4 ms·

>” Just like no one wants to think about spending money each time they turn on a light in their house or take a shower?” No, in the same way that Netflix is di

>” Just like no one wants to think about spending money each time they turn on a light in their house or take a shower?” No, in the same way that Netflix is different from renting movies on Amazon Prime. It’s SVOD vs TVOD vs something like youtube without a subscription that is AVOD. There’s a reason that Spotify is hugely popular while it’s a lot less common to buy an album on iTunes. It’s the reason AYCE KBBQ and buffets are popular. Even if pay-per-use ends up cheaper, flat-rate subscriptions are easier for people to see value in, and they can consume without concern of overages.

billytetrud 5y ago
> There’s a reason that Spotify is hugely popular while it’s a lot less common to buy an album on iTunes. It’s the reason AYCE KBBQ and buffets are popular. Yes, but the reason is not the subscription model. People like variety. The subscription model actually prevents good variety in a network. Read my comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27804511 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27804511 . You bring up Spotify, but music is a fundamentally different product than news or videos. > flat-rate subscriptions are easier for people to see value in What you're saying is that people are getting duped into paying higher prices for lower quality content. While you might be right, this isn't a point in favor of the subscription model. > they can consume without concern of overages There is no reason a service can't help a user track their consumption and let the user configure a warning if they're hitting the configured limit. The subscription service is a very inflexible way of ensuring people stay within their budget. The real problem is that pay-per-view content is massively overpriced. Of course people opt for subscription services when for the price of 3 pay-per-view movies, they can watch 30 movies on a subscription service. If pay-per-view content were priced commensurately with subscription services, it would change the game.

billytetrud 5y ago

> There’s a reason that Spotify is hugely popular while it’s a lot less common to buy an album on iTunes. It’s the reason AYCE KBBQ and buffets are popular. Yes, but the reason is not the subscription model. People like variety. The subscription model actually prevents good variety in a network. Read my comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27804511 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27804511 . You bring up Spotify, but music is a fundamentally different product than news or videos. > flat-rate subscriptions are easier for people to see value in What you're saying is that people are getting duped into paying higher prices for lower quality content. While you might be right, this isn't a point in favor of the subscription model. > they can consume without concern of overages There is no reason a service can't help a user track their consumption and let the user configure a warning if they're hitting the configured limit. The subscription service is a very inflexible way of ensuring people stay within their budget. The real problem is that pay-per-view content is massively overpriced. Of course people opt for subscription services when for the price of 3 pay-per-view movies, they can watch 30 movies on a subscription service. If pay-per-view content were priced commensurately with subscription services, it would change the game.