[HN Gopher] Consumers are paying more than ever for streaming TV...
___________________________________________________________________
Consumers are paying more than ever for streaming TV each month
Author : belter
Score : 32 points
Date : 2023-11-05 20:20 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (finance.yahoo.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (finance.yahoo.com)
| politelemon wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| > 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
| dylan604 wrote:
| >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.
| js2 wrote:
| I was both a ReplayTV and TiVo owner for many years. It was
| better than cable but sucked compared to streaming. Yes,
| you could record a show, but you still had to wait for it
| to air. There was nothing like an entire season being
| dropped at once for new shows. And for syndicated shows,
| again, you had to wait for them. You had to setup a season
| pass. You had to juggle drive space. You could only watch
| in front of the one TV you had the TiVo/ReplayTV hooked up
| you (later TiVo had an overpriced option to watch over the
| network within the home). Plus, you had to pay for your
| TiVo (or buy a lifetime pass) on top of the cost of your
| cable or satellite subscription.
| dylan604 wrote:
| >There was nothing like an entire season being dropped at
| once for new shows.
|
| Even with the streaming platforms, entire season drops is
| not a guarantee for new content. Lots of shows are weekly
| drops, and I'm guessing it will only become standard for
| all new content. Ensures people don't pay for a single
| month or use a free trial period to watch the entire
| season. Rent seeking is only going to creep into more and
| more of your life
| tootie wrote:
| 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.
| ethbr1 wrote:
| Out of curiosity, what streaming services do people have, and
| why? For me... - Paramount+: Scripted + Star
| Trek - Disney+: Kids - Amazon: Prime (thinking of
| canceling. Patriot was the last thing I enjoyed) -
| HBO/Max: Scripted - PBS (although it's free...)
|
| Was thinking of adding Kanopy for classic stuff.
| jryan49 wrote:
| I just subscribe to YouTube now. There really isn't anything
| worth the subscription fee on all these other services anymore.
| At best I want to watch one show on each streaming service. But
| I'm not paying for a whole streaming service to watch one show,
| so I end up with not subscribing to any of them.
| LeafItAlone wrote:
| What do you watch on YouTube? I've recently noticed people
| commenting about paying a YouTube Premium subscription, but I
| don't quite get it yet. I just use it for quick how-to
| videos.
| tbyehl wrote:
| Usenet: $84/yr.
|
| Two NZB indexers: $80 total, one-time.
|
| Storage and Electricity: Probably half what I'd spend
| subscribing to everything but #datahoarder.
| sigio wrote:
| Usenet... $20/year, Indexers: $25/year, 64TB NAS priceless
| LeafItAlone wrote:
| > 64TB NAS priceless
|
| As in, you stole it? Because I've definitely seen prices on
| storage like that.
|
| But seriously - what is your setup like for this?
| echelon_musk wrote:
| We found the GigaNews subscriber.
|
| Snark aside, at $84 you're paying double the cost a yearly
| subscription can be found at with high retention on Black
| Friday.
| Cyph0n wrote:
| PBS (donation), Netflix (through T-Mobile), and Infuse +
| Jellyfin :)
|
| Oh, and I'll probably start donating to Jellyfin soon.
| tyfon wrote:
| I've taken up sailing the high seas again, the companies got
| too greedy.
|
| Besides, I think the quality of TV series have gone down
| drastically. There is not much I watch really.
| codexb wrote:
| The same is true for Music. I spend ~$120 a year on music
| streaming subscriptions. That's somewhere on par with 8-12 albums
| per year, or 100-120 individual songs. I don't think I've ever
| purchased that much in my life. I'm definitely spending more on
| music now than I ever have.
| WXLCKNO wrote:
| Happy to pay for music since it's all in one place usually or
| close to it no matter the service.
|
| Used to be happy to pay for Netflix too but imagine paying for
| Music by subscribing to each major labels unique streaming
| service because they would gatekeep content.
|
| I'd stop paying for Music if that happenned.
| dylan604 wrote:
| I remember back when my younger self was buying music as a DJ
| and spending that much a in 2 week period depending on what was
| released that week. To the point that we started our own record
| store to get wholesale prices. Kids today don't know how good
| they have it! </oldManRant>
| rightbyte wrote:
| Ye I have realized this to. I am spending more on Spotify in
| like two or three years than I would have paid for the CDs for
| everything I listen to. I mean, in the end I listen to the same
| songs anyways every day.
| LeafItAlone wrote:
| That's probably why you are spending so much on music now. In
| the past, you get only a finite amount with that money.
|
| Meanwhile, with my music subscription, I'm sure I listen to 120
| _new_ songs per _month_! In addition to my favorites. Sure I'm
| paying more, but the value (if you agree listening to music has
| value) is much higher.
| pdimitar wrote:
| And in the distance, Google laughs.
|
| I used some streaming services a while ago and very quickly gave
| up. Bad video quality, momentary drops and we're all looking at a
| 240p resolution, started watching a series and suddenly a few
| days later -- "Episode 7 is not available in your country". I
| could go on and on but thousands of others have already described
| it much better than I could.
|
| Nowadays I only pay for YouTube Premium. Not that I couldn't
| fight very hard with their ads through my PiHole and with Firefox
| + uBlock Origin buuuuuuut... (1) I am tired of it and (2) I watch
| videos much more on my tablet and phone than on the computer.
| Bonus points for (3) I don't want Google stealthily and
| spitefully deleting my profile, and they seem to be trigger-happy
| lately.
|
| The streaming market has peaked and currently everyone is just
| trying to squeeze more profit, and the customer experience and
| pricing be damned in the process. Some of us saw the writing on
| the wall and disengaged.
|
| And I'll leave you with:
|
| Obviously all of us download and upload Linux .ISO images day and
| night, right?
|
| ...Obviously. <coughs> Of course. <nods>
| permo-w wrote:
| Youtube is largely composed of amateur content and --
| Kurzgesagt aside -- not-very-good professional content. This is
| a different market to high production quality TV shows and
| films. perhaps you went to Youtube, but I suspect most people's
| next port of call is just piracy
| permo-w wrote:
| why do companies seek infinite growth?
| Mistletoe wrote:
| Because everything is tied to the stock price now, most
| especially the execs' salaries and bonuses. It's not good
| enough to just make money, you have to make money at an ever-
| increasing rate which is impossible.
|
| https://www.cold-takes.com/this-cant-go-on/
| sshine wrote:
| It's instinctive for all life to seek infinite growth, because
| we're capped at our resource limit anyways.
| benjaminwootton wrote:
| Streaming is a hot mess, but if you think about how many hours
| the typical person watches TV for, $50-$100 for an absolutely
| enormous on demand library with mobile access and HD quality etc
| isn't _that_ bad.
| sshine wrote:
| You say enormous, but the stuff I want to watch is always on a
| different subscription.
| ianbutler wrote:
| Should just let me subscribe to individual shows for less. Then
| at least you'd still have a subscriber. As it stands now I've
| canceled most of my streaming subscriptions as each only has one
| or two shows I'd like to watch, and individually each show isn't
| worth the full sub price to me.
|
| The barrier to ease of consumption for a decent price is what
| Netflix originally solved, that's broken down now. I'm thoroughly
| considering going back to the high seas.
| ProfessorLayton wrote:
| Youtube+ is some of the best value for the money I spend on
| streaming, and bought into the family plan that I share with my
| parents, which they enjoy enough to drop cable altogether (I
| never subscribed as an adult). My dad, however, has a separate
| subscription to a sports app.
|
| Speaking of sports, I'm very curious to see what happens as the
| move to a la carte subscriptions continues. Cable subscribers
| have been effectively subsidizing the likes of ESPN for a long
| time via hidden charges. As this continues to unravel, I don't
| foresee those uninterested in sports to continue subsidizing
| those who are, and fans will have to pay their own way. This
| could have downstream effects in things like athlete pay, the
| popularity of certain sports, and even building new sports
| stadiums (Many of which are also subsidized by tax payers).
|
| Interesting times ahead!
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-11-05 23:01 UTC)