I completely agree (as a UK customer). They are very focused on original content at Netflix, but the quality just isn't there. I feel like the best value service in the UK by far is disney+ as it includes the Disney stuff as well as most of the stuff that would be on Hulu in the US (such as Dopesick etc). Netflix just doesn't seem to be competing on that front.
The streaming economy is shotgun malinvestment into the arts.
The subscriber pays a flat rate for unlimited choice within the catalog. They're not paying for the media they think they like the most. While technically the streamer is on the hook for this, they have competing optimization criteria - churn, hours viewed, etc.
The platform pours money into a lot of experiments. Platforms optimize for revenue and retention, get signals based on hours viewed, etc., yet none of this directly maps to satisfaction. Viewers will often mindlessly play stuff in the background. Expensive content reduces the number of cheap experiments that can be run. Weird stuff is long tail.
The old model of paying for what we think we'll enjoy was a better match that resulted in much higher quality film and prestige television.
I'd pay for House of the Dragon and The Last of Us. I'd probably pay $50 - $100 for each good TV show. I don't want the rest of it.
In my ideal world I pay creators directly with an upfront deposit. If I watch certain percentages of the show or film, they get a percentage of that deposit. I'd gladly pay a lot more for content this way.
New content should be paid for directly, à la carte. Old content should be streamed.
We have more prestige TV coming out now than ever before. And of course the streaming platforms include the prestige TV of yesteryear as well. The value at current prices is simply astounding.
I don't know what it is about these platforms but most people seem to have an odd take on their value - so much that most of the comments in threads like these are people complaining about "there isn't anything good anymore". But each platform has thousands, if not tens of thousands, of hours of programming. So when someone complains about their choices, I have a sneaking suspicion that they just aren't looking and are basing their views on the heavily marketed major productions, which only account for a handful of shows or movies each year.
While others complain about cost, or having too many choices, I am quite pleased with the current offerings. I don't have every platform, but the ones I do are more than plenty. I'm worried that it's all gonna go back to a cable-like model in the future with platforms combining and charging $100+ for a super platform.
People just don't know how to enjoy it when something is good.
P.s. you can usually buy episodes of a show on Google or Amazon or elsewhere.. watch an episode at a time and only buy the next one if you like what you see. You'll quickly find that model is much more costly to the consumer.
Comments
I completely agree (as a UK customer). They are very focused on original content at Netflix, but the quality just isn't there. I feel like the best value service in the UK by far is disney+ as it includes the Disney stuff as well as most of the stuff that would be on Hulu in the US (such as Dopesick etc). Netflix just doesn't seem to be competing on that front.
The streaming economy is shotgun malinvestment into the arts.
The subscriber pays a flat rate for unlimited choice within the catalog. They're not paying for the media they think they like the most. While technically the streamer is on the hook for this, they have competing optimization criteria - churn, hours viewed, etc.
The platform pours money into a lot of experiments. Platforms optimize for revenue and retention, get signals based on hours viewed, etc., yet none of this directly maps to satisfaction. Viewers will often mindlessly play stuff in the background. Expensive content reduces the number of cheap experiments that can be run. Weird stuff is long tail.
The old model of paying for what we think we'll enjoy was a better match that resulted in much higher quality film and prestige television.
I'd pay for House of the Dragon and The Last of Us. I'd probably pay $50 - $100 for each good TV show. I don't want the rest of it.
In my ideal world I pay creators directly with an upfront deposit. If I watch certain percentages of the show or film, they get a percentage of that deposit. I'd gladly pay a lot more for content this way.
New content should be paid for directly, à la carte. Old content should be streamed.
We have more prestige TV coming out now than ever before. And of course the streaming platforms include the prestige TV of yesteryear as well. The value at current prices is simply astounding.
I don't know what it is about these platforms but most people seem to have an odd take on their value - so much that most of the comments in threads like these are people complaining about "there isn't anything good anymore". But each platform has thousands, if not tens of thousands, of hours of programming. So when someone complains about their choices, I have a sneaking suspicion that they just aren't looking and are basing their views on the heavily marketed major productions, which only account for a handful of shows or movies each year.
While others complain about cost, or having too many choices, I am quite pleased with the current offerings. I don't have every platform, but the ones I do are more than plenty. I'm worried that it's all gonna go back to a cable-like model in the future with platforms combining and charging $100+ for a super platform.
People just don't know how to enjoy it when something is good.
P.s. you can usually buy episodes of a show on Google or Amazon or elsewhere.. watch an episode at a time and only buy the next one if you like what you see. You'll quickly find that model is much more costly to the consumer.