Streaming platforms should not be allowed to produce content and vice-versa. That’s how it was with movie theaters. Ever wondered why there are no Paramount theater, or MGM theater and so on? Because studios aren’t allowed to own theaters.
this post was submitted on 28 Dec 2023
270 points (97.9% liked)
Technology
58143 readers
5159 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It's basically the Live Nation/TIcketmaster issue. They sell the tickets to the events at venues they own. Conflict of interest much?
Live nation/ticketmaster is worse than that, if you try to open a venue without giving then a cut in some way they'll blacklist you from the industry.
Blacklist them from the... real estate market?
Lol. How exactly does that work? It's the performers that make venues worth going to, not the venues themselves or the people selling the tickets.
By creating near-universal exclusive contracts with venues and artists.
Ticketmaster/LN offers venues ticketing access to fans who want to buy tickets. Because there's no real competitor, the venues feel compelled to sign. The contracts have a provision that prohibits the venue from contracting with other ticket sellers.
Ticketmaster/LN offers artists access to venues for a national tour. Because major venues have all contracted exclusively with Ticketmaster/LN, there is effectively no way to tour without participation of venues who exclusively use Ticketmaster/LN. It's a fait accompli at this point, but Ticketmaster/LN also offer artists participation in their bogus fees, meaning artists get some extra money and don't have to take the blame (Ticketmaster/LN takes the blame, and some extra profit). The artists' contracts prohibit working with non-Ticketmaster/LN venues, further locking in the venues.
Venues who do not participate are locked out of artists and fans. Sounds like a blacklist to me.
So, it's the artist's fault for whoring themselves out to ticketmaster.
Greed wins again!
Yep.
Like lots of "disruptions" it was just getting ahead of regulations and lobbying to prevent/stall them.
3rd party streaming providers and ending exclusivity contracts would fix streaming overnight, and studios would still make an insane amount of money.
Not many people are going to sign up for a 7th streaming service to watch The Office, but millions of people would have it on if only for background noise.
Have the streaming service pay studios per hour watched.
It's up to the streamer to balance how much they charge consumers and how much they pay studios to remain profitable.
yeah exactly. and hopefully being banned from making shows will motivate them to finally work on their terrible UIs. it’s so annoying that so many streaming services still lack basic functionality and have almost no customization options.
its so insane these companies are competing with each other over what’s on their service instead of how pleasant it is to use their service.
Yep. Because as long as the content is exclusive, the ui isn’t a selling point.
Because studios aren’t allowed to own theaters.
Says who?
Says the US Supreme Court. But not anymore.
https://screenrant.com/movie-studios-owning-theaters-rule-court-decision/
Ah, yes. The "find out" stage of the "fuck around and find out" lesson from thinking "we can do Netflix ourselves." Nice work, assbags.
It takes an MBA to make shitty decisions, make 3,000% higher compensation than the average employee, and then turn around and layoff others because of your own shitty decisions. I think you're being real kind with the assbag label there. I'm thinking a term like "parasitic shit-cunt" gets slightly closer but I just can't think of anything derisive enough that satisfies the enmity I have for them.
I don’t want Netflix to even do Netflix anymore. Competition is healthy so if they all merge and there’s only 2 that’ll be bad imo
Competition is good but I really don't want to pay $15 to $20 a month for 5 different streaming services just to ensure good competition.
Theres no way you’re watching that much television that you need all the major services at once. I usually have one at a time and if I absolutely need to see something else during that time well yar har matey
My issue is that I have kids, and my wife and one kid really like one service (Disney), and my other kids like another (Netflix), and I want content on a third (Amazon). So instead of paying for three, we pay for two (Disney+ and Netflix) and I play video games instead.
What's even worse is that all three now also have ads if you're on the bottom tier, which really sucks. I'm thinking of cancelling both and just buying some shows my kids like, it'll probably be cheaper long term anyway.
Honestly, I'd much rather movies and shows be like music. I could subscribe to Apple Music, or Google Play, or YouTube Music, or Tidal, or Spotify, etc. That's competition. Not spreading it out all over. Too much fragmentation can be bad for consumers too. It's why I've been doing my best with buying stuff I really want instead of streaming it. Some stuff I can't buy, and I get that. But others, I'm doing my damnedest to own it so I don't need to subscribe for it.
Side note: I know it (streaming movies like music) is a pipe dream that'll never happen. But still, one can dream.
I get what you are saying, but I want fewer subs. Thanks.
Haha! He made the reference everyone! He made it!
Take my upvote!
Lol. They're not dealing with boomers who don't know how to pirate anymore. We grew up learning how to pirate as kids who won't deal with that bullshit.
I wish. Many kids today seem clueless about that. Many don't even get how file systems work.
This is very true, and I'm betting a big part of why streaming services are doing this is they know they can get away with it more than they could have with earlier generations who just pirate everything when the services aren't worth what they cost.
They still know how web browsers work.
All it takes is a trip over to fmovies and you have more content than any paid streaming service.
No account required. No CC info required. It's a testament to how stupid people who pay for shit are.
lol I was just yesterday saying that I fully expect these to fold and all the content to go back to Netflix where the studios can earn passive income with no more expense than paying their lawyers to write contracts.
Why aren't people using our service? Should we lower prices? Provide better shows and services? No no, we're business people not people making a product. Cut and merge!
With our enshittification powers combined...
The Money Guys never think about the backend.
Here's an idea, friendly to corps because it's the only damn way it would happen. A "nonprofit" foundation with the backing of all major studios. The studios provide the infrastructure while the "nonprofit" uses most of their low subscription fee to pay for content. The rest goes towards market research that is provided to the studios and open sourced at the end of each year.
How is this friendly to corps lol
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The world’s largest traditional entertainment companies face a reckoning in 2024 after losing more than $5 billion in the past year from the streaming services they built to compete with Netflix.
Disney, Warner Bros Discovery, Comcast and Paramount—US entertainment conglomerates that have been growing ever larger for decades—are facing pressure to shrink or sell legacy businesses, scale back production and slash costs following billions in losses from their digital platforms.
Beyond their streaming losses, the traditional media groups are facing a weak advertising market, declining television revenues and higher production costs following the Hollywood strikes.
But as the traditional media owners struggle, Netflix, the tech group that pioneered the streaming model over a decade ago, has emerged as the winner of the battle to reshape video distribution.
“For much of the past four years, the entertainment industry spent money like drunken sailors to fight the first salvos of the streaming wars,” analyst Michael Nathanson wrote in November.
Earnings for its most recent quarter soared past Wall Street’s expectations as it added 9 million new subscribers—the strongest rise since early 2020, when Covid-19 lockdowns led to a jump.
The original article contains 933 words, the summary contains 187 words. Saved 80%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Aren't most of these companies too big to merge with each other?
Not if we cut their dicks off.
I like your style
FWIW, I meant that literally.
No company is too big to merge with another company here in the land of the free where corporations are people and humans are worthless trash!
Quick, corps, double down on enshittification so we never are enticed to give you corporate clusterfucks another chance to deceive us.
Honestly though, the fact that enshitfication was ALWAYS the plan for these businesses is why we shouldn't of let them get as much market share in the first place