First of all this move is enough for me to never subscribe to HBO Max so don't take my defense as positive, just explanatory. > If that were the case, there'd

First of all this move is enough for me to never subscribe to HBO Max so don't take my defense as positive, just explanatory. > If that were the case, there'd be no reason to remove it If the deep parts of the catalog don't generate subscriptions they are a money hole. Remember you don't want to supply users with everything they want when paying residuals. You want to give them exactly enough content to justify the subscription cost and nothing more. The ideal user is one that only watches a single show and nothing else. Of course the problem with this perspective is it assumes users ignore such actions. Hopefully the user base proves them wrong. > Given that though, HBO might be removing Westworld while residuals are the most expensive and it could come back in a couple of years. That isn't necessarily true, it could be that by pulling the content the residuals are frozen or even worse (as someone suggested on an article on the topic) reset when you begin streaming again. > I agree it does feel like HBO is breaking their viewer expectations by removing one of their own originals. Honestly I would bet a lot of money viewers were ignored for this discussion. It is exactly the kind of "short term profit at all costs" play that has become more popular.