World, Writing, Wealth discussion
Book and Film Discussions
>
How Would You Save Netflix and other Streaming Services?
The streaming model is what cable should have done a long time ago. Instead of forcing the customer to buy bundles of channels, offer an a la carte option, individual channels for a small price. I've never subscribed to cable, because when my parents had it a long time ago, there were only a couple channels I found interesting, so it's not worth it to me to pay full price for everything just to get those two channels. If I could have subscribed to those channels for a few dollars a month, I might have. And that would have been money the cable company would have gotten from me that they didn't all those years.As every studio has now launched their own streaming service with content exclusive to each, entertainment has moved in that direction. You don't watch Disney? You don't have to subscribe to the Disney service.
Problem for all these streaming services is they charge as if they're offering a full cable bundle. In the early days, people freely subscribed to Netflix because it was the only thing out there, and the amount of content made it a no-brainer. But now, you have so many choices, people have to really think about it and pick and choose what they're going to subscribe to. Or as you pointed out, they rotate their subscriptions so they're not paying for each service all the time.
It's not just Netflix having problems with their customer numbers, but Netflix will be hit the hardest because they don't have as deep a back catalog of their own content as the major studios do with decades of content in their libraries. Still, those big studios need stability in their customer numbers in order to plan their future. The only way anyone is going to build a dependable customer base is to stop trying to gouge their customers, and offer the service at a price people won't struggle to justify every month.
The problem is, the streaming option is a variation of the cable model - if I buy Netflix, I am subscribing to Netflix but I might only find one or two shows or movies I want to watch. But my subscription money is going to support everything, paying into the huge development deals that produce very little content I want.I actually think the best - though don't know how it would work - model is the one that you use when you want to stream a new theatrical release - you pay for that purchase or rental. I would love a total pay-as-you-go viewing option.
K agree with the "pay as you go" option provided the pay part was not extortionate. There are a small number of series I would like to watch but they are spread across too many suppliers. In the normal course of events, the market would sort this out quickly, but with companies the size of Amazon that won't happen. The problem, for me, is there is not really enough creativity around spread across the various genres to justify so many suppliers.
I'm pretty sure the streaming and cable services are going to get the most money they can from us.
The trouble is, any given price seems reasonable, but when you distribute the few good programs across so many different streams it puts people off. Not helped by the likes of Paramount having pulled a number of programs I was watching from Netflix here, and now they won't show them because NZ is too small. You might think they would let someone else show them here, but seemingly not.
Wonder who's watching myriads of channels, seemingly uninteresting to most, if not all, and what's their business model
Nik wrote: "Wonder who's watching myriads of channels, seemingly uninteresting to most, if not all, and what's their business model"Just like with a low-interest cable channel, you don't need millions and millions of viewers as long as you draw advertising revenue. If you get just a couple hundred thousand viewers, companies will still pay to advertise because the fee will low enough. And as long as that network can keep costs down, they can still make money.
When the broadcasters went digital a number of years back, the switch allowed them to piggy-back multiple channels on their frequency. Now each broadcaster airs anywhere from 1-3 "retro" channels, featuring old content. Mike Lindell might only be able to afford one or two spots on a major network, selling his pillows, or he can afford to plaster the airwaves, advertising on that channel which shows old westerns from the 50s or 60s...or maybe that 70s sitcom channel. And because those smaller channels are niche, advertisers can better reach a target audience than they might from a larger network drawing in viewers from all walks of life.
Yeah, sounds about right and maybe they get a few cents for being in the bundle
I pay for Paramount+ and Amazon Prime. I also watch Netflix and Hulu thanks to my daughter. My partner pays for You Tube TV and Disney. We watch different things for different reason. We susbscribe to some free ones to watch some of the cooking, cars, and other "home" type shows, such as Pluto, Tubi, and some others that I rarely go into.During the holidays I signed up for 3 months of Starz and Showtime thru Amazon. There was nothing I wanted to watch that much on them, so let it go. I do want to watch one show and it is on Starz, though when the new season starts next month I don't know if Starz has it or not.
I keep Paramount just to watch Star Trek and now Mayor of Kingstown. I watch Hulu more than most other services for the daily/weekly playing of new episaodes on everything I would normally have watched on cable - General Hospital, Law and Order, the Chicago trio of series, some medical dramas - you get the idea.
Because of the variety of shows offered and the ability to binge whole seasons, I like Netflix or Prime as a source of things I wouldn't normally look for. I like Hulu to watch current series on the networks. I wish I could have it all in 1 or 2 places.
I have probably;y been as interested in Star trek as any, but Paramount + is not available here (sigh)
Ian wrote: "I have probably;y been as interested in Star trek as any, but Paramount + is not available here (sigh)"I wasn't happy about having to get a new subscription, especially as I had seen the first season of Discovery and it didn't grab me right away. When Picard was released then I signed up on a special offer for CBS All Access, which, at the end of last year, became Paramount+. They never increased my price, so I accept it.
Frustratingly, my firestick with my Amazon account does not recognize any app that I purchased outside of Amazon and will not mesh with the Paramount+.
Discovery got much better IMO. Picard, seems too dark and I am waiting to see this upcoming season.
I wait for offers of a free month or reduced prices for streaming services, never paying full price. I have to keep up with the dates the offers expire and then cancel and move on to another service with discounts. It's a game worth playing if you want to save money. This is actually what I've wanted all along - paying for only the services that offer what I want to watch, instead of having to pay for sports and kid channels I'm not interested in.I wasn't impressed with the Picard series, to my disappointment, since I'm a Trek fan. Maybe the next installment will be better.
Ian wrote: "I have probably;y been as interested in Star trek as any, but Paramount + is not available here (sigh)"Ian, I feel for you. While I can still watch reruns of the old shows on other services, the movies come and go. I found other things to watch on Paramount+ but my enjoyment of Star Trek and having spent since age 12 being fascinated by the show, books, eventual movies; havng written my high school science fiction English class term paper on its affect on society; I knew eventually I would get it. I am surprised that I held back long enough to get a good price on it.
I canceled the other services I signed up for this past winter where 3 months were each 99 cents, but I probably will get Starz again whenever the current season of Outlanders if completely available; binge it for the month; cancel it until next time.
Ian wrote: "Lizzie, Starz not here either :-("Do they put those same shows on other streaming services where you are? For instance, I know that some things are on Netflix outside of the USA but not within.
They did put Star trek on Netflix, but took it off about 6 months ago. Hadn't heard of outlanders, but Netflix does have a rather large menu so I could have missed it. Mind you, it is not the end of the world if a specific show is not here. Actually, now I come to recall I have seen a couple of STARZ shows, but that was some time ago and I don't know if they are still on.
I read yesterday that Netflix has been finding a lot of password sharing and is trying to clamp down. On certain streaming services, you can add a few "friends and family" to the account, but apparently, in addition to this, people are giving out their passwords so that additional friends and family can log on and watch without subscribing.I still have cable and liked a lot of British mysteries that I was able to watch on PBS channels. It looks like they are trying to only make those available on BritBox now.
Well today it's reported that Netflix stock dropped 25%. Instead of the 2.5-2.7 million new subscribers they predicted for the first quarter, they lost 200,000. I don't think they can blame numbers like that on "password sharing." They are even considering adding lower priced tiers that are "ad supported."Hard to believe they can't see the problem is the lack of good, well-produced programming. They're not all that expensive to subscribe to, but why pay for something when you can't find anything worth watching.
They won't be the only one suffering from this. The problem is there have always been as strict limit to the number of programs that anyone wants to watch because there is a limit to the number of good writers in any genre. Now these few good programs are spread mover a huge number of outlets. I think they might have to resort to some other structure because only too many people cannot afford so many suppliers.
Yeah - after premium cable, then came Netflix which used to do some kind of DVD rent-by-mail and then went to curating content and then went to producing their own content. I think there is good writing out there but I don't see a lot of it in stuff written directly for the screen. I read a lot - maybe 3 books a week - and I often come across novels and series that would adapt really well and could be done on far less than a "Game of Thrones" budget.
There has been a recent tendency to make very spectacular shows. I recall a number of older shows that had almost laughable special effects (I recall one episode of "Blake's Seven" where a space ship going into a dark void was represented by a model on a piece of string (the string cut out) move behind a black sheet of cardboard!) It did not matter to me. The issue is whether the plot and the characters are worth watching.
Makes sense to me that Netflix would limit sharing of accounts, which loses them money. My charge recently went up $1, and if you consider how many subscribers they have, that amounts to a lot of money. I hope Netflix doesn't go away because you can find many old movies to watch.
Netflix says it lost 200,000 subscribers in the last quarter, but it also lost 700,000 subscribers in Russia as it cancelled their subscriptions. Not clear how these two figures were counted, i.e. did they include the Russian in the 200,000.My guess is the US subscriber loss will be in part due to general inflation with wages, etc, not keeping up. When belt tightening comes around, a business like Netflix, being on the luxury end of the spending, is the first to suffer.
I sort of agree with Ian. It seems like everything - cable news, streamed entertainment, even products that you might buy on a regular basis are trying to hook you into a subscription model. And people would float their half dozen subscriptions because they could afford to. But when prices go up on eggs, gas and rent, you start to make a stark differentiation between "needs" and "wants." Might be a harder choice if the offerings were better, but frankly I don''t think Netflix is all that great, loads up their offerings with curated stuff while their own productions look cheaply made.
Actually, I don't mind "cheaply made". What bothers me is poor writing. (Acting is usually OK, and poor special effects don't bother me as long as they are not too bad. Recall the original series of Star Trek - the prevalence of cardboard was obvious!)I think Netflix had another problem. When it raised prices, it forces people like me who tend to let things drift suddenly ask, "Is this really worth it?" This is not the question you want client to ask frequently.
Well I might not mind cheap productions if they really had no money - I really liked the series TURN, and it was obviously made on a very restricted budget - but when they have money and give political and royal connections 9-figure "development deals" which leaves a lot less to put into the actual content. But I agree about writing, especially original work - sometimes adapted works aren't all that bad, but a lot of originals are pretty weak IMHO.
I agree completely with your comment about giving 9 figure development deals. That is a very poor reason to raise your prices.
At this point, Netflix has become a joke/meme for its level of wokeness. With other services offering most of the same older content, their only selling point now is the original content. People are moving onto other services, I don't see them coming back if Netflix ever decides to stop catering to the woke crowd.
Barbara wrote: "Well I might not mind cheap productions if they really had no money - I really liked the series TURN, and it was obviously made on a very restricted budget - but when they have money and give polit..."I really liked TURN too.
This morning I read that Netflix is thinking about taking on ads by the end of the year. Talk about not being able to get out of your own way. If your revenue is declining because you gave too much money out in bad development deals, and have nothing left to acquire and produce attractive programming, you really think making what's left of your audience sit through commercials is the answer?
Barbara wrote: "This morning I read that Netflix is thinking about taking on ads by the end of the year. Talk about not being able to get out of your own way. If your revenue is declining because you gave too much..."Don't know that it won't work. I spend more time watching Hulu and Paramount than any other ones; the boyfriend and I watch YouTube TV on his account - all of them have commercials. It won't really bother me - gives me the chance to go potty, get a drink and a snack, return a text.
I abhor commercials. If Netflix makes me watch them, I'll cancel.
Yeah, I guess we can duck out during the commercials, but it's really about what the deal was. If the deal the consumer had with Netflix going in was programming without commercials, and then Netflix made some bad decisions, lost money, lost subscribers, why do their bad decisions mean they get to change their deal with the viewers? Or will there be some kind of "opt out" option for a higher price?
Cox cable/internet raises its prices constantly. The options are cancel or pay. I suspect they all have it in the fine print somewhere that they can raise the price. The subscribers cancelation rights are likely spelled out too. My daughter has subscriptions and I don't know if they are paid monthly or some other form. My subscriptions for Paramount+ and such are billed each month to my credit card. I can cancel it if I choose to do so. I had signed up for specials on some other streaming - discovery, showtime and such. I canceled some after 1 month, others after 3, without a problem.
Yep, Get Woke, Go Broke. It's about time, unless it's only lip service they're playing.
I don't understand the Get Woke thing. You get to choose what you watch. I don't care if others are woke. I even watch some woke stuff just to see what's going on in the world, but I'm not forced to do so.
Also, such services tend to go for what they think the most people want. If more than half the population behaves wokishly, expect plenty of woke programs. Maybe the problem is with ourselves. However, I feel that I still get enough programs where the woke element is sufficiently dilute I can watch them.
I used to like the show "Bosch" based on the Michael Connolly novels. It ran several seasons on Amazon Prime, which I had. This season - Bosch is now a PI, not a cop - Amazon demoted it to Freevee - which means you have to put up with periodic ad breaks. I wonder if "Bosch" - which looked like they had a pretty healthy production budget - needed to subsidize production this time around, but why is that my problem? I'm already paying for Prime.Plus the show got so box-checky-woke that I actually didn't watch the whole season. Just went downhill.
I haven't liked Bosch from the beginning.As for Netflix, this is the one streaming service I keep year-round because you can watch old movies with no rental fees. They also occasionally produce a new series that's good - Ozark and Stranger Things among them. I don't care if they come out with some woke weirdness; I just don't watch.
Today I read that Netflix is laying off 30 more people, mostly in the animation department. That was the department that was producing - and then shelved - Meghan Markle's animated series. They are keeping a few animated projects, mostly ones from people who have some cred in the business like Richard Linklater and Guillermo del Toro
I have to ask - what was Meghan Markle's animated series about? I can't imagine that it would be anything I'd want to watch.
I guess we'll never know, at least whether it was any good.
Scout wrote: "I have to ask - what was Meghan Markle's animated series about? I can't imagine that it would be anything I'd want to watch."Apparently the ex-royals formed a company when they got their development money - Archwell productions - and one of the projects was an animated series called "Pearl" about a girl who finds inspiration from historical women. Never got past the development stage.
Thanks for the info Ian. I'm not really interested in what they have to say. Anyone who deserts his family, yet uses them to make money by throwing them under the bus publicly is not someone I can respect.I heard the other day that Netflix is going to start releasing shows weekly. Now I'm upset :-) I like to binge watch, and that was Netflix's claim to fame. If they give it up, they'll be like all the others.
Scout wrote: "I heard that Netflix is going to start releasing shows weekly."You mean one episode a week, like GOT was? I wonder if it's because Netflix just doesn't have money enough to develop enough programming so they have to stretch out what they've got.
I wasn’t very clear there was I? Yes they want to air an episode at a time. They’re already doing it with The Great British Baking Show, and I don’t like it. I want to binge:-) I think they’re doing it to keep people subscribed instead of jumping to other streamers.
Last week I heard that Netflix is in negotiations to buy a large piece of property in NJ that is a vacated military base to build production studios.
In my case, it's strictly about content. On every streaming service there are one or two shows or movies that interest me, a couple; look interesting but I can't get the past episode. What would your streaming service look like? Mine would
1. Leave the middle grade, children's content to Disney. They do it better, and I doubt that there's a real return for anyone else. But if you're going to do YA or kids material, do it right - that awful angst-ridden Anne of Green Gables adaptation one of them did a while back was awful. Make the book kids remember reading.
2. Go to the library. People talk a lot about the "novels for television" done in the 70s and 80s and lets face it - Game of Thrones was a blockbuster, mystery series like Dexter, Rizzoli and Isles, Bones went on for years, the Pride and Prejudice from the middle 90s started off a Jane Austen trend that is still going on - ditto the British Sherlock Holmes from the same era. Lonesome Dove, Sex and the City, Roots, IT, Band of Brothers, Big Little Lies. Books are a great place to find story.
3. To paraphrase Samuel Goldwyn, leave the messaging to Western Union.
4. Pay talent, not "development" - spending tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars - millions even - on "development deals" to find, option, maybe "produce" stuff, instead of spending the money on the actual stuff - the writers, the productions - makes too many of these series look cheap, limited in scope and pretty much like every other offering.