• [email protected]@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    2 years ago

    Anon got it backwards, networks noticed how profitable Netflix was and bumped the price for Netflix to stream their stuff. Netflix responded by producing their own content rather than leasing others’ at exorbitant rates. Then Netflix later got greedy and bumped their prices, lowered their quality, and cancelled all of their good shows.

    • Zagorath@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      I think it’s a bit of both. Netflix knew that companies choosing to pull their content would be a threat, so they prematurely started producing content (famously starting with House of Cards and Orange is the New Black). Whether because they saw this as a threat or because of the perceived greater profitability of their own platforms (probably a bit of both), other studios started pulling their content from Netflix and setting up their own streaming sites.

      And naturally, other companies pulling their content accelerated Netflix’s desire to produce their own content to ensure they weren’t left in the lurch.

      • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 years ago

        Yall are overcomplicating things. Let me simplify.

        Capitalist corporations + infinite greed = cannibalism

          • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 day ago

            I am so confused, i saw this post like 20 minutes ago… how do i have an almost 2y old comment on it?

            Anyway i am pretty sure i meant greedy corporations will eventually start exploiting eachother and the systems that allow them to exist.

            • wyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              Ah, that’s just my spicy brain at the helm while I try to caffeinate and retake the bridge. I didn’t even clock the date stamp. 😂

        • InputZero@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 years ago

          It’s remarkable how people can see right past what was actually happening and only see what they want to see. Netflix was never trying to be the good guy. Netflix didn’t offer low prices out of the goodness of it’s hearts. It doesn’t have a heart, it has a ledger. The reason why Netflix offered a lot of content for a low price is because the company was trying to disrupt traditional cable. It was always the plan to increase prices, Netflix didn’t become greedy, it always was. It’s just that for a time the companies greed aligned with the publics greed. Once that relationship was no longer beneficial to Netflix it raised the prices, that was the plan all along.

          • MimicJar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            But that’s a zero sum argument. Every company is evil following that logic. No company does anything except for money.

            You can make that argument, but it isn’t unique to Netflix.

            • Soup@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 years ago

              You’re getting there! Just a little further, now.

              There certainly are some companies that seek to do good, or are run by good people. Arizona Green Tea is the current favourite but there are for sure others. The thing is though that there’re huge incentives to being greedy and awful, and a distinct lack of punishment for that behaviour, to the point where so fucking many of these companies are either evil or committing enough evil actions that it doesn’t matter at all the difference anymore.

              Also they weren’t saying that the argument is unique to Netflix but ok then.

              • c0wboy dani@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                6 days ago

                soz for necro but Arizona no longer has my whole heart since I got charged $3.50 for a can, they don’t all have {$.99} printed on them anymore :(

                • wyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  When their background image shows up on retail clothing*, that price hike & quiet pivot to resting on their cultural presence to milk their market was only a meter of time. ☝🏼

                  *IMHO, that shit’s right up there with oversized button-downs emblazoned with copious flames around a serpentine dragon/soaring eagle/howling wolf/et al. 🤦🏼‍♂️

                • Soup@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  5 days ago

                  Whomp, that sucks. It’s about on par, and yea I’ve noticed for a while but unless they’ve changed hands, at some point they do need to survive. In the same way I think wages should go up with inflation, I do understand the need to raise prices from time to time as well. The issue I have is with predatory price jumps, shrink-flation, etc. and doubly when the only people who benefit are the super wealthy at the top.

                  • wyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 day ago

                    need to survive.

                    That’s the thing though: they don’t need to survive.

                    We, The People never needed them to.

                    Yet, they gorge themselves on our public funds (ie. “bail out”= oopsie, free do-over w/ bonus) if when they invariably fail to come up with yet another scheme before their greed tanks run dry. (There’s no “if” here, it’s a disgusting “when”.)

                    Every fucking time.

                    Then, it’s right back to the age-old tradition of bleeding us all more directly —mostly legal, too. 🤷🏼‍♂️

                    “Too big to fail”? Nah. Too corrupt to die deservedly, too greedy to change their implicit nature.

                    Funny thing about guillotines: they get right to the point. No more bullshit, no more wrigglin’, no more spin. Binary and decisive. Ah, the good ol’ days. 🤪

      • jballs@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Yeah I consulted for the cable industry around the time that everyone was just starting to try to build their own services to compete with Netflix. It wasn’t a secret that production companies would be pulling their content. There were licensing agreements signed that had expiration dates.

        So it was more like a race on both ends. Production companies were like “we get exclusive streaming rights to our movies back in X months, so we need to have our own platform up and running.” And Netflix was like “we lose streaming rights to these movies in X months, we need to make some content to replace it with.”

      • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        It doesn’t really matter, though. The only cause of companies pulling their content is Netflix’s success. There was no way Netflix could have prevented it.

        • wyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Don’t apologize for, much less anthropomorphize, any/all corporations.

          You’re doing their work for them —and, for free, FFS. 🤬

      • [email protected]@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Unpopular opinion, but I wasn’t a fan. Was it a bad show? No! Did I enjoy it? Sometimes. How it developed the cult following that it has, I can’t quite piece together. Fantastic voice acting and sound design can only pull so much weight!

        • criss_cross@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          I didn’t care for it either.

          I gave it like 3-4 episodes but couldn’t do it. I thought given the cult following and reputation it’d be right up my alley.

        • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          An excellent concept with some interesting opportunities, butchered by regressing it to the same kitschy formulaic plotlines as every other uninspiring adult animation show. I don’t want Big Bang Theory, I want Twin Peaks.

          • wyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            Hunh. It’s almost as if the same fucksticks from pre-internet days were suddenly pulling rank on the youngins and handing down decrees of returning to tried & true profit lines —despite that being a shit idea with a volatile, barely-sustainable lifespan.