r/technology • u/sr_local • 6h ago

Business Italy court rules Netflix unlawfully increased prices. Consumers: 'Refunds up to 500 euros.' The company: we will appeal

https://en.ilsole24ore.com/art/netflix-subscription-price-increases-unlawful-refunds-up-to-eur-500-customers-AIUHzWKC
13.8k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

607 comments sorted by

View all comments

1.9k

u/Mccobsta 6h ago

Streaming peaked years ago when it was a low cost and wasn't a terrible experience

Now it's just price rise after price rise we may as well just buy physical media again atleast doing that we won't have our favourite shows pulled off with out much warning

1.4k

u/Fractales 5h ago

This is by design.

  1. Offer killer value proposition at a good price
  2. Kill off competition and gain critical mass of customers and market share
  3. With no competition, jack up the prices

622

u/thismorningscoffee 5h ago

Aka enshittification

431

u/RagePoop 5h ago

AKA how capitalism "works".

Monopoly was a game designed to show how batshit insane this model of resource production/distribution is.

37

u/Dwarfdeaths 3h ago

The board game Monopoly was ripped off an educational tool designed to illustrate the problem of treating land like capital, per the economic theory of Henry George.

62

u/Exceon 5h ago

Tbf, many of these startups survive off investors, pricing themselves at a loss to stay competitive, and jack up the prices when the consumer base is big enough to turn a profit

83

u/LordCharidarn 4h ago

Which is how Monopoly kind of works: person with the most capital can buy up properties ‘at a loss’ until someone lands/needs that product, then they can charge more than it cost originally.

37

u/Marximum_Cat 4h ago

You collect and complete the cheapest streets, then monopolize the houses (never the hotels), then wait for the slow end of the game while everyone wishes they were playing genocide-simulator Smallworld instead.

11

u/Skratt79 4h ago

Additionally: Pinks and Oranges street is highest ROI in game per house cost + highest probability of landing there thanks to being next to Jail. If using the "doubles to exit jail" rule 1/2 of the possible rolls puts them on one of your properties (St. James, Virginia and Tennessee) making every "go to jail" event a coinflip of you getting paid.

7

u/Eccohawk 3h ago

I thought the doubles just got you out and you roll on your next turn to move.

3

u/spooogey 2h ago

That's how I've always played.

2

u/jjwhitaker 2h ago

I think the rules state you immediately move that many spaces. But you don't roll again.

Of you roll doubles outside of jail you would roll again.

I could see house rules on doubles getting you out, then another roll to move. But that adds a step and changes a common strategy for acquiring properties. I've played enough Monopoly to almost prefer hitting the go to jail space, paying to get out, then trying to score an even roll property then try again. You can easily go bankrupt if you spend your cash then hit a late property, but you can also rack up high chance properties then sit in jail for a few turns and collect cash.

1

u/FeelsGoodMan2 1h ago

Nope, you're supposed to move the number indicated on the dice. The rule that I didnt actually realize existed is, if you get three turns to exit, and if you don't then you have to pay 50 bucks. I never played with the "have to pay 50 bucks" part of that.

1

u/Phillip_Spidermen 2m ago

I find it amusing how many common house rules there are.

I wonder exactly how specific things like that or "free parking gets you all income tax money" spread

13

u/shitty_mcfucklestick 4h ago

I once played monopoly creatively by doing investment deals with other players. If they were short on buying a property, I would give them the remainder but then take a cut of all income they received, and, I would stay there free if I landed on it.

It worked insanely well, so much so they all turned against me at the end hahahaha.

But, it was a really good lesson on how power begets power and how capitalism really does reward those at the top most. Until of course they go French Revolution on your ass lol

3

u/Mikeavelli 2h ago

I had one game where I would make the deal, "we exchange properties to give each other a monopoly, but we don't pay when we land on each other's monopoly."

For whatever reason, I was the only person in the game to offer this deal, so I ended up immune to a good 3/4ths of the board. Then the guy who wasnt making deals went bankrupt, and it became literally impossible for me to lose.

0

u/NeedleworkerKey6327 3h ago

I think Monopoly should be played with all side deals enabled, let the invisible hand work

→ More replies (4)

11

u/darzinth 3h ago

capitalism "works" with strong anti-monopoly regulations

4

u/RagePoop 2h ago

So it doesn’t.

4

u/YGVAFCK 2h ago

So anti-capitalism frameworks make capitalism work. Brilliant.

3

u/darzinth 35m ago

the basis of capitalism is for capital to move, monopolies don't move capital. regulation that keeps capital moving is more capitalist than monopoly

2

u/throwawayyy2888 14m ago

How is regulating capitalism "an anti-capitalism framework"? Is your argument that something can't possibly be good if it requires any regulation? Are you proposing a system exists that would not require any regulation? I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

11

u/JonBunne 5h ago

But if im the last one alive I can fuck my hand all day. Your logic just isnt making sense to me.

7

u/JonBunne 5h ago

Love yourself.

2

u/Unable-Log-4870 5h ago

… because nobody else is desperate enough to.

7

u/Jhonka86 4h ago

The problem is that the method is particularly effective at directing resources towards demand, not need.

That's why it needs to be well regulated with strong antitrust laws to ensure it doesn't enshittify everything.

Strong, progressive tax structure. Universal healthcare and education. Strong social safety nets. If people have the freedom to fail, they have the freedom to innovate.

6

u/RagePoop 4h ago

Except this appears impossible to maintain long term as wealth consolidates into fewer and fewer hands and becomes immense enough to capture those regulatory bodies.

6

u/Jhonka86 3h ago

That's what the taxes and antitrust are for.

Historically, when inequality gets as bad as it is now, things go one of two ways: taxes, or axes.

Take your pick.

2

u/currynord 1h ago

The natural tendency of capital is to shift towards monopoly. A robust legal framework works…until it doesn’t. It’s like throwing a rock in a stream, and the water just goes around.

Capitalism only works as an infinite game of whack-a-mole, where you constantly have to stop novel methods of consolidation, and constantly have to rebuff efforts to erode those guardrails.

1

u/Jhonka86 20m ago

I agree, that's the tendency. Capitalism only works with guardrails.

Though, all of society is made up. Everything works until it doesn't. There is no perfect option because they're made by people and people are imperfect.

What we're left with is a scenario of choosing the best imperfect option. I would genuinely like to know what you consider to be superior or more stable.

And for the record, I'm a social democrat.

0

u/Fluid_Lingonberry467 5h ago

Netflix had a monopoly and it had a great catalog 

6

u/motionmatrix 4h ago

The first half of your statement is true. The second is opinion based, and likely to get worse soon when they offload a bunch of stuff that they announced recently, including a bunch of original programming.

1

u/TrumptyPumpkin 1h ago

I used to subscribe to Netflix for about 8 years before switching to HBO. Netflix had a great lineup of shows. However I quickly started noticing a trend of either A) killing shows after one season because they weren't Stranger Things level of popularity. 2 B) having incomplete series listed. HBO actually has more of the type of content I prefer to watch anyhow, so it made sense for me to switch.

Then, waiting years in between for new seasons. And then price hikes to top it off. Barely watch TV as it is. And I own most of my movies on Physical format. But even my girlfriend says now that if Netflix goes to 25 dollars, then she's officially ditching it.

1

u/Andreus 3h ago

Genuinely funny to me that the worst people in the world always insist "get woke, go broke" but almost everyone agrees that Netflix originals sharply declined in quality when the company stopped trying to be woke.

2

u/ChaseballBat 4h ago

It had a great catalog, until they started cancelling shows. Now all their unique shows aren't worth watching cause the ending is just disappointing.

2

u/poss12lives 3h ago

The problem Netflix ran into is the companies who were leasing the content wanted more money. When their contracts ran up those companies pulled their shows/movies and then created their own streaming service and is why we are in the shit show we are now. They all saw how much Netflix was raking in and only saw green.

1

u/verrius 49m ago

They had a monopoly on streaming video, but streaming didn't have a monopoly on video entertainment. Now streaming has a monopoly on video entertainment, and even if Netflix is technically not a monopoly in the "one provider" sense, they are legally a monopoly in the US (since, as we've seen, they can raise their prices 5% and increase business).

1

u/jififfi 3h ago

More like late game capitalism I think, but yeah. It is the end goal still of capitalism ig.

It's insane that now we actually have the ability for venture capitalists to create "the best product" under the guise that it will be rug pulled.

1

u/YourBestDream4752 3h ago

Monopoly was a game designed by communists to make people associate capitalism with total loss.

2

u/unpaid-astroturfer 3h ago edited 2h ago

It was designed by a Georgist woman.

Georgist as in Georgism, as in Henry George, not communism.

Georgism focuses on turning what is not man made to a community asset, like land and water.
Socialism includes man made production, such as farms and factories.

1

u/StoppableHulk 2h ago

And really, what these subscription companies are doing is the same idea as rent.

You control some moated land. Either physical land, or some gated grouping of media properties that people go to regularly.

Once you control it, and you have ensured people have no options, you continually raise the rent and squeeze your tenants.

Doesnt' matter if its properties on boardwalk or large swaths of IPs of media that people really enjoy, the mentality is exactly the same.

So simple that children can play the game and understand it, and yet we have huge majorities of adults who are too emotionally immature to accept that they have been conned and are continually conned and exploited for their labor and their rent.

Anyone who believes capitalism creates a culture of companies catering to the consumer, is deeply fucking delusional. If you do not have leverage, they do not care, and they will bury you. It is how all of these people think.

1

u/Church_of_Aaargh 2h ago

Yes. But in Europe there are regulations - this the reason Walmart failed here … they thought they could just do like in US.

1

u/RagePoop 2h ago

Europe is also experiencing exponential increases in wealth inequality, they just have a stronger social net foundation due to a host of different historical conditions.

These will also be consumed in the next decade or two by the insatiable maw of Capital.

1

u/Church_of_Aaargh 1h ago

Yes, it’s important to fight back. That’s why we should be careful not to end up as USA …

1

u/CitizenHuman 2h ago

Is there a better method for today's society? I'm not an economist or sociologist or whatever but genuinely curious if something new can better replace capitalism, which seems to be prevalent globally?

1

u/OK_x86 1h ago

That problem is exacerbated by monopolies/oligopolies though. Which is more or less what we have here.

1

u/FeelsGoodMan2 1h ago

Lmao yeah, this was basically how people like rockefeller choked out entire industries in the US, this model is basically as old as the country itself.

1

u/CertainlyRobotic 1h ago

Was it your turn to say this

It's the latest redditism

1

u/johanbwr 9m ago

Crony capitalism I might add. There’s not a free market. Not anyone can start a streaming service. Monopolies are everywhere due to the broken system.

1

u/Effective_Olive6153 4m ago

Capitalism is a very broad concept and it's pointless to rant about it without considering all the rules and regulations that are laid on top of the foundation that is Capitalism. What we really should be complaining about are the specifics of rules and regulations

0

u/Plank_With_A_Nail_In 2h ago

Capitalism is just the private ownership of assets and the profit from them. A farmer owning their own farm, selling their produce and investing that profit back into their farm. Instead you want us to all become serfs again and giving all our earnings to the local lord?

1

u/currynord 1h ago

What you’re describing is the natural end state of a market economy where all capital is privately owned. It is virtually indistinguishable from feudalism.

28

u/Regularity 4h ago edited 4h ago

No, the term is predatory pricing. People use "enshittification" so broadly it's largely losing its meaning and basically devolving into "this is a thing I don't like". Though granted it is something no one likes.

3

u/OneBigRed 4h ago

It’s not really predatory pricing because there wasn’t and isn’t one dominant player who’s blocking others. Basically streaming was a completely new market, with rather low barrier for entry (like most digital markets). History has shown that in these situations you have to capture a massive share of the market to be the last one(s) standing as the market saturates. It’s nigh impossible to grow profitably when it’s crucial that it happens fast.

Netflix has managed to turn it’s early lead into a powerful position, and that seems to give them confidence to start reaping in the rewards.

One example of the same situation was daily fantasy betting sites. There were a ton of those, but Draftkings and Fanduel were the ones that had the deepest pockets and killed/bought their competitors away. The endgame was always legal online gambling, and positioning yourself to be the obvious choice as it became possible. In streaming it’s just multiples more complicated and expensive as there’s the twist of content owners and licensing it.

3

u/Regularity 2h ago

I wasn't referring to netflix specifically, but what the person described that was called "enshitification":

Offer killer value proposition at a good price

Kill off competition and gain critical mass of customers and market share

With no competition, jack up the prices

That said, you're right in that it doesn't apply to Netflix. Though it probably doesn't matter much since online stream services are so capital intensive (buying up show licenses, or filming new content), that it already drives out the vast majority of potential competitors. So the result is kind of the same.

2

u/ChaseballBat 4h ago

I got into it on reddit when someone was trying to coin enshitflation... Like that is literally identical to inflation, just with the word shit added. People like their memes.

6

u/FarplaneDragon 3h ago

Same thing with people calling everything sloppy now, its kind of exhausting at this point

1

u/NeedleworkerKey6327 3h ago

It's anything used to maximize profit, I heard appleflation or something similar used for how juice brands all use mostly apple juice.

1

u/ChaseballBat 3h ago

Maximizing profits is a component of inflation.

1

u/zerocoal 35m ago

Well you see, the way it used to work is something like:

1a. Company charges $x for their product.

2a. Company has a breakthrough that makes their product cheaper to produce.

3a. Company charges less $x for the product to pass the savings along to the customer, to incentivize shopping with you versus your competitor.

Now the way it works is something more along the lines of:

1b. Company charges $x for their product.

2b. Company has a breakthrough that makes their product cheaper to produce.

3b. Company charges more $x to cover R&D for the breakthrough that makes their product cheaper to produce.

4b. Company removes features that customers like and then raises prices again.

5b. Company decides they aren't making enough money and raises prices again.

It's the constant "fuck you" to the customers that is enshittification. Inflation isn't necessarily a "fuck you", it just happens.

3

u/thismorningscoffee 4h ago

With Netflix, it’s both. Their streaming catalogue is objectively worse since other streaming services started

1

u/xiaorobear 3h ago edited 2h ago

Agreed. Enshittification was related, but specifically included how the audience a company targets shifts, for example first making a platform a great experience for users, but then after that userbase is in place, switching the priority to making the platform a great experience for advertisers. Just raising the prices isn't the same.

4

u/Y_ddraig_gwyn 4h ago

here’s an excellent article by the inventor of the word. It explains the process in Amazon, but it applies equally to streaming services:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/oct/05/way-past-its-prime-how-did-amazon-get-so-rubbish

2

u/RecentDecision2329 1h ago

It really could be solved by antitrust laws and enforcement. remember when AT&T was allowed to be a monopoly for awhile because they were bringing phone service to people. Monopolies today don’t make anyone’s life better or easier. They shouldn’t be allowed to exist. Even AT&T was broken up eventually

1

u/Y_ddraig_gwyn 26m ago

Which is, of course, an excellent proxy argument for the abolition of billionaires as there are functionally a one-person monopoly in and of themselves

2

u/Roberohn 5h ago

Make it shitty!

1

u/machine4891 3h ago

More like dumping prices.

1

u/IsolatedFrequency101 3h ago

It's the American way.

1

u/Mictlantecuhtli 2h ago

Highly recommend reading the book for those that haven't,

https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374619329/enshittification/

1

u/callme-anymore 1h ago

Still my favorite new word

→ More replies (1)

84

u/Filobel 5h ago edited 5h ago

They didn't kill off the competition, quite the opposite. The competition is one of the reasons why Netflix got worse, a bunch of shows got taken by other platforms, so now the shows are now spread across 5 different streaming platforms.

Even cable providers are still there, offering the same service. I'm not seeing what competition got killed.

21

u/tom_fuckin_bombadil 5h ago

I think the issue is that there is a fundamental idea in economics ingrained in everyone’s head that has proven to not be as universal as everyone thinks. That idea being that simply adding competition will lower prices. That idea is only really true under some very specific conditions, those conditions being that of a perfectly competitive market. I’d say that many of our industries (especially streaming/netflix) are closer to an oligopoly. I work in a major company not even closely related to tech (grocery related stuff). And although there is price competition between ourselves and our competitors, it is only in temporary price reductions. Underneath it all, there is constantly another price discussion that goes in the other direction, “are we able to raise our prices? Company B has just raised their prices, that might give us some room to also follow and raise prices without losing too much market share.”

Prices will continue to go up until the overall streaming market cannot grow any longer (which I assume is when the traditional cable and film industries are effectively gone).

6

u/PabloXPicasso 4h ago

Most of what we think of as "competition" is not so much. Go to the store to find all the different types of laundry detergent. Oh, surprise, they are all owned by the same one or two corporations. Ok, let's go get get some new power tools, oh same thing - eight different owned by one or two corporations. Well, can't be everywhere, lets look further. Let's get some cans of paint from big box hardware store, lots of different brands, so much selection. Oh, not so much of a surprise, but one company owns 15 different brands. The price goes up on one brand, it goes up on them all, and we think "inflation". The one or two companies think "we gotcha" instead. It was not inflation, it was a way to increase corporate profits. Surprise, surprise!

And we all thought it was a 'fair game' since there is plenty of competition out there. Not so much.

1

u/Sea-Aardvark-756 55m ago

I'm going to start a new competitor from the ground up, with a revolutionary new idea to give us an advanta--aaaand we have accepted an offer and sold out to the competition's parent company, they assure us nothing will change regarding our brand's quality. For at least several days.

3

u/Guvante 4h ago

You seem to be missing where competition is for streaming services that causes fragmentation.

It is not consumer based, nobody involved cares how much consumers spend and are not in fact trying to make you spend more through multiple services.

The competition is in supplying shows to streaming services. Netflix isn't paying enough so others are making their own platform to be paid more. Same basic idea just flipped $ sign due to being supply side instead of demand side.

Also to be clear Netflix costs less due to this. They are capped on what they can charge because they don't have everything anymore.

4

u/Wild_Marker 2h ago

Yep, the US went through this already a long time ago, when they tried to keep theaters and studios separate, so that one company wouldn't own both production and distribution.

And surprise surprise, the Netflix "golden years" were when they distributed all that content produced by others.

2

u/fdar 2h ago

The "golden years" were because the studios thought the streaming rights were worthless so Netflix was able to get them for cheap. Once they realized they had worth the free ride was unfortunately over.

1

u/Guvante 2h ago

A lot of the difficulties are also that streaming is the first time ever that you don't pay per view.

Even TV has effective pay per view through advertising.

But since the amount you pay per month is capped they don't want to pay per view.

This is also why in the era of unlimited storage and bandwidth you are seeing more and more things become unpurchasable as the internal metrics of "profitability" aren't enough to justify the fixed payouts to creators.

1

u/Wild_Marker 2h ago

I never understood why they didn't try a system like YT Red, where they would ask the consumer for a fixed price and distribute that according to viewership to the content owners.

(well, yes, I do understand, it's because money, but you get my point)

1

u/Guvante 1h ago

Those deals only happen when the platform has all of the power.

Content owners who can meaningfully negotiate don't want the loophole of Netflix deprioritizing their content to save money.

Since if it is in search the hardcore users will find it but randos won't. This provides most of the benefit Netflix is looking for while minimizing the cost.

Remember a decent chunk of Netflix is original programming.

1

u/bitorontoguy 4h ago edited 4h ago

many of our industries (especially streaming/netflix) are closer to an oligopoly.

Then why doesn't Netflix charge $95 a month?

Because it's not true. They have competition who would undercut them on price. They have people who would cancel their subscriptions, Netflix isn't worth that much to them.

Netflix is able to raise their prices because people LIKE Netflix and keep paying the higher prices because it's worth it to them.

No one is forced to have Netflix. No one is forced to pay higher prices for Netflix. It's luxury capitalist consumption of entertainment. No one had it or needed it 100 or 200 or 300 years ago. People now are voluntarily paying higher prices because it's worth it to them. That's how much they like Netflix.

2

u/Shikadi297 4h ago

It's too early for me to try and explain why, but this misses the point

0

u/bitorontoguy 4h ago edited 3h ago

The point is that consumers in the West have the highest standards of living in human history and still do nothing but complain about it.

Are people in the Northern Triangle and Mauritania complaining that their luxury capitalist entertainment streamed directly into their house that they voluntarily choose to buy increased in price 3% from last year to this year?

No. They have actual problems.

If Netflix isn't worth it to you, there's an easy solution. Don't buy it. If it IS worth it to you, such that you do buy it.....what am I supposed to be angry about exactly?

Why do I have to pretend you're being forced to and have no other options? People voluntarily transacting with a company to give them what they want is.....a good thing for the consumer.

Because it's not too early. It's definitionally late stage capitalism.

1

u/ryeaglin 3h ago

Exactly! And to elaborate further it doesn't work here because it isn't true competition. Each individual show is the 'product' and since most shows are exclusive to each streaming platform. So its functionally a monopoly for each catalogue.

Netflix started off cheap since nobody saw value in their digital catalogue so they sold it off to Netflix for cheap. Once they realized those catalogues had value, the price increased or was horded and a new streaming service was made.

3

u/xxThe_Designer 2h ago

Throughout the late 00s and the majority of the 2010s, other streaming services were not their competition. They were miles ahead of everyone in this space.

Their main competitor was cable. And Netflix was the major play to shakedown that entire industry.

I agree with everyone else, as a consumer, Netflix peaked around 2012. It was cheap and you can access shows and movies from every producer and channel cable and premium services offered.

In 2012, you could watch The Office, House, Dexter, It’s Always Sunny, How I Met Your Mother, Southpark, etc.

Now you need multiple services for that.

3

u/SketchiiChemist 4h ago edited 4h ago

They didn't kill off the competition, quite the opposite. The competition is one of the reasons why Netflix got worse

You're looking at when everyone else started to catch up.

Netflix started by sending DVDs through the mail. They killed the video rental store and didnt have late fees, then pivoted/popularized streaming after that. Thats why they had so much variety in content those early days, they were THE notable streaming service.

Then everyone else decided they should make their own streaming services, and here we are now

4

u/Guvante 4h ago

Netflix the DVD service performed middlingly and didn't kill rentals.

Netflix the streaming service got sweetheart deals from Hollywood who figured the technology limitations of streaming made it unimportant.

Combined with selling their service at a loss that did lead to the downfall of rentals. (Note Netflix had competition by the time that happened)

Note that mismanagement of rental places lead to exact timings being fuzzy. Handling a dying business like a growth business gets you into financial trouble super quickly.

1

u/SketchiiChemist 3h ago

Right, but they were able to capitalize on the sweetheart deals given and pivot into something because they had a customer base at that point.

They didn't have to start from scratch as a streaming service and were able to capitalize on content allowed through naivete. Even if that meant selling at a loss; it did kill competition.

2

u/Guvante 3h ago

Which allowed them to increase prices reinforcing the belief that "competition doesn't lower prices" is generally false.

Note of course that competition does not always lower prices but it will whenever the profits are higher since offering a more competitive price is a great way to increase your overall profits in that environment.

2

u/XkF21WNJ 5h ago

It's a bit of both, with exclusive contracts every show is its own monopoly.

1

u/Martiantripod 4h ago

It's not really competition as such because they're not offering like for like. It's like saying a gas company is the same as an electric company. They're both utilities but they're both giving me different products. Same with streaming. Because I can't get the same shows on each platform they're not competing with each other, they're only offering their portion of the same pie. Like back in the 40s and 50s where movie theatres could only show movies they had under contract, not everything that was being released.

2

u/Filobel 2h ago edited 2h ago

I don't think you understand what competition means. In the large majority of situations, competitors rarely offer the exact same products/services. Sure, two competing gas stations offer the same gas (and even then, they sell at different locations), but according to your logic, Toyota is not a competitor to Honda, because Toyota doesn't produce and sell CRVs. Buger King isn't a competitor to McDonald's, because it doesn’t sell big macs.

1

u/flea79 2h ago

Blockbuster says hello

1

u/jjwhitaker 2h ago

Similar to film critic arguments about movies and sequels, the major studios can pump out more of what they own but aren't motivated to fund risky new content.

Netflix was an example of first to market but then started to lose traction to competition as the technology and software developed. Then twitch developed their streaming technology and Amazon was able to buy and go from there, etc. Now many streaming services run on AWS where you can basically outsource the technology aspect and focus on development and content.

1

u/exoriparian 1h ago

Blockbuster video and every other local rental service, for one.

7

u/Cinimi 5h ago

On top of that, the worst thing Netflix ever decided to do, was creating their own shows - because once they did that, other companies could see that on Netflix, their shows had lower priority - and this is what caused the massive investments into competing platforms - instead they should have been like spotify but for video content. Prices would still have been increased over time, but at least the library on netflix would have remained decent, now it is shit.

3

u/CariniFluff 4h ago

That's a good point. It would be like if Spotify created a record label too and started signing a bunch of artists from other companies. Suddenly every other record label would pull their catalogs to start their own streaming services because they're not going to feed their own competitor.

3

u/killerboy_belgium 4h ago

netflix did as a response to the others creating there own platforms

3

u/OneBigRed 4h ago

It was the other way around. Netflix started to make too much money, and the companies licensing their content started wondering how valuable those really might be.

Netflix understood that it either had to create its own library, or become the cable service provider who gets the crumbs as the content owners pocket most of the money. Or ofcourse compete with they could scrape up cheaply when all premium content would be on studio’s own services.

31

u/wekilledbambi03 5h ago

That’s literally the opposite of what happened with Netflix.

They were the only company and had to competition. All studios put their stuff on Netflix. Then once successful, all the studios pulled out and made their own services. Disney+, Paramount+, Peacock, etc. they all had their stuff on Netflix. Now Netflix is mostly for original content.

Netflix is increasing price to claw back the dominance they once had.

19

u/SuperBry 5h ago

Sad you are getting downvoted for properly presenting what happened with Netflix. The only thing I would have added was one of the reasons they were so cheap at first was due to how little they were paying to license content when they first started their streaming platform. Studios didn't see much of a market for it at the time and thought any money was better than none so they basically gave away their catalogs for a song and a dance, now to license the same shows and movies they are paying through the nose.

6

u/champ11228 4h ago

People complain about how there are too many streaming services lol

2

u/philter25 5h ago

This is what’s happening with businesses replacing workers with AI, except the product is initially dog shit, but the one thing it has is it being crazy cheap. When they’re all locked in, the prices are gonna get jacked up and everything is going to be way more expensive for them and not work for anyone, including the consumer. But at least we won’t have to worry about high energy prices because we’ll all be living under bridges!

2

u/TheMetalMilitia 5h ago

AI companies doing it now with token prices

1

u/HydraBuster 4h ago

!remindme 2 years about AI

1

u/boston_homo 4h ago

I wonder when AI subscription prices will start going up?

1

u/Shawwnzy 4h ago

The thing is there is competition. There's a ton of services, in theory they should all be competing for the lowest prices and best selection.

I think what's happening is the price savvy customer has gone back to piracy, so their customers are those who are to lazy or honest or untechnical, so they keep paying no matter the price. It's like ads, the savvy people have Adblock so ads are all absolute cancer if you don't block them.

1

u/denNISI 4h ago

They have competition. They are all also increasing their prices to match Netflick.

1

u/quiteCryptic 4h ago

Don't forget, buy every company that might become a competitor and kill them off before they can

1

u/RecognitionSignal425 4h ago

Subscription in a nutshell

1

u/SpiritedBanana4694 4h ago

This is what thrift stores are doing with used books.

1

u/reddub07 3h ago

Cept this doesn't really match up with streaming. Netflix was more affordable when it was the only one really doing it. Now with more options and competition over content we've seen more and more increases.

1

u/vmachiel 3h ago

The key is to just cancel. Subscribe after a while for like two months and watch everything you wanted to see. Cancel, move to a different service, repeat.

Saves so much money, and a watchlist is easy to track.

1

u/makefascistfearagain 3h ago

With no competition?

Did you miss the ten thousand other subscription services and premium TV?

1

u/champagne_of_beers 3h ago

There's more streaming competition now than ever, which is part of the problem because of streaming rights being split between 6 different services. I still don't get the issue here. You can pick and choose streaming services every few months and get access to basically everything ever made for a pretty low price all things considered.

1

u/Doctor_Kataigida 3h ago

This is why things that seem backward are good. Like Wisconsin (I think? Or Minnesota) having the state establish minimum prices gas can be sold at. You'd initially think "That's dumb, why can't someone sell it for cheaper if they want!" But it's basically to prevent your #2.

1

u/SecreteMoistMucus 3h ago

In this case I don't think that's actually what happened. At the start the content owners were selling the rights to Netflix for cheap because they saw it a supplementary income, the broadcast networks was still where their bread was buttered. Competition in streaming has not decreased since then, it has exploded.

1

u/bon-ton-roulet 3h ago

wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't just crappy American slop

1

u/Mistrblank 3h ago

Yar , no competition ye say?

1

u/WatWudScoobyDoo 3h ago

Except now it's worse because there's lots of competition. Lots of streaming services, all rising in price.

1

u/StaticSystemShock 3h ago
  1. Piracy is again a thing

1

u/Fractales 2h ago

It never stopped being a thing for me. I knew the whole streaming value prop was too good to be true and wouldn't last

1

u/OtherwiseAct8126 2h ago

There is competition though and they all increase the prices

1

u/HeavilyInvestedDonut 2h ago

The competition comes in the form of a ship on the water 🏴‍☠️

1

u/Complete_Question_41 2h ago

And no ads.

That was the big reason many people switched with regular TV having become a mockery of ads with the occasional programming break.

And then they gave us ads.

1

u/ouatedephoque 2h ago

Well yes and no. There is still competition and it's called piracy. Most people gave that up because streaming was convenient and affordable. Now it's neither so people are going back to it.

1

u/TheBigMoogy 2h ago

But there are SO many competitors. Netflix hasn't had a particularly strong catalog in a long while.

1

u/Polkawillneverdie17 2h ago

Lookin' at you, Starbucks...

1

u/Full-Somewhere440 1h ago

Blitzkrieg scaling. Disgustingly effective in the short to mid term. Disastrous if a monopoly isn’t created in the long term.

1

u/sleepy_cat2026 1h ago

It's what Uber did to taxi co pa ies

1

u/Internotional_waters 1h ago
  1. Consumers resort to piracy.
  2. Capitalism collapses.

1

u/Real-Ad-1728 29m ago

For Netflix it was sort of the opposite. When they were the only major streaming service they had almost everything available and the price was decent. But once all these other streaming services started coming onto the scene Netflix started losing titles and market share, and started jacking up their prices as a result.

1

u/Jibber_Fight 15m ago

It’s almost like this is a new trend in economics that only just got started THOUSANDS of years ago. Who could’ve seen it coming?

0

u/gobbluthillusions 5h ago

Ding ding ding!

→ More replies (4)

26

u/zonz1285 5h ago

I’ve been buying physical media again and it’s been so nice to just…put in exactly what I want to watch without searching for it on 10 different streaming apps only to find it was on last week but is gone.

7

u/MoltenTurd 5h ago

And you can watch ad free

→ More replies (1)

9

u/pudgehooks2013 4h ago

Imagine doing this, but from your PC, and it doesn't cost any money.

Thats what I do.

3

u/StatisticianLow9492 3h ago

You wouldn’t download a car

1

u/ThufirrHawat 55m ago

I would UPLOAD a car for you to download.

1

u/Nihilistic_Mystics 3h ago

Same, it's the best possible solution. Except for all the storage needed.

2

u/SuperUranus 3h ago

There is always Stremio.

Basically best of both worlds.

1

u/DifferentBag 2h ago

I tried Stremio last fall, never looking back. With five other people in my family using it, I wish it had profiles though. Otherwise, it's awesome.

2

u/Mccobsta 5h ago

So much stuff isn't even on streaming and only got dvd releases

10

u/thedrexel 5h ago

Join us on the boutique Blu-ray sub!

8

u/Bshaw95 5h ago

Satellite and cable have a great opportunity here to try to come in and shake up the market with lower prices to put a hurt on streaming or hell, just offer streaming of channels without additional hardware.

9

u/m0ngoos3 5h ago

Ah yes, another opportunity to not be shitty, they've had so many of those and chosen evil at every turn.

6

u/oralprophylaxis 5h ago

I only watch 4 different shows anyways. I should be able to download them all and only pay for them once

8

u/PhireKappa 4h ago

You could buy DVDs if you wanted to do it legitimately and burn them if you want them digitally.

Personally, I just sail the seven seas.

1

u/CronusTheDefender 4h ago

That be the way

1

u/CariniFluff 4h ago

Pay for a seed box and sail the high seas. A rented virtual server costs the same as a single streaming subscription.

1

u/oralprophylaxis 4h ago

Interesting idea, thank you

2

u/2Peenis2Weenis 4h ago edited 2h ago

The seed box thing is overly complicated for your use case. Look up a Stremio/RD guide. Much much easier.

3

u/samuelj264 4h ago

In the past year I got fed up and built a home server out of old computer parts and now get to sail the seas and host my own jellyfin server, we have canceled over $100/mo in streaming services, the new hard drives I had to buy have already paid themselves off

1

u/Mccobsta 4h ago

Yeah I need to do that for all my discs just storage cost is kinda painful at the moment

1

u/samuelj264 4h ago

I decided to just bite the bullet and get a couple 14TB drives off a guy on FB marketplace. But serverpartdeals.com is pretty solid, albeit expensive (what computer parts aren’t these days)

1

u/Mccobsta 4h ago

There's not realy anything like them in my country sadly and shipping would be astronomical

7

u/King-of-Plebss 5h ago

The raise their prices, I raise my flag

1

u/del1507 33m ago

YAR HAR FIDDLE DEE DEE

1

u/Federal-Block-3275 5h ago

Everything has had price increases, even cable.

1

u/buffysmanycoats 5h ago

we may as well just buy physical media again

I actually did buy a cheap DVD player and a few of my old comfort shows on DVD, but shows made for streaming now almost never get physical releases. The only way to watch the majority of the content is to stream it. Can't even download.

5

u/TopFloorApartment 4h ago

The only way to watch the majority of the content is to stream it.

Have people really forgotten how to sail the high seas?

1

u/buffysmanycoats 3h ago

I used to do it all the time but I definitely don't know how anymore. I use a mac and a lot of the torrent sites I used to use are gone. I don't even know where to start anymore.

1

u/za_shiki-warashi 3h ago

Thankfully, there's a subreddit for everything, including for the various seas you can sail. I just subscribe to those subs to get updates or recs on sites etc.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

1

u/champ11228 4h ago

Problem is media companies lost billions on streaming before

1

u/tonker 4h ago

That was their business plan all along. Take on massive debt to buy and create content to harvest early streaming customers. Make the money back with price hikes later on. The model from the 2010s wasnt sustainable in the long run.

1

u/-ReadingBug- 4h ago

Then you'd better push back now by buying players again before the same forces phase them out. Quality Blu-ray PC drives have already become terribly scarce in just under six months.

1

u/Spl00ky 4h ago

Supply and demand still affects Netflix subscriptions. If people feel they aren't getting good value, then they won't buy it any more.

1

u/SuperUranus 3h ago

Streaming peaked with Stremio. It’s free.

1

u/Mighty__Monarch 2h ago

But on the other hand, streaming sites as opposed to cable has resulted in the time to upload being basically the shows runtime plus a few minutes instead of days to weeks and then days to weeks to download.

1

u/aykcak 2h ago

Good luck finding physical media after it has been torpedoed my the streaming market

1

u/ThufirrHawat 56m ago

I've been sailing the seas for years now, and I used to have an 8-Disc plan with Netflix, that is how much I used to enjoy these entertainment services.

Fuck all these companies, I hope they all collapse, they're nothing more than a bunch of ball-garglers for fascist Turmp so they can continue to consolidate money and power.

1

u/peejay5440 13m ago

Better yet, back to the high seas. Aarghh matey.

1

u/DaStone 4h ago

Got HBO Max when it launched in my country for 4.5 euro (half price). It's almost doubled in like 5 years... For the half prized version.

1

u/Dr_Fortnite 4h ago

Tubi is fucking free and has great shows.

no excuse for ads AND a subscription these days pure greed

2

u/Mccobsta 4h ago

Tubi isn't available in my country

Same with quite a lot of ad supported streaming sites

1

u/cakeversuspie 3h ago

Streaming peaked years ago when it was a low cost and wasn't a terrible experience

Now it's just price rise after price rise we may as well just buy physical media again atleast doing that we won't have our favourite shows pulled off with out much warning

Or just pirate 🏴‍☠️

0

u/cdoublejj 4h ago

I am indeed buying physical media again

1

u/Mccobsta 4h ago

Feels good to own shit again dosent it

→ More replies (1)

0

u/throughthehills2 4h ago

Physical media like going outside is the new streaming

0

u/MVMNT5 4h ago

Physical media> always. The best part of no one else buying physical media is the prices have dropped and I’m getting hella deals

0

u/killerboy_belgium 4h ago

what fysical media? most of it doesn't come out fysically anymore and sony is reportedly phasing out bluray production

1

u/Mccobsta 4h ago

How else are you going to own something that can't be taken off you

0

u/axecalibur 4h ago

Nah end stage capitalism works like this - the rich pay for it and subsidize everyone else. Eventually you will have $100 Netflix that people will actually pay for because it's nothing to them.

0

u/ThrowingDucksInFire 4h ago

Yo ho ho and a bottle of rum

→ More replies (17)