Aussies have spoken, and the results are not looking good for Netflix. A new report reveals why users are turning to streaming competitors.

200,000 users abandon Netflix after crackdown backfires::Aussies have spoken, and the results are not looking good for Netflix. A new report reveals why users are turning to streaming competitors.

  • Puzzle_Sluts_4Ever@lemmy.worldEnglish
    52·
    1 year ago

    Didn’t the analysis of europe and the US show an increase in subscriptions?

    Also:

    Telsyte notes there is also resistance to the new Netflix ad supported model, and concerns amongst consumers over the increase in cost of living. As living expenses balloon, the majority of video-on-demand users have accepted that streaming fees will too, according to Telsyte.

    Is almost definitely what it was. I know I cancelled my netflix a few years back because the price of everything kept going up. Now I get a month when there is sufficient new content to watch and then cancel it again.

    Which also aligns with

    That could signal comfort with a price increase. Half of those surveyed called subscription services ‘vital’ to meeting their entertainment needs. And they are budgeting accordingly. Telsyte says that on average, Aussies are now willing to allocate $36 per month to streaming services.

    • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.worldEnglish
      62·
      1 year ago

      I’d be willing to allocate $100 a month for life, if I could watch all content I want instantly. Instead they all scrambled to create multiple competing services with different UI’s, and often none of them even host the shit I want to watch, completely remove, or replace originals with modified “rewritten history” versions anyway.

      Instead they get nothing from me and I sail the high seas, paying the same amount of money to computer hardware manufacturers and other internet services. If the majority did the same, they’d change their business models, but consumers are idiots.

      • Puzzle_Sluts_4Ever@lemmy.worldEnglish
        33·
        1 year ago

        I mean, what you are asking for is:

        1. A monopoly
        2. Basically Cable TV with an on demand catalog? Which has existed for at least a decade, if not two or three, at this point?
        • abhibeckert@lemmy.worldEnglish
          11·
          1 year ago

          No - what they’re asking for is how it already works with music streaming services. Where there’s no monopoly.

          You can choose basically any streaming service and you get basically every recording ever published.

          • Puzzle_Sluts_4Ever@lemmy.worldEnglish
            11·
            1 year ago

            Music streaming services largely “work” because of how centralized all the record labels are. It is not a true monopoly but it has almost all of the same downsides. Independent artists/“smaller labels” more or less have to work tooth and nail to get themselves added to the various catalogs… often with considerably worse royalties.

            Spend some time researching “spotify alternatives”. Spotify, Apple, and Youtube all basically have the same catalog because they are the big three. There are slight differences, but none that most people care about. But once you start looking at that french service people like or other smaller services, you have MASSIVE gaps in the catalog.

            Which… is not too dissimilar from netflix/hulu/whatever. Those have more “exclusives” but you still have those bread and butter shows and movies that everyone has in their catalog. Or even in the video game space where gamepass/playstation plus are pretty similar.

    • just_change_it@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      1 year ago

      The ad supported bullshit: isn’t this the majority of new subs for netflix and those companies who have ad supported tiers?