appreciate that as a content consumer.

If you want the opposite of streaming, look at movie theaters. They don't compete on content availability - yet the diversity of content is down, barrier to entry is high, and prices have been rising for years.

Re: Too Many Video Streaming Choices May Drive Users Back To Piracy

#506

Post by reificator »

zzzcpan wrote: post #325
on_and_off wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has already happened to me as well. Look, I want a convenient way to watch movies. I would even be ready to pay more than I do right now to Netflix to have a library of ALL the movies I want to watch. 1 library, not 10, especially if they may or may not contain the movie I want to see. My honeymoon period with Netflix and co is over. - I feel that their original content has dried out : there is even more of it, bu…

It seems to me neither your case nor what parent comment describes is about convenience, but merely about not wanting to pay too much for all the streaming services. I mean I don't think you would pay 10x more for netflix if it had everything, right?

> I mean I don't think you would pay 10x more for netflix if it had everything, right?

Have you heard of a thing called cable?

True, after Netflix anchored it's price at a reasonable level for it's offerings, I probably would not pay 10x more. But a service that made it easy to watch everything under one interface could get more money out of me than Netflix.

By one interface I mean search and/or browse in one place, click a video, optionally pay or subscribe with one click if needed, rinse, repeat. No switching between different catalogs, launching different apps, anything like that. Launching a different app for viewing is acceptable if it's super slick.

Amazon Prime has most of this (and x-ray is cool), so it tends to get my money more than other services, but it still doesn't have anywhere near every title I want to watch, and it's sometimes expensive enough that I will switch to a different service for a significant discount.

Re: Too Many Video Streaming Choices May Drive Users Back To Piracy

#507

Post by noelsusman »

goostavos wrote: post #354
noelsusman wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what confuses me about the current conversation around streaming services. It seems like everyone just wants cable again.

Why is it confusing? Having content fractured across 10 different services each at $10.99/mo is a pain in the bum. Just finding a movie under this setup is hard. I either have to bounce around from service to service, or start googling on my phone to see where it is actually streaming -- and probably find out its exclusively on some _other_ streaming platform. It's only a matter of time before some clever MBA comes u…

Finding movies is easy. I just googled "Avengers Endgame" and it told me it's available instantly for $5 from Google Play, Youtube, Vudu, and Amazon. I googled "The Graduate" and it told me it's available for $4 on various platforms and free on Netflix with a subscription. I google "Seinfeld" and it told me it's availabe on Hulu and TBS with a subscription.

I would much rather pick and choose which entertainment I actually want to pay for than pay a large monthly fee for everything. It saves me money.

Re: Too Many Video Streaming Choices May Drive Users Back To Piracy

#508

Post by scarface74 »

camel_Snake wrote: post #504
scarface74 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Your circle” unless it includes families with small kids, isn’t Disney’s primary audience. Most normal middle class people aren’t going to go through the trouble of pirating movies and setting up a Plex server and then worry about setting up their router to get a good connection while they are away from home and even then deal with the abysmally slow upload speed of the typical home network instead of spending $8 a…

There are VPS out there geared towards Plex/Torrenting. Mine costs ~$15 a month and came with all the bells and whistles installed, though I did some tweaking because I enjoy it. No need to worry about your home network speed or configuring your router, it's about the price of 1 or 2 subscription services, and I get to curate my collection of TV shows I watch so I just log in and see which new ones are available. I s…

I’m speaking in general. I personally have gigabit up/down, no data caps, eight wired gigabit Ethernet connections throughout the house, 3 Roku TVs, a Roku stick 2 AppleTV 4Ks and my son has an Xbox 360 and PS4 with a wired gigabit connection on his room and a gigabit switch.

Yes that’s a grand total of 6 TVs. I have a Plex server setup.

But I know none of this is normal.

Re: Too Many Video Streaming Choices May Drive Users Back To Piracy

#509

Post by kerkeslager »

sp332 wrote: post #498
kerkeslager wrote: post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 2. Google shows a handy "Available on" frame at the top of the page, with prices (if applicable) and services that it's on. Does it, though? https://imgur.com/Yxac3mL I turned off my ad blocker and all other Chrome extensions and tried again before taking this screenshot, and really have no idea what you're talking about.

Yup. https://imgur.com/a/mC1TKtB

Ah. I'm not a frequent Google user, so I've never seen that before. But I'll concede that most people are frequent Google users.

Still, the fact that Google has a workaround for this issue shows that it is an issue.

Re: Too Many Video Streaming Choices May Drive Users Back To Piracy

#510

Post by kerkeslager »

holy_city wrote: post #505
kerkeslager wrote: post #490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And if you keep them on your platform, they're not going to even think about typing a query into a browser to find out what to watch next - you've already told them. It is sad to me that this is how you consider your fellow human beings. Putting aside how disrespectful this assumption is to your users, I don't think it's true for all your users. It may be true for enough of your users that it looks like a good idea…

I don't personally think that (nor do I work for any of those businesses directly), that's just the design goal of streaming platforms. They're hyper optimized to keep users subscribed, and whether or not natural viewing/discovery habits play into that and are exploited is up for debate. >It may be true for enough of your users that it looks like a good idea in A/B testing It's really impossible to say since everyone…

> Users don't search various services looking for a specific piece of content

This is a very black and white statement, and as such I can directly say it is wrong because I do this.

If you meant "most users", I'd like to see what the breakdown is. Even if "most" is true, if a significant portion don't, then a significant portion has an incentive to pirate because streaming services don't fit their use case.

> they usually pull up to follow what they were watching previously or to browse a catalog,

Following what they were watching previously is looking for a specific piece of content...

It's a fairly simple case to solve, but it also breaks when the streaming service you're subscribed to no longer licenses the show you were watching--again, going back to the problem of needing multiple streaming services to gain access to all content.

> If you want the opposite of streaming, look at movie theaters. They don't compete on content availability

Huh? Yes they do. Maybe at one time people went to the movies and just saw whatever was playing, but now people look up what's showing online, and if there isn't anything they want to see, they don't go. It would be inconvenient not to, because you might show up at a time when no movies are starting and have to wait.

> - yet the diversity of content is down, barrier to entry is high, and prices have been rising for years.

There are a lot of confounding factors here.

Post reply on HN