Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
This is all just a prelude - the strike(s) will sort this all out. Netflix will have to put out real viewership numbers so there is transparency on what content creators are due.
 
I believe Apple are making the Visio Pro primarily to make more money; it’s a new market that Apple are hoping contains a lot of money and growth. If there’s a side benefit that improves someone’s life or make something easier for someone, that is a side-benefit, not the primary purpose.

For example, if by adding new accessibility features Apple attracts more consumers to buy their devices and thus make more money, you can bet they will. Apple wins by making more money, the consumers who need those additional accessibility options win by having them.

If making iMessage cross-platform would attract more consumers to buy their devices and thus make Apple more money, you can bet that they will. If by making iMessage cross-platform it would discourage people from switching to an Apple device and thus not them more money, you can bet that they will not do it.

Beyond that I have no idea what you are trying to say.
Don't play dumb with me. You know exactly what I am trying to say but you wont say it because you do not want to be seen as being a hypocrite.
 
1. It’s really weird how much you’re rooting for Netflix but I hope you get picked or whatever.
2. Why did you share a random other users post screenshot like you’re quoting the person you’re responding to? They didn’t write that.

Were you really paying for prime just for the tv shows?

Apple includes the cost of iCloud storage in the breakdown of how much the iPhone costs and what they consider to be “profit” from each sale. So no, it isn’t “free.” We are literally paying them for it.
yeah i did pay prime for few shows as well. I don't use Amazon for shopping FYI
 
  • Like
Reactions: missingar
It's $19 a month people. I spend twice that much on a rib dinner and beer twice a week. It's kinda amazing how people consider $19 for a good meal at a restaurant is fine, but then raise hell over paying that much for a huge amount of content over the course of a month.
Good for you, do you want a cookie or a pat on the back? $19 a month is a lot of money for some people. They might be willing to pay $9/month, but not $19, because they may value an actual treat such as a good meal at a restaurant more. If they have to decide between the two, they'd go with the second. Here's the secret: you're not using even a fraction of that 'huge amount of content'. Yet, you're paying for it.

We just cancelled a bunch of streaming subscriptions. True, each of them may have been less than $10, but it adds up quickly, and we had to cut our expenses because... inflation. If the Netflix crackdown reaches us (sharing a multiple screen subscription with parents who live one town over, including dad who travels a lot for work), I can guarantee you Netflix will not gain two new subscribers, because the parents just aren't using it that much; they can think of a million better use cases for those $10-$20.

The idea that "household" is tied to a specific physical location is extremely outdated.
 
Good for you, do you want a cookie or a pat on the back? $19 a month is a lot of money for some people. They might be willing to pay $9/month, but not $19, because they may value an actual treat such as a good meal at a restaurant more. If they have to decide between the two, they'd go with the second. Here's the secret: you're not using even a fraction of that 'huge amount of content'. Yet, you're paying for it.

We just cancelled a bunch of streaming subscriptions. True, each of them may have been less than $10, but it adds up quickly, and we had to cut our expenses because... inflation. If the Netflix crackdown reaches us (sharing a multiple screen subscription with parents who live one town over, including dad who travels a lot for work), I can guarantee you Netflix will not gain two new subscribers, because the parents just aren't using it that much; they can think of a million better use cases for those $10-$20.

The idea that "household" is tied to a specific physical location is extremely outdated.

Well If product is affordable at 9 but not 19 is probably a customer that is not worth capturing. People blow 6 dollars a day on coffee beans with water at Starbucks, those will end up signing up once the password sharing is over. because 19 dollars a month is like a little over 3 cups of coffee cost.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: iOS Geek
Well If product is affordable at 9 but not 19 is probably a customer that is not worth capturing. People blow 6 dollars a day on coffee beans with water at Starbucks, those will end up signing up once the password sharing is over. because 19 dollars a month is like a little over 3 cups of coffee cost.

That is such a common misconception. Yeah, those $19 may be "a little over 3 cups of coffee". What you're missing is that those would be in addition. Not everyone is getting a Starbucks every day; there are indeed those who get three a month as a treat for themselves. Never judge someone based on how they spent their money when not knowing anything about their lives.

Many people who could afford their own subscription probably already had them. Not everyone who benefited from password sharing was doing so to be cheap; some literally just couldn't or wouldn't afford it separately and have different priorities in their lives.
 
  • Like
Reactions: missingar
I believe the systems and processes in place that afford these companies the opportunity to be that successful should be sharing more of their success with the wider public. Sharing the success more broadly with just the employees would be a good start, but I think the benefits should be seen by the wider population.
Companies become successful by offering goods that people find valuable. Yeah, cronyism exists and shady stuff happens, but in general a company can only stay afloat if people find it worthwhile, expressed by giving their money to the business. It’s about mutual benefit. It’s literally what socialists claim to want: people being forced to do things for others. I can’t make a living if I don’t prove to others that my efforts will benefit them.

Systems and process? More like, people just doing things. People deciding to do things, to make money.

Benefits should be seen more widely? What does that even mean? Government employees get to give their buddies tax dollars? To think government is anymore virtuous, by nature, than a private business is just absolute silliness. Why would you think an institution, government, with the closest thing to absolute power, would be more restrained than a single company that will cease to exist if they annoy people too much?

It’s so interesting that people are so upset by private companies making money.
 
I would still wait to give it time. Their numbers may have gone up, but I do think at least some of it is fluff. Think about how many countries have various promotions to start the new account 1 month free maybe even 2 or possibly also a cheaper first couple of months and how many people may cancel when they are now paying full price. I don't know of course how many people this equates to, but I would wait until next quarter and see what the continued subscriber count it.

I know I do the same thing with audible. I cancel my subscription then after a while I get a promotional email where I can have a month or whatever for like $3 with a credit for a book and I do it get the book and cancel again. You can also look at how many people have Apple TV+ due to all the free months with purchase of a new product and Apple probably gives so many months free in the off chance that you forget to cancel because you have what like 6 or 3 months to cancel I don't remember what it is at now
 
Well If product is affordable at 9 but not 19 is probably a customer that is not worth capturing. People blow 6 dollars a day on coffee beans with water at Starbucks, those will end up signing up once the password sharing is over. because 19 dollars a month is like a little over 3 cups of coffee cost.
For those of us who live in metro areas where rent is $2400 a month on average for a 1br apartment an hour away from work, who make all our own meals & coffee, and have no streaming services so we can afford to eat, the $6 coffee metaphor is completely irrelevant. I'd consider paying Netflix $8.99 a month but i'm not paying them almost $20. That's food for a few days.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iOS Geek and Ankaa
And what might those "easy ways" be?

I haven't tried, but according to Netflix, VPN doesn't work because your account is tied to your physical address.
If you have a decent router you just use a VPN to route traffic through your house. It's pretty easy and built into a number of consumer/prosumer routers. I do this for some other things but we just decided to cancel it all together. I prefer other services and not worth playing games with Netflix for the number of screens for 4k and price increases. It is just going to get worse as they try to squeeze more money out of people. At some point it is just not worth it.
 
So 100M were sharing, and 6M signed up after the crackdown. So isn't the news that Netflix lost 94M watchers?
Maybe so, but why does that matter?
Most of them were casual watchers who might use NFLX once a month; and even if they were watching NFLX 24/7, NFLX doesn't generate revenue (or anything else of value) by simple "watching".

Now, NFLX may, at some point, create a companion free ad-supported site, like Freevee for AMZ. Such a site has value both as a way to suck in paying users (Freevee is currently showing Wheel of Time S1 free, presumably hoping people will subscribe to Prime once S2 drops) and for ad revenue. And when you have such a site, raw viewer number is of interest. But NFLX is not at that point.
(My guess is that they are watching how this churn plays out. What fraction of viewers are somewhat insensitive to both stream quality and timeliness? There is probably scope for capturing some of these via a free NFLX service that shows NFLX content that's from more than 3 years ago, or whatever; but you want to get the details correct. AND you probably don't want to launch until after the current strikes are over and you can have some confidence in the cost landscape for the next ten years or so...)
 
So 100M were sharing, and 6M signed up after the crackdown. So isn't the news that Netflix lost 94M watchers?
No because bandwidth costs aren't free. Sure Netflix has some very clever technology to get the content as close to the end user as possible, but those development costs aren't free either.
 
For those of us who live in metro areas where rent is $2400 a month on average for a 1br apartment an hour away from work, who make all our own meals & coffee, and have no streaming services so we can afford to eat, the $6 coffee metaphor is completely irrelevant. I'd consider paying Netflix $8.99 a month but i'm not paying them almost $20. That's food for a few days.
That's fine. In that case you're probably better off using one of the many fine free services (Tubi, Freevee, Pluto, Roku Channel, Plex, Crackle, ...)
That doesn't change the analysis of what's optimal for Netflix on their side.

Isn't it great to live in a world where we have so much quality and choice, even on the completely free side?
 
That's fine. In that case you're probably better off using one of the many fine free services (Tubi, Freevee, Pluto, Roku Channel, Plex, Crackle, ...)
That doesn't change the analysis of what's optimal for Netflix on their side.

Isn't it great to live in a world where we have so much quality and choice, even on the completely free side?
I would argue that I got the same amount of enjoyment (if not more) from the seven TV channels we had growing up as I do with the over 105 channels I get with DirectTV Stream. And this was free TV vs a paid subscription. PlutoTV rocks though, no arguing that.
 
They said how many new subscribers they gained, but not how many existing accounts they lost.

I'm curious how their total membership compares before/after-- especially after the new accounts are outside of the free initial period.
 
They still haven't enforced it with my account... wondering if they are counting all the pre-emptive gainers before actually cracking down to make things look better than they might really be...
Same my hangers on can still watch for free. I don’t care anyway they can pay for their own, considering that I pay for all the streaming services for my brother and sister in law.
 
This policy hurts split immediate families that live across two houses. In my case all except one would be the same viewers in either house. But they want us to pay double.

I agree extended family and friends sharing is taking advantage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: poorcody
This policy hurts split immediate families that live across two houses. In my case all except one would be the same viewers in either house. But they want us to pay double.

I agree extended family and friends sharing is taking advantage.
What is a "split immediate" family? I'm being sincere here, I've never heard of this before.
 
This policy hurts split immediate families that live across two houses. In my case all except one would be the same viewers in either house. But they want us to pay double.

I agree extended family and friends sharing is taking advantage.
Add this to the list of things in life that aren’t fair. Seems like pay the $7.99 or somehow figure out a way around this.

I guess the new policy does not cover 100% of every family situation.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: iOS Geek
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.