←back to thread

1525 points saeedesmaili | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.423s | source
Show context
dswalter ◴[] No.43654125[source]
There's a fundamental reality that shapes both Netflix and Spotify's trajectory: content licensing. 2012 Netflix had access to vastly more of everyone else's library, so it was closer to an indexed search of what was available that one could watch and then getting that video onto your screen. Over time, other companies understood that they were underpricing their content and Netflix was reaping the benefits. Once external forces adjusted, the TV/film bidding wars began. Today, netflix doesn't have nearly as much content as they used to have.

That risk (losing all content and facing extinction) is what pushed Netflix in the direction of being a content-producer, rather than a content aggregator. I agree with everyone's points on the influence of the median user in diluting the quality of the content Netflix produces, but that's not the only forced that pushed us here. Spotify faced a similar crossroads and decided to broaden beyond music once they started losing bidding wars for licensing.

Being a faster horse wasn't an option available to either Netflix or Spotify; there is no path for a 'better 2012 version of netflix or spotify' in 2025. They each had to change species or die, and they chose to keep living.

replies(4): >>43654287 #>>43654529 #>>43655377 #>>43658586 #
1. crote ◴[] No.43658586[source]
> They each had to change species or die, and they chose to keep living.

Did they, though? 2025 Netflix is extremely close to having a worse UX than piracy, and it's already far more expensive. Are people going to pay a fortune for Netflix when their handy nephew can hook them up to his far superior Jellyfin instance for a sixpack of beer?

It's a tragedy of the commons, really. The whole value is in having a complete catalogue available for the casual viewer, and making $10-$20 from someone wanting to watch a random decade-old movie twice a month or so. Break up that catalogue into twenty different services each charging $15, and that same casual viewer isn't going to subscribe to a single one of them.

If the streaming industry doesn't get its shit together they are either going to lose viewers to piracy, or to a completely different medium.

replies(1): >>43660967 #
2. kowbell ◴[] No.43660967[source]
You are overestimating how many people have access to a piracy nephew by a very, very large margin. And even if we all knew a privacy nephew, they're very quickly going to stop responding to incessant requests for more content. And they won't be available 24/7.