3 ms·
This newsletter from early last week had some really interesting thoughts about this: https://mattstoller.substack.com/p/the-slow-death-of-hollywood https://mat
by Deimorz 7y ago
This newsletter from early last week had some really interesting thoughts about this: https://mattstoller.substack.com/p/the-slow-death-of-hollywood https://mattstoller.substack.com/p/the-slow-death-of-hollywo...
It quoted a section from an article in The Information:
> [Netflix] now routinely ends shows after their second season, even when they’re still popular. Netflix has learned that the first two seasons of a show are key to bringing in subscribers—but the third and later seasons don’t do much to retain or win new subscribers. Ending a show after the second season saves money, because showrunners who oversee production tend to negotiate a boost in pay after two years.
- r00fus 7y agoIt's unfortunate that even Netflix wasn't able to transition the industry to episodic production runs as opposed to season-based. Is it possible that the best distribution is an exponential backoff of new episode timing instead of just cutting it off at "2 seasons".
- kjsbfkjbf 7y agoThe financial uncertainty would be appalling.
- cannonedhamster 7y agoI left Netflix because they kept cancelling shows I liked after two seasons and continued to pump out low quality garbage. I think they might be incorrect in their assumptions at this point about just how valuable their offerings are, which isn't very. They have no real good movies, not even old movies, their television shows aren't generally worth getting invested in because they'll cancel them unless it's a super big hit. Why bother sticking around when Hulu or Philo offers more for the same money?