3 ms·

Well hey, that's what happens when you turn streaming into cable. I had Netflix, Amazon, and Hulu subscriptions last year. Today, I have none of those, except

Well hey, that's what happens when you turn streaming into cable. I had Netflix, Amazon, and Hulu subscriptions last year. Today, I have none of those, except for one or two video purchases I made on Amazon. Now I'm supposed to have Disney+, CBS All Access, HBO Max, Peacock, etc., and that list will probably grow. And we're at a low point in what we consider entertainment. It's bread and circuses up the wazoo. And now I'm apparently supposed to pay more(I heard the Netflix subscription increased again).

majormajor 6y ago
"A la carte" was proposed for a long time as "here's what's wrong with cable" and overall it's definitely better now. I pay less for a few services, and can switch them in and out, than I did for cable. But people got unrealistic expectations of total price from the first few years of Netflix and Hulu prices + library. That stuff was always gonna get more expensive as the market moved to streaming.
- citizenkeen 6y ago
  Thank you! I've been saying this for years. I will admit that the request for a la carte assumed channel theming along the lines of cable, which isn't materializing in streaming. If I want just high quality sci-fi, which streaming service do I subscribe to? If I want feel good family movies? Etc. But it was always going to be a dozen streaming services. Anybody who thought otherwise was either delusional or didn't understand how money worked.
  - lotsofpulp 6y ago
    It's mind boggling to hear people compare cable and satellite TV to media via the internet. We once had to sign contracts, and have people come into your house and install things, and then pay rental for their cable boxes or whatnot and had to watch shows based on the schedule they were broadcast. Now, we can click a few buttons and stream exactly what we want, when we want, and unless you are watching too much media, it is surely cheaper than cable/satellite in years past. And you can purchase a subscription and cancel a subscription within seconds, as opposed to calling the cable company and waiting on hold and dealing with retention departments.
qz2 6y ago
Comparing it cable is unfair. At least cable worked properly with my television unlike the HDCP infested upgrade nightmare that streaming turned into. I started just pirating the content I was subscribed to because it was easier. Then they made it harder with all the fragmentation so I stopped paying for it full stop. Movie industry has to do the leg work to get my attention and that is very fragile. They choose not to so no cash from me.
- novok 6y ago
  I find a lot of pirate services don't really serve the 4k market that well. The vast majority of it is 1080p. Do you just use 1080p or 4k in your piracy adventures? Is the new thing not bittorrent?
  - qz2 6y ago
    1080p and bittorrent. That's it. I honestly don't have the eyesight or a large enough screen that 4k makes a difference for me.
nostromo 6y ago
> Now I'm supposed to have Disney+, CBS All Access, HBO Max, Peacock, etc., and that list will probably grow I honestly don't see why anyone needs more than maybe two streaming services. Do you really need to see everything? Even during the pandemic, two seems to be plenty for most families. Imagine arguing that movies are too expensive now because you have to see a movie every day. The obvious solution is to prioritize what you view and watch fewer movies. For most people the current approach is better: spending $20 or $30 a month instead of $80 -- and with much better choices available, and often without any ads.
- closeparen 6y ago
  If you want to be frugal, it also makes a lot of sense to stop and start your subscriptions depending on what show(s) you're actively watching that season. During Game of Thrones I needed only HBO. During The Handmaid's Tale I needed only Hulu. During Stranger Things only Netflix.
  - ASalazarMX 6y ago
    The next headline would be: "Stopping and Starting Subscriptions Pose a Threat to Legitimate Streaming Platforms" Well, more like "Dear subscriber, for your convenience and security, you can now activate your subscription in 3-month packages. Don't thanks us, at EvilCast, we're always thinking of you".
    - closeparen 6y ago
      This one is easier for them to fix with loyalty-based pricing and/or activation fees.
      - ASalazarMX 6y ago
        At least we can rest for now, knowing they won't do that until one of them is convinced it won the subscription streaming war.
- freeflight 6y ago
dceddia 6y ago
I agree it sucks, but isn't this pretty much what "everyone" was asking for? A few years ago it felt like every week there was some refrain of > Look, I don't want to pay $120 for 900 channels I never watch. Just let me pay for them a la carte. This reminds me of those plots where the devil grants wishes in sneaky terrible ways that are not at all what the asker intended.
- noetokyo 6y ago
  Well at the same time due to the way the industry works in the first place. Netflix was fundamentally going to die. Mainly due to how licensing fees work. Doing this alleviates that pressure in a way that cable never could.
- RHSeeger 6y ago
  Only, we're not paying $60 for 15 channels we want now. We're paying $60 for 1-2 shows each from 200 channels (most of which we don't want). Channels had themes, and what people meant by a la carte was being able to get the themes they wanted. Personally, I'd prefer to see every service have access to (pretty much) all content and then compete on quality/price/etc... kind of like how music tends to work nowadays.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
transpy 6y ago
I just couldn't resist: https://i.imgflip.com/4kyf7g.jpg https://i.imgflip.com/4kyf7g.jpg

majormajor 6y ago

"A la carte" was proposed for a long time as "here's what's wrong with cable" and overall it's definitely better now. I pay less for a few services, and can switch them in and out, than I did for cable. But people got unrealistic expectations of total price from the first few years of Netflix and Hulu prices + library. That stuff was always gonna get more expensive as the market moved to streaming.

citizenkeen 6y ago
Thank you! I've been saying this for years. I will admit that the request for a la carte assumed channel theming along the lines of cable, which isn't materializing in streaming. If I want just high quality sci-fi, which streaming service do I subscribe to? If I want feel good family movies? Etc. But it was always going to be a dozen streaming services. Anybody who thought otherwise was either delusional or didn't understand how money worked.
- lotsofpulp 6y ago
  It's mind boggling to hear people compare cable and satellite TV to media via the internet. We once had to sign contracts, and have people come into your house and install things, and then pay rental for their cable boxes or whatnot and had to watch shows based on the schedule they were broadcast. Now, we can click a few buttons and stream exactly what we want, when we want, and unless you are watching too much media, it is surely cheaper than cable/satellite in years past. And you can purchase a subscription and cancel a subscription within seconds, as opposed to calling the cable company and waiting on hold and dealing with retention departments.

qz2 6y ago

Comparing it cable is unfair. At least cable worked properly with my television unlike the HDCP infested upgrade nightmare that streaming turned into. I started just pirating the content I was subscribed to because it was easier. Then they made it harder with all the fragmentation so I stopped paying for it full stop. Movie industry has to do the leg work to get my attention and that is very fragile. They choose not to so no cash from me.

novok 6y ago
I find a lot of pirate services don't really serve the 4k market that well. The vast majority of it is 1080p. Do you just use 1080p or 4k in your piracy adventures? Is the new thing not bittorrent?
- qz2 6y ago
  1080p and bittorrent. That's it. I honestly don't have the eyesight or a large enough screen that 4k makes a difference for me.

nostromo 6y ago

> Now I'm supposed to have Disney+, CBS All Access, HBO Max, Peacock, etc., and that list will probably grow I honestly don't see why anyone needs more than maybe two streaming services. Do you really need to see everything? Even during the pandemic, two seems to be plenty for most families. Imagine arguing that movies are too expensive now because you have to see a movie every day. The obvious solution is to prioritize what you view and watch fewer movies. For most people the current approach is better: spending $20 or $30 a month instead of $80 -- and with much better choices available, and often without any ads.

closeparen 6y ago
If you want to be frugal, it also makes a lot of sense to stop and start your subscriptions depending on what show(s) you're actively watching that season. During Game of Thrones I needed only HBO. During The Handmaid's Tale I needed only Hulu. During Stranger Things only Netflix.
- ASalazarMX 6y ago
  The next headline would be: "Stopping and Starting Subscriptions Pose a Threat to Legitimate Streaming Platforms" Well, more like "Dear subscriber, for your convenience and security, you can now activate your subscription in 3-month packages. Don't thanks us, at EvilCast, we're always thinking of you".
  - closeparen 6y ago
    This one is easier for them to fix with loyalty-based pricing and/or activation fees.
    - ASalazarMX 6y ago
      At least we can rest for now, knowing they won't do that until one of them is convinced it won the subscription streaming war.
freeflight 6y ago

dceddia 6y ago

I agree it sucks, but isn't this pretty much what "everyone" was asking for? A few years ago it felt like every week there was some refrain of > Look, I don't want to pay $120 for 900 channels I never watch. Just let me pay for them a la carte. This reminds me of those plots where the devil grants wishes in sneaky terrible ways that are not at all what the asker intended.

noetokyo 6y ago
Well at the same time due to the way the industry works in the first place. Netflix was fundamentally going to die. Mainly due to how licensing fees work. Doing this alleviates that pressure in a way that cable never could.
RHSeeger 6y ago
Only, we're not paying $60 for 15 channels we want now. We're paying $60 for 1-2 shows each from 200 channels (most of which we don't want). Channels had themes, and what people meant by a la carte was being able to get the themes they wanted. Personally, I'd prefer to see every service have access to (pretty much) all content and then compete on quality/price/etc... kind of like how music tends to work nowadays.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

transpy 6y ago

I just couldn't resist: https://i.imgflip.com/4kyf7g.jpg https://i.imgflip.com/4kyf7g.jpg