Entertainment
Sponsored by

"TVs streaming model is broken"

6,462 Views | 65 Replies | Last: 2 yr ago by cajunaggie08
PatAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:21p, 6/6/23
AG
https://www.vulture.com/2023/06/streaming-industry-netflix-max-disney-hulu-apple-tv-prime-video-peacock-paramount.html

Lot of interesting info and quotes in this article, that mirrors a lot of discussion on various threads we have.
I have some thoughts I'll share but thought this might be a good thread topic.
Reply Quote
7
Ol_Ag_02
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:08p, 6/6/23
AG
Loooonnnnngggg article. Good read.
Reply Quote
4
superunknown
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:04p, 6/6/23
AG
My word, I'm just reading the selected quotes that are the preamble to actual article and finding myself nodding along to every freaking word.

Just want to give OP kudos for posting this. I'm sure I'll have more thoughts later (the long streaming thread should give you an idea on where I stand on all of this) but I'm definitely thankful for this article.
Reply Quote
oragator
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:11p, 6/6/23
Good read - a lot of that has been talked about here. But if you had to boil the article down to a few sentences, it would be:
Companies that once chased stock price now have to show a profit, so all the niche shows will likely suffer in favor of fewer, safer more broad based appeal shows. Consolidation is likely, and that will likely mean higher costs for users, with potentially fewer show options. Caught in the middle are writers who don't seem to get rewarded for great shows today with the cost plus model, and with a leaner market might have more problems ahead. They would like to get back to the pay for success model.
Reply Quote
6
dreyOO
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:13p, 6/6/23
Quote:
"Most writers are gamblers," says someone who has created megahits in both linear and streaming TV, "and are willing to bet on their own talents. They would be much happier getting a bigger payday with big success and a more modest payday if their show didn't work. But now everybody's basically playing a baseball game where people can only hit singles. The ball over the fence is still only a single."

If true, that's a hell of a hard life lesson.
Reply Quote
2
dreyOO
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:27p, 6/6/23
Quote:
"It's hard to develop hit sitcoms when the people selling, pitching, buying, and programming them don't seem to like them. They don't seem to like what the audience likes," says the top agent. "I mean, I'm sorry, but people seem to really like Two and a Half Men, and none of my writers want to write that. They all want to write Barry. And you know who watches Barry? Nobody."

This is why I find myself watching old shows I had previously missed from a decade or so ago. Simpler times. Easy sitcoms and shows. Not everything has to be suspenseful art for people that just want to relax and veg out a bit after work.
Reply Quote
41
Iowaggie
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:40p, 6/6/23
AG
There several things that have been discussed in a collection of threads, but the point about the stockpiling of content is true. This writers strike could continue for 8 years, and I think I'd be fine with live sports and the current content on Netflix, hulu, Disney+, Amazon Prime, HBO/Max, Peacock, and Paramount+.
Reply Quote
10
Post removed:
by user
In reply to Iowaggie • 11:46p, 6/6/23
TCTTS
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PatAg • 12:01a, 6/7/23
AG
Thanks for posting. This is such a comprehensive, incredibly-well-done look at the (sad) state of TV today. Basically, every question asked on this board, re: the mechanics of the streaming industry as a whole, just needs to be referred to this article from now on.
Reply Quote
6
2 edits
An L of an Ag
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:16a, 6/7/23
AG
Great read - thanks OP!
Reply Quote
1
Hub `93
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to dreyOO • 9:13a, 6/7/23
AG
dreyOO said:
Quote:
"It's hard to develop hit sitcoms when the people selling, pitching, buying, and programming them don't seem to like them. They don't seem to like what the audience likes," says the top agent. "I mean, I'm sorry, but people seem to really like Two and a Half Men, and none of my writers want to write that. They all want to write Barry. And you know who watches Barry? Nobody."

This is why I find myself watching old shows I had previously missed from a decade or so ago. Simpler times. Easy sitcoms and shows. Not everything has to be suspenseful art for people that just want to relax and veg out a bit after work.
Same here. I've been watching a lot of the original Magnum PI, a show I never watched when it was in production. I've even started watching Murder, She Wrote. (Some of the accents, though.)

The show I've watched the most of over the past year is The Rockford Files, which I loved as a kid. A definite nostalgia factor there for me. Plus, it was just a great show.
Reply Quote
12
JDUB08AG
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:45a, 6/7/23
AG
We've been rewatching full house with our kids (7 and 5). On season 6 now and I'm enjoying it way more than I would have expected. Also, there are a lot more adult references in the show that I naturally didn't appreciate as a kid. Its been a lot of fun. We'll likely continue this with our kids and move from show to show.

I miss the simpler times.
Reply Quote
13
Mega Lops
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:15a, 6/7/23
AG
Great article! Love the irony of how the never ending quest for money is having the opposite effect.

The narratives and agendas being served up on a plate for easy consumption are being rejected by Americans who don't want to be force-fed biased representations that do not reflect values or ideals important to most of us.
Reply Quote
9
1 edit
Gigem314
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:17a, 6/7/23
AG
Quote:
"It's absolutely conceivable that the streaming subscription model is the crypto of the entertainment business."
Really interesting comparison. I never would have pictured it like that, but I could see why some would see it that way.
Reply Quote
4
1 edit
Quad Dog
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Gigem314 • 11:41a, 6/7/23
AG
Gigem314 said:
Quote:
"It's absolutely conceivable that the streaming subscription model is the crypto of the entertainment business."
Really interesting comparison. I never would have pictured it like that, but I could see why some would see it that way.
Streaming should have been the next thing that replaced DVDs that replaced VHS as a secondary revenue stream. But it sounds like the companies got greedy and not enough of that new revenue stream made it into the hands of creators.
Reply Quote
Hub `93
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:47a, 6/7/23
AG
FASCINATING article. I just wish there was more about the algorithms v. marketing aspect. That warrants at least a sidebar article, IMO.
Reply Quote
7
EclipseAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to dreyOO • 12:43p, 6/7/23
AG
dreyOO said:
Quote:
"It's hard to develop hit sitcoms when the people selling, pitching, buying, and programming them don't seem to like them. They don't seem to like what the audience likes," says the top agent. "I mean, I'm sorry, but people seem to really like Two and a Half Men, and none of my writers want to write that. They all want to write Barry. And you know who watches Barry? Nobody."

This is why I find myself watching old shows I had previously missed from a decade or so ago. Simpler times. Easy sitcoms and shows. Not everything has to be suspenseful art for people that just want to relax and veg out a bit after work.
That's a great quote from a really interesting article. Resonates with me because I love "Two and a Half Men," and I typically watch a couple of episodes every night via cable (and I've never seen "Barry").

But the broader point is a good one. It's telling that so many people are reverting to reruns of shows that aired a decade or more ago -- shows that are perhaps less "quality" but way more "accessible." The entertainment industry made more sense when television was mainstream and movies were art, rather than the opposite situation we find ourselves in today.
Reply Quote
4
ABATTBQ11
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:11p, 6/7/23
AG
I feel like I've been saying similar things for a long time in regards to what streamers create, especially things like RoP, which to me is the perfect example of the streaming issue.

Streamers effectively have a fixed budget because of the subscription model, so anything greenlit needs to be very cheap on a per minute of content basis or be so ****ing amazing and mass appeal that it brings in enough new subscribers to justify a large price tag. The latter are going to be rarities to the point that companies like Netflix need to get into the distribution business and start doing theatrical releases before platform releases to recoup costs. This is also why the budget for RoP never made sense to me. There was never a world in which that show was going to recoup $750MM-$1B. Throwing massive amounts of money at content was and is unsustainable because these companies will ultimately operate on a fixed budget at market saturation. It's ok for growth to build subscribers, but there has to be a plan for no longer being a growth company.

The commentary on mass appeal versus the niche content that fueled more diverse production lacks some crucial context, IMO. Those "marginalized" stories were marginalized because they didn't have an audience in a world where you had to have one to not only survive, but get a greenlight and investment in the first place. That went out the window with the streaming explosion, and now we're just coming back to the previous reality. To me, the solution here is for streamers to create a hybrid model: make catalogue subsets available for an added fee the same way premium or niche channels were made available on cable. If people want those stories, they can get them, but other subscribers aren't subsidizing the entire niche catalogue and the streamer is seeing added revenue that directly supports those niche projects.

As for the issues with staffing, I think a consolidation and correction is in order in many ways. The Guild model may be unsustainable on the writers' end. If they want to be able to bet on themselves, then they need to do it without the safety net of a union. I see the complaints about the loss of backend residuals and the inability to build a career when projects are cancelled so easily, but welcome to every other job. You aren't going to be compensated for the amazing work you just did by being paid for it forever, you're going to be paid for it by pointing at it and demanding more for the work you're going to do in the future. That's how careers are made. The Guild's problem is that they want everyone to be employed and making money all the time, but they also want a piece of the pie for success, with the ultimate argument being that they want a stake in success but no part of failure. It's not gambling on yourself if you can't lose. Remove the collective nature of the union and have writers negotiate their own pay based on their body of work.
Reply Quote
14
1 edit
CC09LawAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to ABATTBQ11 • 2:35p, 6/7/23
ABATTBQ11 said:
The commentary on mass appeal versus the niche content that fueled more diverse production lacks some crucial context, IMO. Those "marginalized" stories were marginalized because they didn't have an audience in a world where you had to have one to not only survive, but get a greenlight and investment in the first place. That went out the window with the streaming explosion, and now we're just coming back to the previous reality. To me, the solution here is for streamers to create a hybrid model: make catalogue subsets available for an added fee the same way premium or niche channels were made available on cable. If people want those stories, they can get them, but other subscribers aren't subsidizing the entire niche catalogue and the streamer is seeing added revenue that directly supports those niche projects.
This is going to be easier said the done. In today's political and corporate climate, they will get killed in the court of public opinion if they try to gatekeep certain content with an extra $$ fee. Now, I agree with you and they may just decide it's worth it - if enough companies do it, the backlash will die down and be less severe.
Reply Quote
1
Beat40
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:38p, 6/7/23
Look forward to reading this article tonight and commenting.
Reply Quote
Iowaggie
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:58p, 6/7/23
AG
It wasn't that long ago that I thought companies like Sony and FOX were foolish for not getting into the streaming game like everyone else. Fox went the way of a FAST tier with Tubi, and I think Sony has done OK just being a content provider to the companies. Maybe they did all right on that end, or maybe I don't know.
Reply Quote
2
Quad Dog
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:52p, 6/7/23
AG
It's never made sense that the metric for success was subscribers and nothing else. Viewers, awards, social media buzz, and ultimately money should determine success of a show or a streamer. But every company was always just focused on increasing subscribers. We all knew they would reach a saturation point and subscribers would plateau, but the streaming companies seem surprised by this fact.

It's never made sense to me why they don't make a hybrid approach and integrate streaming into the existing framework. Just think about Disney and The Mandalorian. They made it streaming only to get subscribers to Disney+ as their only metric of success. But they could have made a lot more money had they streamed it Wednesday at midnight on D+ for those people that only subscribe, then aired in on traditional ABC Thursday night for Ad money, then syndicated it to FX or whoever for syndication money, then also sold it to Netflix to stream once it had all aired on ABC while they simultaneously streamed it on Disney+. There you go Disney Execs, I just sold your one product 4 times when you sold it once to get subscribers only.
Reply Quote
6
62strat
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to dreyOO • 4:14p, 6/7/23
AG
dreyOO said:
Quote:
"It's hard to develop hit sitcoms when the people selling, pitching, buying, and programming them don't seem to like them. They don't seem to like what the audience likes," says the top agent. "I mean, I'm sorry, but people seem to really like Two and a Half Men, and none of my writers want to write that. They all want to write Barry. And you know who watches Barry? Nobody."

...people that just want to relax and veg out a bit after work.
This right here is why we struggle with streaming platforms.
So often, we want to just turn on the tv, and not have to figure out what we want to watch. I don't watch much tv, but my wife talks about how she misses the days of turning on a tv, and just having the TV on, without having to necessarily pick something we want on in the background. Instead, you endlessly scroll and have analysis paralysis.

We are considering giving up netflix, disney, and just going back to youtube tv. It's just so damn much more $.
Reply Quote
7
JJxvi
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:40p, 6/7/23
AG
Quote:
If you're wondering whom to blame for TV's predicament, that's easy: It was Netflix.
Was it though? Netflix was an outsider in television media. They were a glorified new fnagled high-tech version of a Red Box, not a television company. The blame lies on all of the companies that were profitable making air and cable television who decided that competing with Netflix was the way go creating massive streaming competition and diluting their own product by creating an alternative way to consume it. They could have simply starved out Netflix having access to their content but instead they started up their own services to compete not only with Netflix but also themselves.
Reply Quote
10
1 edit
HollywoodBQ
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 62strat • 4:55p, 6/7/23
AG
62strat said:
So often, we want to just turn on the tv, and not have to figure out what we want to watch.
...
We are considering giving up netflix, disney, and just going back to youtube tv. It's just so damn much more $.
Before I moved to Australia, I had about $150/month of Dish Network, NHL Center Ice package, etc.

When I got to Australia, I wanted my family to integrate with the local culture so I forced us to watch free to air TV only. For several years, we only had 5 channels - 7, 9, 10, "The ABC" (think PBS) and SBS (basically PBS for indigenous and immigrants - like me).

Point here is that I cut the cord in a major way and adapted to the local television which was largely comprised of US, British and Australian programming.

One of my biggest complaints with attempts at streaming off YouTube and the US network sites - especially NBC for Saturday Night Live, or CBS for 60 Minutes was the fact that most of that content was blocked because I was in a foreign country.

This led many Australians to various content piracy sites to download programs that were blocked in Australia.

Moving back to the USA, I continued with my cable boycott and just used the rabbit ears on my TV plus some streaming. Borrowed my daughter's Netflix account up until a couple weeks ago. At this point, I'm paying for Apple TV (Ted Lasso) and Prime (good for movie "rentals") and I'm using Pluto for random TV or movies.

I've got about 40+ channels on free to air here in Los Angeles and at least 25 of them are English language. I've really enjoyed watching old Hawaii Five-O, Magnum P.I., CHiPs, Rockford Files, Charlie's Angels, Three's Company, Sanford and Son, The Jeffersons, etc. It's like 1979 on my TV. Especially love the Johnny Carson reruns.

My biggest complaint in this new world of streaming is - where do I easily find what's on which service?

Example, if I want to watch an old movie like Clint Eastwood - "Firefox", I might find it for free on Pluto, Hulu, (not Netflix anymore), Prime, or Apple TV. I'm finding that often times, I'll wind up renting it on Prime but, not until I've spent 10 minutes searching 4 different apps trying to figure out who has it.
Reply Quote
1
Quad Dog
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to HollywoodBQ • 5:17p, 6/7/23
AG
There are various websites you can use to see what is streaming where, such as https://www.jus****ch.com/us
EDIT: apparently the word "just watch" without a space is censored.

But I'm surprised that's not a service that isn't supported yet by someone like Verizon or Comcast. Comcast almost does this now. They track what you want to watch, alert you when a new season or streaming release is out, let you easily subscribe for a month or two, or rent from the source through Comcast while they make a little as the middle man.
Reply Quote
2
1 edit
EclipseAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:21p, 6/7/23
AG
You can use the Xfinity voice remote to ask for a particular movie or television show and it will give you viewing options across multiple platforms.
Reply Quote
JJxvi
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:25p, 6/7/23
AG
So...if the cord cutter wants to know whats streaming, y'alls solution is have him add Xfinity?
Reply Quote
5
Quad Dog
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to JJxvi • 5:33p, 6/7/23
AG
No, just saying there are companies close to providing that but they are missing a market by not catering to cord cutters.
Reply Quote
JD Shellnut
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:52p, 6/7/23
AG
I'll google search the movie and it will usually tell me what service it's on.
Reply Quote
4
dave94
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Quad Dog • 5:54p, 6/7/23
AG
Quad Dog said:
There are various websites you can use to see what is streaming where, such as https://www.jus****ch.com/us
EDIT: apparently the word "just watch" without a space is censored.

But I'm surprised that's not a service that isn't supported yet by someone like Verizon or Comcast. Comcast almost does this now. They track what you want to watch, alert you when a new season or streaming release is out, let you easily subscribe for a month or two, or rent from the source through Comcast while they make a little as the middle man.
The Justw-a-tch App (no dashes, lol) is great for this.
Reply Quote
1
redline248
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:04p, 6/7/23
AG
I'm just kind of catching up on this topic...would this be an accurate summarization?

Streaming providers overpaid for content they could never match with subscriber revenue, and the content providers agreed to rates that had zero flexibility due to the lack of things like syndication?
Reply Quote
2
ABATTBQ11
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to CC09LawAg • 6:18p, 6/7/23
AG
CC09LawAg said:
ABATTBQ11 said:
The commentary on mass appeal versus the niche content that fueled more diverse production lacks some crucial context, IMO. Those "marginalized" stories were marginalized because they didn't have an audience in a world where you had to have one to not only survive, but get a greenlight and investment in the first place. That went out the window with the streaming explosion, and now we're just coming back to the previous reality. To me, the solution here is for streamers to create a hybrid model: make catalogue subsets available for an added fee the same way premium or niche channels were made available on cable. If people want those stories, they can get them, but other subscribers aren't subsidizing the entire niche catalogue and the streamer is seeing added revenue that directly supports those niche projects.
This is going to be easier said the done. In today's political and corporate climate, they will get killed in the court of public opinion if they try to gatekeep certain content with an extra $$ fee. Now, I agree with you and they may just decide it's worth it - if enough companies do it, the backlash will die down and be less severe.


I think it depends on messaging, but yeah you're probably going to ruffle feathers. I don't think anyone interested in that niche content would be too upset if they partnered with the right individuals or organizations to promote it as premium content. You would, however, likely upset some of the maga conservative F16 types who would also view it as the opposite of gatekeeping.

Either way, I think it would be a solid way forward for increasing revenues without alienating subscribers with higher prices.
Reply Quote
1
Quad Dog
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to redline248 • 6:37p, 6/7/23
AG
Also a big difference between traditional success of a TV/movie studio vs. what Wall Street considers success of a streaming company.
Reply Quote
1
Mega Lops
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:37p, 6/7/23
AG
Also, don't forget: Streaming series which make into to production but never take off are just another way in which the Hollywood mafia launders money. They have been doing it for years in the TV and movie business, so all the streaming content is just another outlet for them to illegally move money around in plain sight.
Reply Quote
1
Page 1 of 2 ▼
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.