Movies and shows that are being removed from streaming services ARE still available, but, of course, in an unofficial, not-legal manner (they’re on torrent sites, and probably some dark web locations).
> On May 22, 2023, at 6:35 PM, PGage <pga...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Matt Belloni at Puck News has a story out that, while it doesn’t exactly > break new ground, crystallizes in a dramatic way what is happening in > television right now. As he puts it, “the Great Netflix Correction has > officially become the Great Streaming Purge.” > > He means that the draconian cuts made infamous by Zas at WBD are now becoming > the norm in the industry. Iger at Disney is determined to cut $3 Billion this > year. Streamers will still be spending a lot of money on production of > course, but more and more focused on content that is watched by significant > fractions, and that drive sign-ups and limit churn. > > One of the things this means is a return to the television content lifespan > that Boomers grew up with, but will feel new and intolerable to most everyone > younger: most shows and films will (if lucky) live long enough to be enjoyed > once, maybe twice, and then disappear, often for good, not living on > infinitely on VHS, DVD or evergreen streams. > > What I did not really understand until now (even though WBD kept claiming it, > but they are hard to believe) is that available content in a streaming > library is not cost-neutral to the streamer. I had assumed that if nobody is > watching a bad film that is available on Disney+, it does not cost Disney > anything (aside from original cost to make it or purchase it). But that’s not > true. Apparently, just making a film or show available for streaming incurs a > significant licensing fee cost. We need to think of every show and film on a > Streamer’s available archive as if it were actually being exhibited or shown > on a TV channel, (I.e. there are as many channels exhibiting licensed content > as there are individual films or shows in a Streamers archive) and that means > you have to pay the owner of the content their fee, whether it is being > watched by millions or by no one. > > Streamers original strategy was to have so much content always available that > it drive subscription sign-ups and kept subscribers paying every month. That > worked for a while, especially for Netflix. But not anymore. Mist subscribers > will not subscribe or stick around just because they can always find > something to watch; they come for what they want, then leave and go some > place else. Now all that Un or under-watched content is all cost and no > benefit, and Streamers are wanting to eliminate them. > > Belloni notes that residual payments to writers and actors make up a very > small slice of the cost to streamers, and are not really a factor in the > Purge (so go ahead and increase their residuals). > -- > Sent from Gmail Mobile > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TVorNotTV" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > <mailto:tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkYK3pTXpv69ih5XggjZs5fGbYmK_cyJ1Bo54cW6SucKgqw%40mail.gmail.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkYK3pTXpv69ih5XggjZs5fGbYmK_cyJ1Bo54cW6SucKgqw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/83234D12-CE01-467A-A701-E5B7457C4B76%40ellwanger.tv.
