[jurassic]

> a graveyard of prematurely canceled originals

This is the crux of the issue for me. I lost interest in even trying new Netflix shows because they developed a reputation for cancelling lots of good, not great, shows with loyal followings because they weren't pulling in blockbuster viewership numbers on the level of Stranger Things. This spray and pray strategy is fundamentally disrespectful to the audience.

[verve_rat]

And the ridiculous thing is, streaming services should be better for slow burning, loyalty building IP. It doesn't matter when your friend tells you about the thing they like, you can start from the start anytime.

The loyal fans will watch and rewatch the old episodes for years and years to come.

This cancel early and often model is the exact opposite of the business model streaming services should use.

[lathiat]

I feel like mainstream TV wasn't much better at that. The vast majority of TV shows I got into seemed to get cancelled after 1-2 seasons.

While they seem to have a bad track record by public opinion, it's unclear how much worse Netflix was at this.

I did a quick google to see if I could find any statistics, I got bored looking for some better data but did find this article claiming that from 2009-2012 "on average, 65% of new network television series will be canceled within their first season.": https://screenrant.com/tv-success-rate-canceled-shows/

[jurassic]

Could be, I'm not really old enough to remember how linear TV dealt with new television series. Perhaps it is mainly a problem of perception. When you turn on the hotel TV and see a Law & Order rerun playing for the umpeenth time you aren't really thinking about all the other shows that never got beyond a pilot because they couldn't outperform a juggernaut like Law & Order and earn a slot in the schedule.

The way Netflix seems to drive every season into a cliffhanger ending and then cancel seems pretty short-sighted though. If they just let stories be a little more self-contained, then these one-season shows (dare I say "miniseries"?) would accumulate into a catalog of stories that are actually worth a damn for the audiences that find them later. Every piece of content in the library that they don't have to pay to license can earn back an ROI from a niche audience over a much longer period of time since they don't have to optimize the limited number of hours in the schedule like linear TV.

I think there is an emotional difference also that plays a role here. With traditional TV, people I think were maybe more accustomed to the idea of "you get what you get". Don't like what's on? You can change the channel, but you can't pick out exactly what you want, so you have to get used to settling for "good enough". So you leave Law & Order playing in the background even if, really, police procedurals aren't something that inspire passion in you. But with streaming, there is the illusion of infinite choice. The magic of it is getting exactly what you want exactly when you want it, and the magic fizzles the moment the thing you like and very much want to continue watching gets unceremoniously cancelled. It feels like having a choice taken away.

[marcosdumay]

Didn't they cancel Stranger Things because the viewership dropped a little?

[jurassic]

I don't follow it closely enough to know. I would assume because the child actors were aging out of their roles.