5 ms·

My limited understanding is most content gets reinvested in creating more content. That is $10.5B that won't be used to create new movies, tv shows, etc.

by itake 2y ago

AzzyHN 2y ago
The $10.5B number is bullshit. It assumes every piracy stream user would've been a paying customer (which is false), and they would have paid the full, non-sale value (also false). For subscriptions, they usually add up the cost over at least 12 months. Sometimes longer.
- itake 2y ago
  The article says they made 250M euro/mo or 3b/yr. If they operated for 4 years, that would be 12B of money lost. They probably haven't made 250m/mo for 4 years, but they probably have also been operating longer than 4 years.
  - BLKNSLVR 2y ago
    I think the $250m per month is included in the "number is bullshit" description, given that the $10B is an extension of the $250m/mo.
Ar-Curunir 2y ago
maybe now they'll spend money thinking about what to produce, instead of producing tons of slop, most of which is not viewed by anybody.
- brokenmachine 2y ago
  The slop is cheap to produce and some people watch it. Slop is good business!
brokenmachine 2y ago
Yes, that is definitely a limited understanding.
Refusing23 2y ago
i guess the 10 billion is based off of how long the service had been running, and how many users they had and some avg streaming service monthly cost and then you get 10 billion but that doesnt mean all the users would have spend money on netflix instead... loads of people who pirate arent potential customers to begin with. and does it take into account the price difference from different countries? i doubt it
__rito__ 2y ago
That line of argument assumes that all of this money would have actually gone to streaming sites. That's a lie they tell. People buy services from/use pirate site because either they could not afford it in the legal way, or contents weren’t available to them at all.

My limited understanding is most content gets reinvested in creating more content. That is $10.5B that won't be used to create new movies, tv shows, etc.

by itake 2y ago

My limited understanding is most content gets reinvested in creating more content. That is $10.5B that won't be used to create new movies, tv shows, etc.

AzzyHN 2y ago

The $10.5B number is bullshit. It assumes every piracy stream user would've been a paying customer (which is false), and they would have paid the full, non-sale value (also false). For subscriptions, they usually add up the cost over at least 12 months. Sometimes longer.

itake 2y ago
The article says they made 250M euro/mo or 3b/yr. If they operated for 4 years, that would be 12B of money lost. They probably haven't made 250m/mo for 4 years, but they probably have also been operating longer than 4 years.
- BLKNSLVR 2y ago
  I think the $250m per month is included in the "number is bullshit" description, given that the $10B is an extension of the $250m/mo.

Ar-Curunir 2y ago

maybe now they'll spend money thinking about what to produce, instead of producing tons of slop, most of which is not viewed by anybody.

brokenmachine 2y ago
The slop is cheap to produce and some people watch it. Slop is good business!

brokenmachine 2y ago

Yes, that is definitely a limited understanding.

Refusing23 2y ago

i guess the 10 billion is based off of how long the service had been running, and how many users they had and some avg streaming service monthly cost and then you get 10 billion but that doesnt mean all the users would have spend money on netflix instead... loads of people who pirate arent potential customers to begin with. and does it take into account the price difference from different countries? i doubt it

__rito__ 2y ago

That line of argument assumes that all of this money would have actually gone to streaming sites. That's a lie they tell. People buy services from/use pirate site because either they could not afford it in the legal way, or contents weren’t available to them at all.