As 'Subscription Fatigue' Sets In, the OTT Reckoning May Be Upon Us (adweek.com) 205
An anonymous reader writes: Deciding which streaming outlet you want to subscribe to can be just as hard as finding a show itself. With options from big players like Netflix, HBO Now, Hulu, Showtime, Amazon and YouTube Premium -- and looming new platforms from the likes of Disney, Apple, AT&T and NBCUniversal -- consumers are already starting to grow frustrated with the crowded streaming marketplace as "subscription fatigue" sets in, according to Deloitte's 13th edition of its Digital Media Trends survey.
Viewers are taking advantage of these options: the average video consumer subscribes to three video streaming services, said Deloitte. But they're growing frustrated over just how many options they have. Nearly half of those surveyed, at 47 percent, said they are frustrated by the growing number of subscriptions and services to watch their shows. And this audience grows attached to the content: 57 percent of consumers said it frustrates them when shows and movies disappear from their streaming libraries.
Viewers are taking advantage of these options: the average video consumer subscribes to three video streaming services, said Deloitte. But they're growing frustrated over just how many options they have. Nearly half of those surveyed, at 47 percent, said they are frustrated by the growing number of subscriptions and services to watch their shows. And this audience grows attached to the content: 57 percent of consumers said it frustrates them when shows and movies disappear from their streaming libraries.
Too expensive (Score:5, Insightful)
I would get YouTube Premium if it was 2 bucks a month. The current price, higher than Netflix, isn't worth it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The bottom line is you're really not interesting enough for Google to care about. They probably already know your address from related searches and indexes of public information.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The spaces make up for all the evil.
Re: (Score:2)
But they will, once they index this thread and cross reference everything else they know about your username
That whooshing sound you hear overhead? Yup, that was the joke.
Re: (Score:2)
The bottom line is you're really not interesting enough for Google to care about. They probably already know your address from related searches and indexes of public information.
What are you talking about? It's not like they dedicate an employee to monitor everyone, their automated algorithms track *everyone* (even if you don't directly use Google services). So no one is too small to escape their interest.
But like you said, most people probably aren't diligent enough to keep Google from identifying them - simply not subscribing to a service won't stop that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Being paranoid that Google will know everything about you because of a youtube premium subscription just shows a profound lack of understanding on the subject.
Categorically no. Even if Google knows everything about me, the data is noisy and likely thoroughly poisoned. I am not going to volunteer any confirmation of any data they might have on me, as I am sitting here at home at 123 Street Ave, City, Texas and eating my Cheetos and drinking Mountain Dew while feeding Purina to my dog.
Re: (Score:2)
I really think it's more about fragmentation than cost. People don't want their stuff scattered all over the place, and a lot of people have developed brand loyalty (developed Stockholm syndrome, have become enveloped in the RDF, whatever you want to call it) to the platforms which have been around
Re: (Score:2)
Everyone wants a direct customer relationship. That's the hotness these days, and licensing to Netflix wound't give them that. That's why everyone who tries to work with Apple ends up not doing so, since Apple won't tell them anything about the customer.
I've subscribed to Netflix since they were DVD only. They have enough original content that I keep them. I tried CBS and it sucked. Hulu hans't much better, but that was a while ago. I have Prime, but their UI is so pathetic that I really don't watch anythin
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Making a market value decision and only being willing to pay what you think it is worth is very much the market in action.
Mr. Cruise's pay is reflected in a higher movie price. In a market economy (this includes Capitalism), buyers get to decide if that is worth it to them or not.
You seem to be advocating a centrally planned (command) economy. Even the old Soviet Communists didn't force people to buy things they didn't want.
Apple Knows This (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple knows this. Maybe it is the secret sauce in its soon-to-be-announced offering.
I for one agree. I don't want to sign up with a bunch of different places and have to maintain multiple accounts, deal with multiple renewal periods/expirations, have my credit card info scattered all over the place, etc.
What I want an "Amazon of on-line media consumption". One place, one bill. I add to my account the stuff I want, I deal with one entity, and leave it up to that entity to pay off the content providers under whatever arrangement they may have. I can pick up or drop services as desired, and just maintain it all at one place.
Re: (Score:2)
You hit the nail on the head. I subscribe to Google's Premium service because that is what I mainly watch. However, my NetFlix subscription is free because I get it through my cellular carrier. Do I care to pay $10 a month to a whole bunch of providers? Not really.
I don't want to sound alarmist, but what are all these businesses selling subscriptions going to do if there is a recession, and Joe Sixpack has to tighten the belt? The first thing he will be doing is cancelling all but maybe 1-2 things that
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The great thing about contracts is that they expire. Eventually, all of ESPN's current contracts cable companies and whomever will expire, just like Disney's are about to do with Netflix. Then it can do something else. Isn't ESPN owned by Disney? Disney could just say fuck all you cable providers, one by one as their contracts expire. Want ESPN? Subscribe to Disney's Streaming Service, through Disney, or fuck off. All of the other big content companies could do the same thing and consolidate down to 5
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Apple Knows This (Score:3)
That's called cable, and it fails as your provider makes choices and contract bundling to save money, thus limiting your choices.
However if you want to do that get subcriptions through Amazon. I pay Amazon for my HBO now subcription, and thus don't only have one place for my card.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like... Cable TV.
o.O
What I want is a la carte TV shows. I don't really care about the services, though I do keep my Netflix subscription going, I'd much rather watch a pilot freebee and pay for a season of a show.
Get an AppleTV (Score:2)
I don't want to sign up with a bunch of different places and have to maintain multiple accounts, deal with multiple renewal periods/expirations, have my credit card info scattered all over the place, etc.
That's the beauty of using an AppleTV for this, today.
A few services (notably Amazon and Netflix) you still need to sign up for separately.
But pretty much everything else, you can subscribe to content in an app using in-app purchase on AppleTV.
That means none of those companies have any info on you beyond a
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect the Apple video service is what AppleTV has in a more generalized form. Right now you need an AppleTV to enjoy it. With a few more content providers and such, the new se
Re: (Score:2)
What I want an "Amazon of on-line media consumption". One place, one bill. I add to my account the stuff I want, I deal with one entity, and leave it up to that entity to pay off the content providers under whatever arrangement they may have. I can pick up or drop services as desired, and just maintain it all at one place.
Amazon, ironically, does let you do pretty much that. I see plenty of shows and movies in their video service that are really through a different video service, which presumably you pay for via Amazon.
Re: (Score:2)
One place, one bill. I add to my account the stuff I want, I deal with one entity, and leave it up to that entity to pay off the content providers under whatever arrangement they may have. I can pick up or drop services as desired, and just maintain it all at one place.
so....you want cable
Re: (Score:2)
A big problem is the exclusive deal. A has an exclusive on 1, B an exclusive on 2, C on 3, etc. Any one or two would be a fair enough price to pay for a good variety of entertainment, but not the growing number you have to pay to get the shows you want.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure how it is relevant that "apple knows this". Everybody knows this and always has. It doesn't stop the content producers from making exclusive licenses or starting their own streaming service (Disney). This is a long-predicted endgame.
There is a solution: compulsory fair licensing. The producer can't choose who is and isn't allowed to buy their DVDs so why are they allowed to choose who carries their stream? Basically historical accident. The specter of compulsory licensing is what was ho
Re: (Score:2)
What I want an "Amazon of on-line media consumption". One place, one bill.
I'd be content with more choice. Streaming for free with ads, or subscribe to remove the ads. Most places force one option or the other.
Re: (Score:2)
> I have to wait for stuff. And I spent less time watching since I can only have one DVD out at a time. Both of these are things I have to deal with because I am too broke to replace my 1990's DVD player and 1980's 13" TV.
But the TV has ***COLOR*** (!!)
Re: (Score:2)
I spend less time watching
You say that like it's a bad thing.
Work on your reading comprehension. He said it was a benefit. Or, maybe it's your language skills rather than reading comprehension. Benefit = good thing.
Amazon streaming has sublet too many movies (Score:3)
57 percent of consumers said it frustrates them when shows and movies disappear from their streaming libraries.
No kidding; Amazon has taken to moving off a lot of both shows and movies to linked providers so now one would need to pony up extra $$ for five or six other services to get the same old selections.
Re: (Score:2)
I have this sneaking suspicion that Amazon eyes closely what people enjoy watching, then take it off prime when they suddenly and miraculously just so happen to offer a DVD collection of that show as a new item.
Aggregator (Score:4, Funny)
What we need is a subscription service, that manages your subscription services.
For a small monthly fee, you can pay for small monthly fees, and have an easy way to manage all those subscriptions, for just a small monthly fee.
Re:Aggregator (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
What we need is a subscription service, that manages your subscription services.
Even better, you need a couple of them.
How can you get frustrated? Never easier... (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't see where frustration is coming from, as these days it's so easy to start and stop subscriptions.
I have Netflix regularly, and Amazon Prime mostly for shipping but do use video also. Beyond that though, I just join in and then drop different services depending on what I want to see - so I subscribe to HBO when Game of Thrones is on, dropping it after (and also catching up on a few other shows they have while I'm there). I subscribed to CBS fo ra little while to watch Star Trek Discovery, then dropped it when I had seen enough.
This is the golden age of subscription. I don't care how many different streaming options there are, as long as I can take them or leave them when I see fit - so much better than cable ever was.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Sure, but you still need a cable bill worth of streaming services to get most of the content out there.
No, you don't. I keep Hulu, Netflix, and Prime (and that's more for shipping than video) year round. If a show I want to watch comes on HBO, Shotime, Starz, CBS, whatever, I'll sub for a month, watch the show, and un-sub. Most people don't need every service every month of the year.
Re: (Score:3)
No, you don't. I keep Hulu, Netflix, and Prime (and that's more for shipping than video) year round.
That's all I have, and honeslty it's more than I need. Prime we have because of the shipping otherwise wouldn't bother with it- it has the worst UI and worst selection. It's not worth getting Prime just for TV.
That leaves Hulu and Netflix. The wife can't live without Netflix and the kids can't live without Hulu. I watch a few shows from both but could do without either. So both Hulu and Netflix stay for now to keep the family happy.
Three streaming services is enough and where I'm stopping. I want to w
Re: (Score:2)
FOMO, or fear of missing out, is a big part of it. I actually didn't start watching GOT until like season 5 started as I wasn't willing to pay for it. Then my friend let me borrow the first season on dvd and I was instantly hooked. HBO became suddenly worth it for a while.
Now I'll definitely be watching it because I'll want to be able to talk with my coworkers who also love the show. If I don't see the show right away, how can I participate in the conversation?
Why? It doesn't work like that today (Score:2)
Expect to incur "cancellation penalties".
Why should I expect that , when absolutely zero streaming services do that today.
Want to watch the newest episode?, you need to back-date your subscription to ep 1.
Again I refer you to my previous statement regarding absolutely no streaming services working like that.
just like the "disney vault", the streaming vault, will have more content for people who stay longer.
No services work like that and at this point any one that tried would go down in flames.
Now what I CAN
Re: (Score:2)
No services work like that and at this point any one that tried would go down in flames.
Disney. This sort of shit exactly fits their monetization mindset. Once they pull in all the Marvel movies, Star Wars, and Disney and Pixar movies into their own streaming service, expect them to work like that. It's the business model they've had for decades, after all.
Whatever works to extract the most money from people (and especially from parents), that's what they'll do, no matter how annoying.
Re: (Score:2)
That is a risk with Disney, since they have become rather money grubbing of late. I plan on subscribing to their service, but if they play the vault game, I will not continue.
Re: (Score:2)
That is a risk with Disney, since they have become rather money grubbing of late.
If by "of late" you mean "for the past 100 years or so". The line used to be "if a kid in America gets a dime, Walt gets a nickle".
Re: (Score:2)
Expect to incur "cancellation penalties".
Why should I expect that , when absolutely zero streaming services do that today.
Amazon Prime gives a discount for annual billing compared to monthly billing.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see where frustration is coming from, as these days it's so easy to start and stop subscriptions.
Yeah I know. Just yesterday I was thinking I wanted to a movie so I sat down at the TV, browsed through the library, fired up the website, cancelled my Netflix subscription, jumped on HBO subscribed, downloaded the app to the TV, made some popcorn and ... well at that point it was bed time. But it's okay in the morning I ... wasn't in the mood for a horror film so I opened up the website, cancelled my HBO subscription, jumped on the Netflix website ...
Easy as pie. What a golden age we live in.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see where frustration is coming from, as these days it's so easy to start and stop subscriptions.
I have Netflix regularly, and Amazon Prime mostly for shipping but do use video also. Beyond that though, I just join in and then drop different services depending on what I want to see - so I subscribe to HBO when Game of Thrones is on, dropping it after (and also catching up on a few other shows they have while I'm there). I subscribed to CBS fo ra little while to watch Star Trek Discovery, then dropped it when I had seen enough.
Sorry, my torrent finished downloading halfway through reading that. I'm just not interested in the question of "which damn service hosts this thing I want to watch". Netflix used to have a lot of value to me, as I could browse it when I was bored and actually find something. That's fading. I was happy to pay one subscription, and let Netflix sort out the money between all the IP owners but that's the service I was paying for.
There's just no way I'm going to try to figure out what's on a dozen different
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see where frustration is coming from, as these days it's so easy to start and stop subscriptions.
I don't know, bittorrent 'subscriptions' have been working fine for over a decade...
Re: (Score:2)
> as these days it's so easy to start and stop subscriptions.
It is, but it's also easy to forget when your subscription month end is, and as a result you'll miss cancelling in time. It's also a hassle. I have Netflix, and I get Prime Video through my Prime membership. I may entertain buying a couple of other services for a month here and there, but that's it, and when I do that I'll do it at a time when I can binge what I wanted and then drop it. I won't be subscribing to anything else on an ongoing
Re: (Score:2)
So you enjoy juggling all those subscriptions. Good for you.
Some people want to just sit down and watch something without first having to figure out which service is active today and what is actually on that service.
That's where torrenting comes in.
It's sad, really. Netflix was THIS CLOSE to winning over piracy because people don't inherently WANT to be criminals ... but then everyone got greedy and wanted their own cake instead of a slice of the cake and here we are, torrents are once again becoming the op
It's not the choice that "fatigues" (Score:5, Informative)
It's the ever changing offer. Today you have Series A on Streaming Service A. Tomorrow, on Service B. Then it vanishes entirely. Only to resurface on C next week. Maybe. And heaven forbid you want to see more than one show. Because one thing you can be almost certain of: It is on another streaming service. Or will be. Or will no longer be once you subscribed to that other service for exactly this one show, but now you're tied to it for a year.
Especially that last bit gets people pissed. Streaming services could be a killer for torrents if, and only if, they become at least halfway reliable. Else, torrents are simply less hassle.
Re:It's not the choice that "fatigues" (Score:4, Interesting)
This is why I still buy movies and sometimes TV shows that I enjoy on physical discs. If it's something I might enjoy rewatching later, or a long-running show where I want to make sure I can watch the whole thing, it doesn't work out significantly more expensive given how much I typically watch on the likes of Netflix.
The frustrating thing is that because of the emphasis on streaming and rental models these days, it's much harder to buy a lot of things on disc than it used to be, You can find that seasons 1 and 2 are out on disc, but season 3 isn't, and season 4 is but only on US import that doesn't quite work right here in the UK. Then because Amazon won and killed off all the competition, and right now it doesn't have season 2 on sale, you get stuck anyway.
I miss the old days, when there were actual bricks 'n' mortar shops like Silver Screen, where you could go in and buy most moderately popular films and shows from at least the past decade or two and the classics right off the shelf, and they knew how to get hold of just about anything else if you wanted to order it for collection later. What we have with modern technology should have been better, but as usual the money-grabbing media companies have spoiled it by trying to lock everything up and squeeze out a tiny bit more profit.
Sets in? (Score:2)
It might be easier for us to avoid FOMO (Fear Of Missing Out) because we are not cord-cutters.
We never had cable to begin with.
Re: (Score:2)
Star Trek Discovery is broadcast on the Space channel in Canada. Not sure how that deal was worked out. Isn't the first season on Netflix now?
Not in the US. In the US the only way to get Star Trek is via CBS's "All Access"- but who wants to pay an extra $5 a month just for one show?
In other countries it is available on Netflix (and as a result gets a larger market share of eyes). Only in the US is the consumer blocked from watching it.
Re: (Score:2)
Nope, it's not on Netflix Canada yet.
Too much entertainment (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Too much entertainment (Score:5, Funny)
A /. commenter telling others to go do something real? Pot met Kettle ...
Mod parent up. :) (Score:2)
I wish I had mod points now.
Netflix plus Prime plus Other (Score:2)
If you try to recreate a cable package through multiple streaming services it will end up costing just as much
As recent cord-cutters
We already had Amazon Prime for free delivery etc. and will keep it
We have a Netflix subscription which we will keep.
We have an antenna and DVR for over the air broadcasts (Networks/PBS/Spanish stations for soccer games with Spanish commentary)
Then we will probably just have one other active service at a time.
At the moment it is HBO through Amazon (we are binge watching Game of
"Consumers" have finally hit the limit... (Score:2)
... of how many corporate hands they want in their bank accounts every month.
I'm not sure who said it... (Score:2)
...but commerce is natural across humans. If governments (or in this case the stupid companies themselves) try to constrain commerce in unnatural ways, a black market is a certainty.
In re all the flippin streaming services specifically?
If you decide to leave the commons and hide your products in pay-to-enter walled gardens, we're going to find out two things:
1) how good your security is, because ultimate someone's just going to break in and steal it, or
2) your shit isn't worth the trouble.
Welcome to the new cable-TV. (Score:5, Funny)
Same as the told cable-TV.
You need to subscribe to multiple providers(packages) to get the few of shows you really want to watch, and the remainder is like the old cable cliche of "500 channels and nothing good is on." How many mediocre shows that take place in some dystopian future do we need?
Smart money will bet that in a year or two, these providers will begin to divide their offerings into basic & premium content.
A la carte (Score:2, Interesting)
But they're growing frustrated over just how many options they have.
No, what these people are complaining about is that nobody has been able to deliver on a reasonably priced one- or two-stop a la carte experience for viewing content they care about. And they're placing the blame squarely where it belongs - on subscription services basing their model on producing "you can only find this show on this service" content to try to lock in their piece of the pie.
I don't have to subscribe to a video game service if I want to play the newest video game. I can just buy whatever ga
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's also the changes made from the broadcast version to the one which is sold, particularly in the music choices.
This happened in the past due to licenses and the contracts at the time not covering streaming and home media (since neither really existed at the time). It's pretty rare for current shows to have to alter music anymore since they write the contracts with streaming and home media rights in them now.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't have to subscribe to a video game service if I want to play the newest video game. I can just buy whatever game interests me.
I don't have to subscribe to a musical venue service if I want to go to the newest concert. I can just buy a ticket to the concert that interests me.
I don't have to subscribe to a movie ticket service if I want to go to the newest movie. I can just buy a ticket for whatever movie interests me.
Neither of those examples are "buying" either. The person I replied to is obviously OK with that.
And yes, even games, it's almost impossible to buy physical copies of games not tied to Steam or another always-on DRM. Your only choice is GOG or related DRM free vendors, but their selection is a tiny sliver of the overall available games on PC. Console single player games are about the only ones still buyable and playable without relying on a internet DRM or game server, and even those have a set lifespa
OTT? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:OTT? (Score:5, Informative)
Am I the only person here who has no idea what OTT means?
Neither the summary nor TFA defines the what OTT means. According to Google it means "Over The Top", and refers to a box that sits on top of a TV set-top box to give additional services and content. But since services like YouTube Premium don't actually involve any physical device, the term has become disconnected from its origin.
Can't find stuff (Score:2)
All options are full of crap. Tons of crap. Sure there are a couple semi-recent movies, but that is about it. Most of it is not worth watching, which is exactly why they can buy tons of hours of stuff for dirt cheap.
Very frustrating is that there is no good indexing service I have found to tell which of our 3 subscriptions might have it. WTF?
Want to go back and watch a good show again after giving up finding anything new in despair? Too bad, it disappeared.
Too many options, not enough good content (Score:2)
I do this: Each month, try a new subscription and cancel an old one.
After a year, pick one to have permanently, and try the others again.
OTT = Over The Top (Score:5, Informative)
Which is a term for direct to internet content services. Had to look it up. If it's not a widely known acronym, it should be spelled out in the title or summary.
Re: (Score:2)
And this is why (Score:2)
One of these days I'll buy a little storage network and rip my library, but I'll keep the discs - gotta figure out a backup strategy. Meanwhile, I'll keep my
Re: (Score:2)
And this is why piracy exists. (Score:3)
And these content providers wonder why piracy still exists. I'm sorry, but a person shouldn't have to subscribe to more than one or two streaming services to get the content they want. Any more than that is a market failure. It's far too easy to just toss the wanted series or movie into Sonarr or Radarr, and magically have it appear in your library. The best part of this is that it will never disappear from your library when a licensing deal expires.
What we need in the video world is mandatory, non-discriminatory licensing for content, similar to what exists in music. Netflix should be able to provide whatever they want, and just pay the same licensing fee as everyone else. Same thing goes for Netflix produced content.
Shitty UI, too (Score:2)
A big problem I have with streaming service silos is they each present their own (bad) UI and search space. So if there's a show I want to watch, it's quite difficult to figure out which of the services will have it other than to go to each Roku app, find its search screen, type in the query one letter at a time into the on-screen keyboard, find out the show isn't there, and repeat until I've exhausted all my options and, maybe, resort to just finding a torrent and having it in less time than that just took
Re: (Score:2)
You can search the web but "which streaming service is show X on" is a surprisingly difficult query.
It gets even worse if you don't live in the US, because the selections are different.
Most of the TV channels are doing it right (Score:2)
What we need now is some master app which coordinates all this. Right now if you try to stream like this directly from all the channels, you'll have to go through a login procedur
OTT? (Score:2)
I would hate to think that the real OTT [echochamber.me] were to come to an end.
Subscription Fail (Score:2)
"...57 percent of consumers said it frustrates them when shows and movies disappear from their streaming libraries."
All too true. Netflix dropped the stuff I really wanted to watch. So I dropped them.
Re: (Score:2)
Netflix dropped the stuff I really wanted to watch. So I dropped them.
They even drop stuff partially. For some TV show that I wanted to watch, they still offer season 2 and further, but withdrew season 1. It boggles the mind why anyone would think that's a good idea.
Hoovering up 'cord cutters' money (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
U-verse U-400 service, $200+. Netflix, $12; Hulu, $12; Amazon Prime, $10; ISP, $50. So, cable = $200; streaming = $84. That leaves quite a bit of margin for intermittent, short-term subscriptions to other streaming services when something interesting pops up. And of course, the cost of Amazon Prime covers more than their streaming service; we save more in shipping costs than the cost of the Prime subscription.
While it's true that there are a few shows that are available through U-verse that aren't available
Re: (Score:2)
You all thought 'cutting the cord' was going to save you money and get you what you want and only what you want?
Depends. As the article says, most people only use a couple of streamers. We only have 2 subscriptions at our house, and it's still less than half the price of cable, while it offers more entertainment that I'm interested in. The beauty of entertainment is that it is interchangeable. I don't have to watch a particular movie if I can watch something equally entertaining instead.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why would ones internet connection be factored into the cost? This being the day and age it is, I imagine most of those we typically think of as cord cutters already had broadband connections when they switched off cable.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Sure, I don't care about what's only on streaming but you MUST have internet to use streaming so you have to consider the cost."
No you really don't. If you had the same internet connection both before and after cutting the cord then it would be completely incorrect to include unless you included the internet bill into your prior cable costs as well. In other words, the necessity of having a broadband internet connection to watch streaming content is irrelevant in this context because it is typically a cost
Fundamental disconnect (Score:2)
Consumers are willing to pay for a streaming service and we don't mind there being 10-20 streaming services but all of them need to have all the premium content included and for it to stay. Nobody cares about the non-premium content at all. So content makers, stop splitting off your own streaming services and stop selling exclusive access. Let consumers have their cake and eat it to and race these guys to the bottom and make up the difference by making them all pay for content all the time instead of one at
Taste the irony: Article is paywalled (Score:2)
The article about subscription fatigue is locked behind a subscription:
I tried to register, giving my email, a random 16-character string as a password, first name, last name, and country. But because I left the following fields blank, the "JOIN" button was grayed out.
Re: (Score:2)
Just do what I used to do for those kind of sites.... LIE
We wanted a la carte... (Score:2)
... now instead of having to buy a super expensive cable package to get the channels/shows you want, now you need to subscribe to multiple different services to get the 1 or 2 things you want on each one.... was better when Netflix had almost everything and you didn't need multiple subs....
Netfix+ (Score:2)
I'd actually pay a little extra, say 1-2EUR on my Netflix account if it allowed me to view shows from some other network. Pay a little extra to Netflix and get 3h of viewing of another providers content, delivered through the same account/subscription I already have.
I'm sure they could work out a deal if they only wanted to.
But alas, Popcorntime is still a better experience. Or so I'm told.
Suppose.tv (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
For years, people screamed they wanted cable ala carte, they wanted to pick and choose what channels they get and now that future is here. This is the future we wanted. You can make good arguments about pricing but we got what we wished for.
It's kinda like a la carte but instead of picking "the history channel" and "discovery channel" you get to pick between:
"variety package 1", "variety package 2", and "variety package 3".
If you just want documentaries, or history stuff, there's no way to pick just the type of shows you want- you can only pick from variety packages of which only 2 or 3 shows you're interested in in each bucket.
No one wanted what we have now.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
They are still bundled in a manner that does not easily make sense to the customer.
When consumers say they want a la carte, they literally want to buy one movie or one season of a TV show or Sunday NFL games this year. A la carte.