I just pay Netflix because of guilty conscience. There was nothing interesting to watch in the last months.
this post was submitted on 19 May 2024
587 points (98.2% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
54772 readers
222 users here now
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Cable TV exists
Customers hate it and people start pirating
Netflix comes around, other streaming services
People happy, piracy goes down
Streaming services go back to the way cable was, increased prices, reduced content, started bundling shit you don't want.
Customers start pirating again
Surprised Pikachu face
Maybe if we put ads in and take away the ability to download content foe offline use?
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Customers will notice the change on their next bill. Netflix has quietly put up its prices across each subscription tier in Australia.
~~Why is this even legal, oh who am I kidding lobbying most likely.~~ They began notifying people on May 13. Thanks for the correction @[email protected].
They get 30 days notice of the price increase. That's pretty reasonable and in compliance with the law, I would assume.
Now I remember why I don't pay attention to 7 news. This article is an ad in itself.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Dear Netflix, I've been a loyal customer since 2013. I've been perfectly happy with our arrangement. YOU are the one terminating our contract, not me. It seems you'd prefer to get rid of a happy, paying customer in the hopes you can somehow persuade them to embrace a higher cost or shittier experience (ads). That's a bold move Cotton. Buh-bye dons pirate hat
YARR MATEYS
thing is, most of us should of known, they pulled this same crap back when they tried forcing everyone to drop the physical discs and switch to streaming only …
AOL still has 1.5 million active monthly subscribers. People forget to cancel subscriptions all the time.
Subscriptions are a great way to sell a service to someone who isn't using it, and when they want to cancel it getting the spent money on something never used is generally impossible.
IMO for something like a streaming service... if you don't stream a minute of video in a month you shouldn't have to pay anything.
I despise ads. I can't even bring myself to watch Netflix or Amazon Prime. If there is advertising, it ain't worth it, no matter how cheap.
There's not enough of us, but I still don't care. I refuse to pay to watch ads. Also, I had Prime and they wouldn't let me watch high def with firefox on Linux, so even though I paid for it, I had to hit the high seas to watch content in high def.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
they first succeeded in curbing piracy before the moved to ruining the value of their offerings.
i dont think they've lost touch, they've never been in touch. this behavior is apparently what produces the biggest profits for the next quarter, so they'll do it until they drive the platform into the ground, then just start another one and repeat
load more comments
(1 replies)
Because i aint spending 3 figures a month on 5+ different sports streaming services to follow one team. Simple.
The only thing that keeps me with subscriptions is the cartoons my daughter watches, because they are hard to find dubbed in my language (Portuguese). It's still more convenient to subscribe than try to find the dubbed cartoons online. For everything I watch I use my arr stack.
There are still plenty of good deals in streaming if you have shifted to on-demand. If you want live TV or sports, they're out to gouge the fuck out of you. Luckily my Wife came around to on-demand only and an antenna. Of course, they're trying hard to take away the antenna option from everyone with ATSC 3.0.
Depending on her age of course... But you can find SRT (subtitle) files for literally almost everything, often in dozens of languages. They're super tiny too since it's basically just a txt file
Sounds like your daughter is at just the right age to start learning a new language? (Half joking) 
The language of Arrrrrr? 😁
That's the best approach IMO but till she can watch a cartoon and understand it may be take a while..so in the mean time I'm kinda tied to streaming.
I bet watching them in English with Portuguese subtitles would prob be a great way for a kid to learn English on the sly
Definitely worked for me.
It seems very common among millennials and Gen Z.
It's been common for decades - I firs learned of it in the 80's.
The funny bit to me is how obvious they are about restructuring their business model. Netflix clearly wants a greater proportion of their revenue to come from advertisers, so they're charging exorbitant prices for the 4K and, in particular, standard plan while keeping the "ad-supported" plan fairly low. They were probably seeing waves of short-term subscribers in response to big releases and are trying to bait those people into staying subscribed permanently while also milking then through advertisements. I wouldn't be surprised if the standard plan is removed at some point because it's such bad value now.
Edit: I see now the article is about Australia. And the price is higher, but converting to USD the new price is still less than US $15.49 which I feel is fair. It costs me about $13.50/month in electricity for plex.
How is the standard plan a bad value? It's $15.49 for 1080p no ads. I dropped 4k a while ago because they went stupid on the price, and I will never use ad supported. If they made the ad tier free, I'd still pay the $15.49/month. Standard plan hasn't been hit with the last several price increases, which is why I still think it's a good value, and why I'm still subscribed.
I'm sure with the way things are going Netflix will end up pushing me away eventually, but they haven't yet. Dropping standard would cause me to cancel. I also have the Disney/Hulu bundle for $20 and plex for anything else. I could easily get anything on Netflix on plex.
How is the standard plan a bad value?
Because of how it is priced relative to the other tiers. It is significantly closer in price to the highest tier ($7 gap) despite being almost identical to the lowest tier in terms of features ($11 gap). The only meaningful difference is ads. It's very clear that Netflix is trying to price out customers who are unwilling or uninterested in paying for all the features limited to the highest tier (4K, double the simultaneous streams, better audio, etc) and force them on to the cheaper, ad-supported plan instead because they believe they can make more money this way.
Additionally, the middle tier is priced closer to the highest tier to imply that the highest tier is great value (because it has so many extra features for a smaller price increase than between the lowest tier and the middle tier). This is a classic retail strategy designed to trick consumers into spending more money than they originally needed or wanted to because "it's better value". Consumers often conflate "better value" with "saving money", even though they are doing the complete opposite when they pay $7 more for features they didn't initially care about at all.
There is a pretty big gap between ad supported and standard. Wonder if ads actually makes up for the difference or if it's just under priced to push people towards it. But seeing as ads are like cancer to me I don't even consider that tier as existing. So 15.49 1080p 2 screen, or 22.49 I think for 4k 4 screens. I sit far enough away that I don't notice the benefits of 4k and don't need the extra screens so I just judge the value from the content and price. Honestly I'd rather just have everything on plex instead of jumping between services, but some stuff that family watches is hard to find. Sonarr has probably 100+ episodes of reality TV crap that won't download as no seeders.
Wonder if ads actually makes up for the difference or if it’s just under priced to push people towards it.
The ads are almost certainly making up the difference and then some, otherwise I don't see why Netflix would pursue that strategy at all. The only other theory I can think of is that people are less likely to initially cancel an $8 monthly subscription than a $19 subscription, and are therefore more likely to forget to cancel it in the future.
Like the rest of the tech industry, Netflix is way past the point of making a loss just to drive growth and is now obsessed with driving maximum profits because their shareholders are demanding (or are owed) returns on the big investments they made in a different financial climate years ago. That's why Netflix is introducing ads, pushing up prices and cracking down on shared subscriptions (and now even a one-off payment to "add" an account member from outside of your household) and cancelling projects with real artistic merit at short notice when they don't show immediate signs of becoming the next massive hit. It's all about making as much money as possible now. We are no longer in the age of focusing on providing a reasonably priced and objectively good service and that will drive people back to piracy, just as it has done previously.
Wonder if ads actually makes up for the difference or if it’s just under priced to push people towards it.
I reckon you guys are on the right track with your comments. Something to add in relation to why streaming services are introducing an ad tier. Introducing adverts introduces variable pricing for the streaming services. Meaning they can earn the same base rate, but for say the next season of Bridgerton, or one of their other really popular shows they can make a kind of 'super profit' by selling the ad space on top of their base rate per subscriber account.
The studio cash grab explosion of streaming services is simply too inconvenient.
Subbing to everything you want to watch would still be cheaper than renting it all before streaming.
But Netflix has changed the value proposition and the stuidios are slitting their own throats trying to catch up.
I accidentally pirate crap I have legitimate access to because I can't be bothered to figure out which damn platform its on. I have access to quite a few through work due to my industry at no out of pocket costs.
The times I try to actually search for something, it'll be listed on multiple platforms but 0 to 1 of those platforms will actually have what I'm looking for included with the subscription forcing me to manually check each one.
It is easier to just pirate.
Rotten Tomatoes will usually say where it's streaming. Or a quick Google search of "(TV show) where streaming" will get you there. At least it used to, Google is shit these days so who knows.
That info can go stale quickly as content licensing changes. I've ran into that plenty.
Justwatch.com is my go to
Cerement linked it in their comment
JustWatch also has direct links to IMBD in their descriptions.
Yes. I use it as my first step for sailing. See if it’s on a service I have then grab the imdb identifier if it’s not. Very handy if you sail old school manually like I do.
Depends on the country though as well. Its probably pretty easy to figure out for big ones like the USA, but in smaller countries its often a mess...
Your case would apply for the legitimate use of streamio, where you can log into all the services and you can watch whatever through that service's credentials.
load more comments
(2 replies)
when you need the modern equivalent of TV Guide just to find a show …
load more comments
(2 replies)
very much a convenience factor – Apple broke the MP3 sharing scene with the simplicity (at the time) of iTunes – video streaming started out simple but now it’s turned into cable TV, trying to find out which service is streaming a particular show, if it’s region-locked, or gated behind a premium upgrade, or just been dropped completely, or two services are still arguing over who gets the rights, or find out all the seasons are on one service except one season is on another service …
Was iTunes popular outside of the US? Everyone I know hated they intrusive software and DRM that prevented you from playing the songs elsewhere. Don't think I know a single person who actually purchased music there.
I did, back in... 2005-6? Somewhere around there. I'm from the US, so the first part of your comment applies to me, but at the time iTunes let you put music from the CDs you owned into your collection, and made it very easy to load music onto an iPod. I was 16, with some of my first disposable income from my first job. Couldn't get music easily from anything but CDs or iTunes (Or Kazaa/Limewire, but that's a different story) at the time so it just made sense. Around the time I realized I was locked into the platform by my purchases I stopped buying there and started streaming or buying CDs again.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Happens here in Germany too. We were not informed via mail but via a message when we started the app on the TV (not even on a phone). Since there are two other people on that account I decided to not just cancel but talk with both of them. We moved one tier down.. Yet.
Guys running the one platform be like "they're pirating our show," other guy hosting a different platform be like "no, in this region it's us hosting that show so it's us they're pirating from," third guy hosting another platform be like "next month it's our platform that'll be hosting it so it'll be us they're pirating from", fourth guy hosting another platform be like "we're the guys authorized to actually be selling that show in this region at this time, so they're also pirating from us", fifth guy also hosting another platform be like "wait, they're also pirating this show only we're authorized to stream but we don't offer our service in that country"
Pirate be like "I host everything"
(Not justifying it, just saying Gabe was right)
load more comments
(1 replies)