4 ms·

I think that's fine at a certain price point (it's the a la cart system we clamored for) but at $9-$20 a service it ends up costing more than cable because ther

I think that's fine at a certain price point (it's the a la cart system we clamored for) but at $9-$20 a service it ends up costing more than cable because there's no comprehensive aggregator platforms anymore. The Netflix model became "get or create everything we can," which means a lot of cruft. Prime gets scraps. Hulu and Sling are just putting lipstick on a pig. It's a mess. What consumers want is to select and pay for what they want. That was the major complaint against cable and it's no different with streaming services today.

rosege 8y ago
I'snt Hulu owned by Disney and Fox? Not in the US and don't use it but I'd imagine they could really make it pretty amazing with back catalogue etc if they wanted to.
- nkozyra 8y ago
  It's owned in part by a lot of media companies, primarily as counter-half-measure against YouTube and later Netflix and Amazon. It's not an end game. It's the proverbial finger in the dike, a way to buy time until figuring out the next great way to screw consumers.
  - dayofthedaleks 8y ago
    Fyi... for that expression you'd want to use 'dike,' not its homophone.
    - nkozyra 8y ago
      Thanks. I'd really like to blame autocorrect here ... yeesh
    - teh_klev 8y ago
      Not sure if edited, but if nkozyra had said "dyke" then it's a perfectly valid (non-derogatory) noun for describing a levee or earthwork to prevent the ingress of water. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/dyke https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/dyke
      - nkozyra 8y ago
        It's not common usage in us and given its pejorative association I think the edit provides clarity :)
      - dayofthedaleks 8y ago
        Huh, I'd never known the Australian use as a synonym for jakes/outhouse!
        teh_klev 8y ago
        I always thought that was a "dunny" in Australian parlance. You learn a new thing every day on HN :)
philipkglass 8y ago
I too wish there were a central aggregator platform, but I think the price:value calculation still favors streaming if you don't care about live events. My mother's "expanded basic" cable package costs more than my subscription to 4 streaming services[1]. It may be different if you negotiate aggressively with your cable provider every time the introductory prices expire. [1] Netflix, Hulu, HBO Now, FilmStruck + Criterion (annual plan).
rm_-rf_slash 8y ago
I would love and pay for a service that would let me subscribe to all the episodes of a show for one month at a low price, directly from the content producer. I would much prefer to pay, say, $.99 or $1.99 for an unlimited month of The Expanse, and if I don’t watch it all in a month and I want more, then I pay for another month. Maybe keep some shows like It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia on retainer for whenever. That would kick the crap out of having to pay twice as much for the 2-3 aggregator subscriptions just to get all the shows I want to watch.
clouddrover 8y ago
> What consumers want is to select and pay for what they want. iTunes offers that to an extent. You can buy or rent individual movies. If you only rent movies occasionally then it's a cheaper option than a subscription service.

rosege 8y ago

I'snt Hulu owned by Disney and Fox? Not in the US and don't use it but I'd imagine they could really make it pretty amazing with back catalogue etc if they wanted to.

nkozyra 8y ago
It's owned in part by a lot of media companies, primarily as counter-half-measure against YouTube and later Netflix and Amazon. It's not an end game. It's the proverbial finger in the dike, a way to buy time until figuring out the next great way to screw consumers.
- dayofthedaleks 8y ago
  Fyi... for that expression you'd want to use 'dike,' not its homophone.
  - nkozyra 8y ago
    Thanks. I'd really like to blame autocorrect here ... yeesh
  - teh_klev 8y ago
    Not sure if edited, but if nkozyra had said "dyke" then it's a perfectly valid (non-derogatory) noun for describing a levee or earthwork to prevent the ingress of water. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/dyke https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/dyke
    - nkozyra 8y ago
      It's not common usage in us and given its pejorative association I think the edit provides clarity :)
    - dayofthedaleks 8y ago
      Huh, I'd never known the Australian use as a synonym for jakes/outhouse!
      - teh_klev 8y ago
        I always thought that was a "dunny" in Australian parlance. You learn a new thing every day on HN :)

philipkglass 8y ago

I too wish there were a central aggregator platform, but I think the price:value calculation still favors streaming if you don't care about live events. My mother's "expanded basic" cable package costs more than my subscription to 4 streaming services[1]. It may be different if you negotiate aggressively with your cable provider every time the introductory prices expire. [1] Netflix, Hulu, HBO Now, FilmStruck + Criterion (annual plan).

rm_-rf_slash 8y ago

I would love and pay for a service that would let me subscribe to all the episodes of a show for one month at a low price, directly from the content producer. I would much prefer to pay, say, $.99 or $1.99 for an unlimited month of The Expanse, and if I don’t watch it all in a month and I want more, then I pay for another month. Maybe keep some shows like It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia on retainer for whenever. That would kick the crap out of having to pay twice as much for the 2-3 aggregator subscriptions just to get all the shows I want to watch.

clouddrover 8y ago

> What consumers want is to select and pay for what they want. iTunes offers that to an extent. You can buy or rent individual movies. If you only rent movies occasionally then it's a cheaper option than a subscription service.