6 ms·

What does the market cap of the company or the founders net worth have anything to do with the unit economics of operating a streaming business? Netflix, Hulu a

What does the market cap of the company or the founders net worth have anything to do with the unit economics of operating a streaming business? Netflix, Hulu and others are all exploring charging more or introducing ads. Does that not factor into your analysis at all??

mr90210 3y ago
> What does the market cap of the company or the founders net worth have anything to do with the unit economics of operating a streaming business? For being a sub-product when compared to other streaming platforms, I, the naive me, would expect that Prime wouldn’t be in such a rush to milk money from users and instead they would focus on making the best product they can given that their mother company is wealthy as fuck. Like I said, I am naive.
enriquec 3y ago
Not that I even agree, but I guess the point is that someone so highly paid should be able to find solutions that don't at least feel unfair. I mean most people pay for cable and there's not even a way to not have ads and they increase prices regularly - then again most people do hate the cable companies.
worewood 3y ago
It's like a Ferrari stopping in a tire shop and the owner trying to haggle $10 off the service.
- comprev 3y ago
  The reason they own a Ferrari might be because they're good at money management including negotiation. The local "cheap" supermarket (Lidl) to me has plenty of >€70k vehicles in the carpark.
  - thfuran 3y ago
    Cars are depreciating assets. Owning a Ferrari is pretty much the opposite of good money management.
    - comprev 3y ago
      Handling finances well enough that you can safely afford a luxury car is an example of good money management, no?
wolfendin 3y ago
It doesn’t and doesn’t need to, especially since Amazon profits tripled YoY
jakequade 3y ago
If the company is already huge and makes a tonne of profit, there's little/no need to double-dip on an accessory service that already makes a good case for pushing people into their main service (i.e prime video is free if you use amazon prime -> using amazon's main website/service). It's not about the market cap specifically, it's stating that prime video doesn't need to operate at a profit in order to benefit amazon's core business.
- tedunangst 3y ago
  Wait, I thought it was evil and anticompetitive to use one business unit to prop up another business unit at unsustainable profit margins.

mr90210 3y ago

> What does the market cap of the company or the founders net worth have anything to do with the unit economics of operating a streaming business? For being a sub-product when compared to other streaming platforms, I, the naive me, would expect that Prime wouldn’t be in such a rush to milk money from users and instead they would focus on making the best product they can given that their mother company is wealthy as fuck. Like I said, I am naive.

enriquec 3y ago

Not that I even agree, but I guess the point is that someone so highly paid should be able to find solutions that don't at least feel unfair. I mean most people pay for cable and there's not even a way to not have ads and they increase prices regularly - then again most people do hate the cable companies.

worewood 3y ago

It's like a Ferrari stopping in a tire shop and the owner trying to haggle $10 off the service.

comprev 3y ago
The reason they own a Ferrari might be because they're good at money management including negotiation. The local "cheap" supermarket (Lidl) to me has plenty of >€70k vehicles in the carpark.
- thfuran 3y ago
  Cars are depreciating assets. Owning a Ferrari is pretty much the opposite of good money management.
  - comprev 3y ago
    Handling finances well enough that you can safely afford a luxury car is an example of good money management, no?

wolfendin 3y ago

It doesn’t and doesn’t need to, especially since Amazon profits tripled YoY

jakequade 3y ago

If the company is already huge and makes a tonne of profit, there's little/no need to double-dip on an accessory service that already makes a good case for pushing people into their main service (i.e prime video is free if you use amazon prime -> using amazon's main website/service). It's not about the market cap specifically, it's stating that prime video doesn't need to operate at a profit in order to benefit amazon's core business.

tedunangst 3y ago
Wait, I thought it was evil and anticompetitive to use one business unit to prop up another business unit at unsustainable profit margins.