3 ms·
Yeah, I shouldn't have said "still be profitable." For that, I meant they could be in a stronger position to ignore studios. And it is a bit mind boggling to
by taeric 3y ago
Yeah, I shouldn't have said "still be profitable." For that, I meant they could be in a stronger position to ignore studios.
And it is a bit mind boggling to think of 4.4 billion in profit. Wow.
Still, my point mostly stands? If the studios decide not to let Netflix stream their movies, then they don't stream their movies. This was far more hollow of a threat in the early days of streaming, but nowadays it is very conceivable that they can leverage their back catalog for someone. Such that Netflix is quickly getting to where what got everyone to sign up is at major risk of going away.
And this is far from hypothetical. It is mind boggling to me that Daredevil is no longer available on Netflix. Something they literally helped produce.
- pests 3y ago> It is mind boggling to me that Daredevil is no longer available on Netflix. Something they literally helped produce. Except they didn't. Netflix was the broadcaster. Daredevil was produced by Marvel Television, ABC Studios, and Drew Goddard's production company. In fact, originally those shows did show a Netflix bumper at start but that has been replaced now with Disney+ as that's where it now streams.
- taeric 3y agoAmusingly, I suspect this is me falling for the "engineer" trap. Producer is clearly a technical term in that field that all to many of us think means something more nebulous. Doesn't help with "executive producer" being a thing that I know a ton of folks mean "funded." So, whatever their technical role's name, my understanding is that they put up a lot of money for the shows to be made. And now can't show them. Is that not the case?