[sidkhanooja]

Tangential, but I've recently noticed that due to huge fragmentation in the streaming industry (Netflix, PrimeVideo, Hulu, Disney+ et al.), I'm only using two - Netflix and PrimeVideo, and a third torrent streaming service (PopcornTime) when I can't find a specific movie/TV series.

I prefer to use the third option as few as possible, but I find myself having to use it more and more often as the years go by - geolocked content, huge swathes of content being removed on the whims of providers (The Office comes to mind), and 'originals' that are beyond even the so-bad-it's-good category that cannot even begin to fill the void left by the good content leaving.

I cannot ever see myself subscribing to a plethora of services - the best case is subscribing to a service when it's absolutely necessary (HBO/Hotstar) and then unsubscribing when you're done, which is not at all conducive to fulfilling long-term revenue plans of such services.

So what is the endgame of such services? Is it simply to build a huge catalog of content that you'll mindlessly devour whenever you're bored? Or something else?

[mysterydip]

One more frustration to add to your list: only having x seasons of a show available instead of all y.

[IronBacon]

Agreed.

Similar gripe, finding out that only the sequel or the last movie in a trilogy is available: why Netflix, why?

[mgoetzke]

or splitting up the seasons in the UI like Amazon does it (the amazon UX is quite dismal anyway)

[arethuza]

That 'feature' of Amazon's service really annoys me as well - presumably it's to make it look like they have far more content available than they actually have?

[moomin]

Lucifer is particularly funny in this regard: exclusive to Amazon for seasons 1-3, Netflix for 4.

[1_player]

> content being removed

I used to watch a lot of Monty Python sketches on YouTube, and in the past few months they've been removed. Last time I looked it was impossible to find the super popular Parrot Sketch!

They're not on Archive.org, no decent results on alternative sites such as DailyMotion, just disappeared.

That's absolutely shocking to me, a huge piece of popular culture is unreachable unless you specifically go pay for it or are lucky to find a collection on a torrent site.

[kgwxd]

Netflix recently added it in my region. I wonder if that deal is the reason it was targeted for take-down notices.

[brokenmachine]

Does you remembering that they were there somehow violate the DMCA?

[spookybones]

I think they're on Netflix now. For how long, who knows.

[dmix]

If you live outside of the US and use streaming services you 100% still need torrents to get access to a lot of popular shows and movies you might randomly hear about.

Even content that is constantly marketer directly to me by ESPN is US only (ESPN plus) despite my Canadian geo. It’s annoying.

[askvictor]

I want something simpler: to pay for a movie or show when I want to watch it. From the one spot (e.g. Google Play movies and it's ilk). Shouldn't be too hard. I don't understand why studios don't licence things to get a direct payment for them, instead forcing a subscription that I don't want and won't use.

[beobab]

Reliable recurring revenue is better for long term stability of a business. Joe Average on subscription is better for their overall "health" than the ups and downs of "no-one's buying this month because something amazing is coming out next month".

[VvR-Ox]

Aaaaaand Cpt. CAPITAL strikes again! :-D

This is only possible in a world where nonsensical bullshit is rewarded with a big pile of money.

In a world we'd all want there would be ONE SERVICE on earth that has EVERYTHING. As long as they don't get that I'll be a pirate.

At least the big companies don't suffer from the loss of my money as a little band would do. That's why I still buy vinyl and visit concerts but I have no choice to do that with movies/series I'm afraid.

To the people who always argue for the "free market": Is this what you meant by "competition is good for the consumer"?

[HeadsUpHigh]

As long as draconian IP protection and the DMCA exists this is not a free market.

[DanBC]

> (The Office comes to mind),

I wonder how many content providers see the popularity of old shows and think they can pull in the audience, without realising that a big part of the appeal is having all the shows in one place with one subscription?

[sho]

> 'originals' that are beyond even the so-bad-it's-good category

Couldn't agree more. Besides a very few "tentpole" features, and a small number of standup comedy specials, that Netflix Originals logo up the top left may as well mean "do not watch". If I could exclude them at the UI level, I would. I pay to see top-range feature films and high quality productions, not an endless bargain bin of third-rate filler.

I suspect the "endgame" is that after all the studios have tried out their little walled garden plan and most have failed, they will band together and finally create some kind of unified system, same as the RIAA has done. It'll probably take a good few years, though.

[jacobush]

I think this is one reason Disney is going to make money hand over fist. Almost all of their shows and movies are at least OK and often very good. You won’t have to wade through heaps of trash looking for something decent.

[yreg]

I find myself watching less and less content, which is not available on Netflix. I even gradually dropped some tv-series I liked, because they were not on Netflix. Everything else (pirated or not) just seems so clumsy in comparison.