4 ms·

Key paragraph: > Why? Unlike a paid subscription, which brings in a fixed amount of revenue each month, there is no ceiling to advertising revenue. The number

Key paragraph: > Why? Unlike a paid subscription, which brings in a fixed amount of revenue each month, there is no ceiling to advertising revenue. The number of ads displayed and the rates a streaming platform can charge marketers for the ads are constantly fluctuating, offering unlimited revenue upside. This makes a lot of sense, considering that all companies want is sustained, increasing YoY growth. What this means I suppose is that the streaming service have managed to recreate the cable era, but in some aspects also made things worse than before. But as the story always goes in such cases, > Consumers have grumbled, but have so far been willing to keep paying up the story will continue. As a population we value our passive sensory overload too much.

ethbr1 3y ago
I mean, it's exactly like the cable era, except that over-the-top-distributors+studio vertical integrations are the new "channel bundles", we've cut the bundler intermediary out of the revenue stream (e.g. cable provider), and everything is also on-demand.
- lotsofpulp 3y ago
  So it’s not exactly the same. You do not need special equipment from the monopoly cable company, you do not need to enter into a contract, you can cancel at a moment’s notice and buy a month here or there with a few clicks, all which was impossible with cable/satellite tv.
- dylan604 3y ago
  And all of those silos and studio verticals you mention are now getting retail rates per user instead of wholesale rates to a cable provider. There's no wonder why cable companies hate the cord cutters.
gretch 3y ago
> What this means I suppose is that the streaming service have managed to recreate the cable era, but in some aspects also made things worse than before. I disagree. It’s not as good as the golden era of streaming when everything was on Netflix for 1 low price, but we’re still wayyyyyy above where cable was before. You don’t have to sign any contracts and you can go the website and make 3 clicks to cancel the service. Also everything is available on demand, you don’t have to be watching at the exact time the show or movie airs.
- vel0city 3y ago
  Not only can you cancel service in just a few clicks, you can actually go find another provider. Being able to choose between different cable providers was unheard of. Now there's several cable-like providers along with dozens of different on-demand media companies.
  - dylan604 3y ago
    I'm now to the point where I've started pausing subscriptions as I marathon content from a new provider. Why pay for Netflix, when your only watching shows from any of the other platforms? Of course, I'm just me and not having to navigate the complexities of other family members. We'll just chalk that one up in the being single pro column.
  - rchaud 3y ago
    The alternative to cable was broadcast TV or a visit to your video rental store. Same as today. If you cancel your Netflix, the alternative will not have the same programming available.
    - vel0city 3y ago
      But one can cancel their cable TV subscription and go to YouTubeTV and go to Hulu Live TV or Fubo or Direct TV Stream or Sling which are all very old school cable-like in experience but no contracts, which is what I was mostly talking about. Or as you mentioned, OTA which in many markets has had an explosion of content (over 110 channels in my area!) Or the hundreds of free internet streaming TV channels often bundled into most smart TVs these days.
    - sonicanatidae 3y ago
      That's not entirely accurate. ;)
- dylan604 3y ago
  >you don’t have to be watching at the exact time the show or movie airs. With the advent of DVRs, this wasn't an issue either. Even in the 80s with VCRs and a competent user that could make the clock stop flashing 12:00, you could record a single show at a time. No where near as convenient as a DVR and still less convenient of on-demand, but let's not act like watching a delayed show wasn't possible until on-demand.
tootie 3y ago
Comparison to the era of linear TV based on cost or ad volume glosses over the incredibly valuable change to on-demand viewing. If cable TV companies could have made a purely on-demand service in the 1990s they would have charged a king's ransom for it. Now it's table stakes.
moribvndvs 3y ago
There’s a silver lining here. Anecdotally, my partner and I are on the verge of cancelling all these skyrocketing services that have terrible content and opting to read good books and play old video games.
- js2 3y ago
  I definitely recommend canceling the skyrocketing services with terrible content in favor of affordable services with not terrible content. e.g. Criterion ($99/year) is my favorite subscription. At any given time it's only a few thousand films, but films rotate from month to month, it's a nice variety of films, and they are well curated and grouped.

ethbr1 3y ago

I mean, it's exactly like the cable era, except that over-the-top-distributors+studio vertical integrations are the new "channel bundles", we've cut the bundler intermediary out of the revenue stream (e.g. cable provider), and everything is also on-demand.

lotsofpulp 3y ago
So it’s not exactly the same. You do not need special equipment from the monopoly cable company, you do not need to enter into a contract, you can cancel at a moment’s notice and buy a month here or there with a few clicks, all which was impossible with cable/satellite tv.
dylan604 3y ago
And all of those silos and studio verticals you mention are now getting retail rates per user instead of wholesale rates to a cable provider. There's no wonder why cable companies hate the cord cutters.

gretch 3y ago

> What this means I suppose is that the streaming service have managed to recreate the cable era, but in some aspects also made things worse than before. I disagree. It’s not as good as the golden era of streaming when everything was on Netflix for 1 low price, but we’re still wayyyyyy above where cable was before. You don’t have to sign any contracts and you can go the website and make 3 clicks to cancel the service. Also everything is available on demand, you don’t have to be watching at the exact time the show or movie airs.

vel0city 3y ago
Not only can you cancel service in just a few clicks, you can actually go find another provider. Being able to choose between different cable providers was unheard of. Now there's several cable-like providers along with dozens of different on-demand media companies.
- dylan604 3y ago
  I'm now to the point where I've started pausing subscriptions as I marathon content from a new provider. Why pay for Netflix, when your only watching shows from any of the other platforms? Of course, I'm just me and not having to navigate the complexities of other family members. We'll just chalk that one up in the being single pro column.
- rchaud 3y ago
  The alternative to cable was broadcast TV or a visit to your video rental store. Same as today. If you cancel your Netflix, the alternative will not have the same programming available.
  - vel0city 3y ago
    But one can cancel their cable TV subscription and go to YouTubeTV and go to Hulu Live TV or Fubo or Direct TV Stream or Sling which are all very old school cable-like in experience but no contracts, which is what I was mostly talking about. Or as you mentioned, OTA which in many markets has had an explosion of content (over 110 channels in my area!) Or the hundreds of free internet streaming TV channels often bundled into most smart TVs these days.
  - sonicanatidae 3y ago
    That's not entirely accurate. ;)
dylan604 3y ago
>you don’t have to be watching at the exact time the show or movie airs. With the advent of DVRs, this wasn't an issue either. Even in the 80s with VCRs and a competent user that could make the clock stop flashing 12:00, you could record a single show at a time. No where near as convenient as a DVR and still less convenient of on-demand, but let's not act like watching a delayed show wasn't possible until on-demand.

tootie 3y ago

Comparison to the era of linear TV based on cost or ad volume glosses over the incredibly valuable change to on-demand viewing. If cable TV companies could have made a purely on-demand service in the 1990s they would have charged a king's ransom for it. Now it's table stakes.

moribvndvs 3y ago

There’s a silver lining here. Anecdotally, my partner and I are on the verge of cancelling all these skyrocketing services that have terrible content and opting to read good books and play old video games.

js2 3y ago
I definitely recommend canceling the skyrocketing services with terrible content in favor of affordable services with not terrible content. e.g. Criterion ($99/year) is my favorite subscription. At any given time it's only a few thousand films, but films rotate from month to month, it's a nice variety of films, and they are well curated and grouped.