• IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 days ago

    In this case, the ads are probably bringing in less per viewer than the service costs, so having non-paying viewers is still a net negative.

    Clamping down on this is probably a worse negative in the long run, but investors only care about this quarter.

    • reddig33@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Considering how many streamers are encouraging people to sign up for the ad-supported plans, I think they’re making more money from the ads. Of course, they’re double-dipping just like the cable companies used to do. Charging for a subscription, and then making even more money by showing you ads. The OP’s screenshot is like how they used to charge for each cable descrambler box in a home. Wanna watch in both the bedroom and the living room? Pay up!

      It’s just greed.

      • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Part of it is greed. Part of it is that television and physical media subsidized a lot of streaming’s content and now that money is gone. There has already been a collapse of some types of movies and TV shows because the economics that led to their golden age are no longer there.

        Netflix used to get streaming rights for pennies because production companies made their money through other sources. Now those income streams are dead.