• [email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    2452 days ago

    Anon got it backwards, networks noticed how profitable Netflix was and bumped the price for Netflix to stream their stuff. Netflix responded by producing their own content rather than leasing others’ at exorbitant rates. Then Netflix later got greedy and bumped their prices, lowered their quality, and cancelled all of their good shows.

    • Zagorath
      link
      fedilink
      80
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      I think it’s a bit of both. Netflix knew that companies choosing to pull their content would be a threat, so they prematurely started producing content (famously starting with House of Cards and Orange is the New Black). Whether because they saw this as a threat or because of the perceived greater profitability of their own platforms (probably a bit of both), other studios started pulling their content from Netflix and setting up their own streaming sites.

      And naturally, other companies pulling their content accelerated Netflix’s desire to produce their own content to ensure they weren’t left in the lurch.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        341 day ago

        Yall are overcomplicating things. Let me simplify.

        Capitalist corporations + infinite greed = cannibalism

        • @InputZero
          link
          111 day ago

          It’s remarkable how people can see right past what was actually happening and only see what they want to see. Netflix was never trying to be the good guy. Netflix didn’t offer low prices out of the goodness of it’s hearts. It doesn’t have a heart, it has a ledger. The reason why Netflix offered a lot of content for a low price is because the company was trying to disrupt traditional cable. It was always the plan to increase prices, Netflix didn’t become greedy, it always was. It’s just that for a time the companies greed aligned with the publics greed. Once that relationship was no longer beneficial to Netflix it raised the prices, that was the plan all along.

          • @MimicJar
            link
            61 day ago

            But that’s a zero sum argument. Every company is evil following that logic. No company does anything except for money.

            You can make that argument, but it isn’t unique to Netflix.

            • @Soup
              link
              12 hours ago

              You’re getting there! Just a little further, now.

              There certainly are some companies that seek to do good, or are run by good people. Arizona Green Tea is the current favourite but there are for sure others. The thing is though that there’re huge incentives to being greedy and awful, and a distinct lack of punishment for that behaviour, to the point where so fucking many of these companies are either evil or committing enough evil actions that it doesn’t matter at all the difference anymore.

              Also they weren’t saying that the argument is unique to Netflix but ok then.

        • @someguy3
          link
          2
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          That’s not overcomplicating it. That’s the exact impetus for Netflix to make their own content (nothing premature about it).

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        61 day ago

        Yeah I consulted for the cable industry around the time that everyone was just starting to try to build their own services to compete with Netflix. It wasn’t a secret that production companies would be pulling their content. There were licensing agreements signed that had expiration dates.

        So it was more like a race on both ends. Production companies were like “we get exclusive streaming rights to our movies back in X months, so we need to have our own platform up and running.” And Netflix was like “we lose streaming rights to these movies in X months, we need to make some content to replace it with.”

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        91 day ago

        It doesn’t really matter, though. The only cause of companies pulling their content is Netflix’s success. There was no way Netflix could have prevented it.

      • [email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        62 days ago

        Unpopular opinion, but I wasn’t a fan. Was it a bad show? No! Did I enjoy it? Sometimes. How it developed the cult following that it has, I can’t quite piece together. Fantastic voice acting and sound design can only pull so much weight!

        • @criss_cross
          link
          218 hours ago

          I didn’t care for it either.

          I gave it like 3-4 episodes but couldn’t do it. I thought given the cult following and reputation it’d be right up my alley.

        • @horse_battery_staple
          link
          12
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          Fantastic acting and production quality can elevate any media but especially TV shows. Look at Shrinking for a prime example. It has the production quality of Dispatches From Elsewhere but it’s essentially a three camera sitcom like Modern Family or hell All in the Family. And it’s KILLING right now.

          People like the humor of Inside Job and the fantastic quality made it so much better.

          • [email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            11 day ago

            I guess if you’re in the market for cola, you’ll look for the cola with the best taste. But seeing a discontinued cola lauded as a fallen behemoth is a bit odd, from my perspective

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          61 day ago

          An excellent concept with some interesting opportunities, butchered by regressing it to the same kitschy formulaic plotlines as every other uninspiring adult animation show. I don’t want Big Bang Theory, I want Twin Peaks.