Below is a look at the most exasperating news from streaming services from this week. The scale of this article demonstrates how fast and frequently disappointing streaming news arises. Coincidentally, as we wrote this article, another price hike was announced.

We’ll also examine each streaming platform’s financial status to get an idea of what these companies are thinking (spoiler: They’re thinking about money).

Netflix starts killing its cheapest ad-free plan in June

Sony bumps Crunchyroll prices weeks after shuttering Funimation

Peacock is raising prices

Fubo cuts 19 channels

In a seemingly desperate push, many streaming services prioritize revenue and profits ahead of building the best streaming service for customers.

We could go on about how this might force people to reconsider their subscriptions, but we should publish before another service makes yet another policy change.

  • FortuneMisteller@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    They let people believe that streaming is cheap, but it is not. A server can send streams to many people at the same time, but not so many as it seems and sever up time is a cost, in terms of energy and in terms of sysadmin time. Maintenance of the network is also expensive, especially in the US where most of the people live in low density neighbourhoods.

    To that you have to add the cost of the big data servers that check everything people look at and profile their customers.

    The dirty cheap subscriptions were meant to attract new customers, the service was heavily subsidized. The companies looked profitable just because other companies bought more ad space than necessary. Overadvertising is the preferred method to give stealth subsidies, but it is a cost for the other businesses of the network. After a while they have to shift those costs to the customers.

    • nyctre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah, that could be true. But seeing as how 99% of companies are following the same business model of squeezing more and more profit out of people, I’m gonna go with Occam’s razor on this one and say they’re most likely just trying to make more money because they can. As long as it keeps working, they’ll keep doing it.

      • FortuneMisteller@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        2 months ago

        To get an idea of the cost choose any cloud service and see how much you pay for the server usage by the hour. Try to llok at all the other costs involved in the business, production of dedicated content is not cheap. All the company staff, the administration and the billing have a cost.

        Do not go by assumptions, measure, try to get an idea of the real costs.

        • Valmond@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          2 months ago

          I have access to 40€/month 10Gb symmetric (this is a commercial offer, so it’s obviously cheaper for them). Now tell me bandwith is so so expensive.

          It was expensive back in the day, not so much any more, and prices plunge every year.

    • Oaksey@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Netflix have been making a profit since 2003 and only recently introduced ads. They are just trying to squeeze more profit.

    • MSids@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      When I worked at an internet provider, Netflix sent us a cache (I’m sure they have several at that ISP now). I can’t imagine it cost them more than a few thousand dollars, as it was just a bare bones box full of hard drives. We gave them free power, internet, and rack space in our data center. Every night during the slow period it would fill up with whatever they thought would stream the next day.

      There was nothing to do with neighborhoods, the cache served customers all over Maine and they didn’t pay us anything. Netflix’s costs are more likely content and licensing.

    • darganon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 months ago

      Netflix is a public company, you can just go look at how wrong you are about this.

      They took in $9.3 billion in Q1 2024, and spent $702 million on “technology” and $3.7 billion on adding “content assets”

      Their net profit was $2.3 billion, for one quarter. They could afford to just charge less money, but the line must go up.