I wonder if that effect has a name in economics. But streaming services essentially killed themselves. When it was only Netflix, is was great, they had a lot o

I wonder if that effect has a name in economics. But streaming services essentially killed themselves. When it was only Netflix, is was great, they had a lot of content at an affordable price, consumers liked that, and plenty of people were ready to pay for it. They almost accomplished the impossible: they beat piracy without a single lawsuit, simply because they offered something worth paying the price they asked for. As a result Netflix made a lot of money, and another company (call it B) thought: why sell our work for a low price to Netflix, we can do it ourselves and get the full benefits. So they launch their service, some people leave Netflix for the new service, so Netflix makes a little less money, and the new company a little more. Now a third player comes in with the same reasoning, and now the third company makes a little more money, and the other two, a little less, repeat as many times as you want. Now, let's focus on company B. They made more money by launching their streaming service at the time they did it, but now, with all the other players (including piracy that made a comeback), their benefits drop, possibly below what they did when it was only Netflix. Everyone lost money. So, by a series of seemingly rational decisions: each new streaming service made more money for the company at the time they launched it, in the end, everyone lost. There is some game theory here.