6 ms·

That would be true if each of these services had enough unique content to stand on it's own. Netflix does, Amazon does, and HBO does if you take their entire hi

That would be true if each of these services had enough unique content to stand on it's own. Netflix does, Amazon does, and HBO does if you take their entire historical cannon into account. The rest of the services (Starz, Cinemax, Hulu, Showtime et al) have 1-2 great exclusives and a bunch of old so-so content. I shouldn't have to pay for 5 additional instances of Netflix to get one instance of Netflix worth of quality content. You were late to market and lost, deal with it and list your content on Netflix or Amazon, band together to form a joint competitor, or service a niche market like what Crunchyroll did with anime.

rayiner 8y ago
If you don’t want to subscribe, then don’t. But these services are cheap compared to what they’re replacing. The average cable bill is over $100. These streaming services are the a la carte channels everyone was always saying they wanted in the bad old days when content was bundled together in cable packages.
- Thriptic 8y ago
  Most of these services are the same a la carte premium channels that already existed 10 years ago for roughly the same price (HBO, Starz, Cinemax, and Showtime). Little has changed except the content delivery mechanism and availability of content on demand.
  - rayiner 8y ago
    It’s completely different now—they’re no longer tied to an expensive cable package with a bunch of other channels you don’t want.
    - ryandrake 8y ago
      Right. They are instead tied to slightly less expensive streaming bundles with a bunch of other content you don’t want. Completely different.
  - friedman23 8y ago
    > Little has changed except the content delivery mechanism and availability of content on demand. What? You don't need to pay $100 for cable anymore, how is it that nothing has changed? Anyway, I think arguing with you is pointless, pirates will always find a way to justify their behavior.
    - DmenshunlAnlsis 8y ago
      Right, now you spend for Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, HBO, Showtime, Stars, CBS, and soon Disney. Plus Crunchyroll if you like anime, plus a sports package for sports. If this keeps going $100 will seem like a bargain, and piracy will surge. I also think it’s rude and out of line to tell someone that arguing with them is pointless. Do the mature thing and just stop responding, or the even more useful thing and actually try to have the conversation.
      - friedman23 8y ago
        >Right, now you spend for Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, HBO, Showtime, Stars, CBS, and soon Disney. Plus Crunchyroll if you like anime, plus a sports package for sports. And why are you subscribed to every single streaming platform? Do you actually need to watch every single show you might possibly like?
        ryandrake 8y ago
        I think he is simply addressing the argument that today’s environment (multiple streaming services each with exclusive content) is any different than yesterday when it was multiple cable bundles each with exclusive channels.
        friedman23 8y ago
        Of course it is different, today you can pick and choose what you want whereas before you needed to buy the entire thing
        8y ago
- ryandrake 8y ago
  What we have today is far from a la carte. Yesterday: if you want shows 1, 2, and 3, you have to purchase cable bundles A, B, and C, even if you don’t watch 99% of the content in those bundles, since the shows were spread across those bundles. Today: if you want shows 1, 2, and 3, you have to subscribe to streaming service A, B, and C. There is almost no difference, except now you’re paying three separate companies instead of one for 99% of content you don’t watch.
  - hsod 8y ago
    You can buy shows and movies a la carte on iTunes and Amazon Video if you want. Perhaps a company should create a $9/month streaming service where each customer gets to choose their catalog personally.
scarface74 8y ago
Hulu’s biggest appeal for a cable cutter is day after content with no commercials from the major networks and their back catalog of TV is not bad.

rayiner 8y ago

If you don’t want to subscribe, then don’t. But these services are cheap compared to what they’re replacing. The average cable bill is over $100. These streaming services are the a la carte channels everyone was always saying they wanted in the bad old days when content was bundled together in cable packages.

Thriptic 8y ago
Most of these services are the same a la carte premium channels that already existed 10 years ago for roughly the same price (HBO, Starz, Cinemax, and Showtime). Little has changed except the content delivery mechanism and availability of content on demand.
- rayiner 8y ago
  It’s completely different now—they’re no longer tied to an expensive cable package with a bunch of other channels you don’t want.
  - ryandrake 8y ago
    Right. They are instead tied to slightly less expensive streaming bundles with a bunch of other content you don’t want. Completely different.
- friedman23 8y ago
  > Little has changed except the content delivery mechanism and availability of content on demand. What? You don't need to pay $100 for cable anymore, how is it that nothing has changed? Anyway, I think arguing with you is pointless, pirates will always find a way to justify their behavior.
  - DmenshunlAnlsis 8y ago
    Right, now you spend for Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, HBO, Showtime, Stars, CBS, and soon Disney. Plus Crunchyroll if you like anime, plus a sports package for sports. If this keeps going $100 will seem like a bargain, and piracy will surge. I also think it’s rude and out of line to tell someone that arguing with them is pointless. Do the mature thing and just stop responding, or the even more useful thing and actually try to have the conversation.
    - friedman23 8y ago
      >Right, now you spend for Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, HBO, Showtime, Stars, CBS, and soon Disney. Plus Crunchyroll if you like anime, plus a sports package for sports. And why are you subscribed to every single streaming platform? Do you actually need to watch every single show you might possibly like?
      - ryandrake 8y ago
        I think he is simply addressing the argument that today’s environment (multiple streaming services each with exclusive content) is any different than yesterday when it was multiple cable bundles each with exclusive channels.
        friedman23 8y ago
        Of course it is different, today you can pick and choose what you want whereas before you needed to buy the entire thing
        8y ago
ryandrake 8y ago
What we have today is far from a la carte. Yesterday: if you want shows 1, 2, and 3, you have to purchase cable bundles A, B, and C, even if you don’t watch 99% of the content in those bundles, since the shows were spread across those bundles. Today: if you want shows 1, 2, and 3, you have to subscribe to streaming service A, B, and C. There is almost no difference, except now you’re paying three separate companies instead of one for 99% of content you don’t watch.
- hsod 8y ago
  You can buy shows and movies a la carte on iTunes and Amazon Video if you want. Perhaps a company should create a $9/month streaming service where each customer gets to choose their catalog personally.

scarface74 8y ago

Hulu’s biggest appeal for a cable cutter is day after content with no commercials from the major networks and their back catalog of TV is not bad.