← Back to context

Comment by ComputerGuru

6 hours ago

They might make less money with one super subscription than two separate ones.

Everything about these big moves in the streaming space is basically to re-create the "good old days" of cable subscriptions and pay-per-view.

I think we can expect HBO streaming to continue as a premium subscription for movies and high-production-value shows. That would let everything else to land on Netflix with no conflict.

I can imagine an internal analysis that says:

Move show X, Y, and Z from Netflix to HBO Max because those profiles are likely to add the second subscription.

---

Piracy seems like the only thing that keeps prices/practices in check.

Yeah, I can easily see something like 2 separate at $20/month vs 1 super at $35/month (make-believe figures).

Assuming all WB and Netflix customers move to the super platform, that's a loss for Netflix (assuming the super platform doesn't significantly reduce their costs).

And the $35 might be more than some set of current Netflix subscribers want to pay, so they drop the service, so an even bigger potential loss.

Certainly, I have no desire to subsidize sports fans via a higher Netflix super package.

  • We're reinventing cable!

    • The irony is that a lot of people complained loudly about the cable bundle then complained loudly about streaming service fragmentation even when it at least offered a choice to cut their monthly bill.

      4 replies →

    • Cable failed at millennial+ user experience.

      Many on-demand viewing experiences still play ads through atrocious “cable box apps.”

      Entrenched cable bureaucracy disrupted by app culture. For the better.

      Netflix also will some day be disrupted, as the wheel turns.

      2 replies →