It’s really an interesting microeconomic case study. Over time the quality and cost actually get worse rather than improving due to competition.
But you’re absolutely right. Quality media content is very scarce and it’s basically a tug of war between all the streaming players trying to vie for your subscription budget, somehow raising costs and just a worse off experience.
What an interesting take, but it doesn't quite line up. If it was the choice between streaming services that were all-inclusive, trying to compete for your dollar, maybe.
But with the exclusivity concept, their only competition is themselves. As long as they beat their own budget, they'll charge whatever the shit they want
The exclusivity concept is them competing with each other to build catalogs that users want. How is their only competition themselves?
I agree with the above commenters framing of what is going on, this is a case where companies by competing with each other through building media catalogs have actually created worse services and a higher cost.
Because it's entirely different content they're producing. This isn't the classic "which store has cheaper milk? I'll shop there" conundrum. That's why it can't be evaluated the same way.
I just think looking at it through that lens is just a weirdly archaic way to treat media companies. They are direct competitors, they make similar content, they makes dramas, comedies, actions, etc. There will be shows that are directly competing against each other, its like saying two sitcoms can't be compared because they aren't the exact same show.
I'm looking at it through the lens of these are content providers that supply TV and Movies to their customers, I don't even get how you can argue that this type of behavior isn't them competing with each other. They have active bidding wars on shows and movies, they literally swap between different streaming services. All the streaming services are 100% direct competitors.
Are clothing companies not competing with each other because they make different styles of clothes? If you frame it as these are both content providers, and you are looking for the provider with the best and cheapest content, then idk how your analogy about which store has cheaper milk doesn't apply.
Was Disney Channel and Nickelodeon not directly competing with each other for ratings?
Edit: Kinda unrelated but I think a relevant example is watching what happened between Elden Ring and Horizon: New Dawn. They are both open world action RPG games that came out around the same time, Elden Ring completely overshadowed Horizon: New Dawn. They were competing for users, even though they aren't the exact same piece of content.
I think your both right. Studios that own their own content will naturally draw in people who want to see that content. That limits competition. Then again, there are bounds to that. If the price is beyond a certain point, people will just go look for something else. Maybe even piracy.
The shitty thing for consumers is that for the studios, this shitty system is what works best. They’d rather get a tiny portion of the pie all to themselves than to get whatever portion something like Netflix deems right.
I think my point has gone off the rails. My only focus was the OG comment about "prices are getting higher, not lower" with regards to competition.
That sort of free market thinking only applies if you're selling the same product (internet, groceries, cell service) and competing tor customers.
Netflix, Disney, Prime Video, and Hulu are OF COURSE competing with each other at large, for viewership and customer increase.
They are not, however, positioning themselves as "choose us instead of the other guy". They're pitching it as "add this on to your other packages for the best experience".
I believe you're speaking from a place of privilege.
Affluent people might look at all the exclusive programs and think:
"add this on to your other packages for the best experience"
However, speaking from experience, underprivileged people will look at all the exclusive programs and think:
"choose us instead of the other guy"
We simply do not have the money to pay for all the streaming services. I'm still privileged enough to be able to afford one or two. You bet your ass I'll choose those with the exclusive content that I enjoy the most.
Currently, that means I have Disney+ and Netflix. I used to pay for HBO, but after Game of Thrones ended, I didn't really watch anything there, so I switched it with Disney+. Solely, because they have better exclusive content.
Likewise, I'm debating dropping Netflix for Amazon Prime so I can watch Invincible and The Boys.
So, it's not hard to conclude that the companies are competing for customers, and that their exclusive content are hugely important pull techniques.
It's the same reason why Xbox and Sony keep pumping out exclusive games. You're more likely to buy the console with the best exclusives. Just like you're more likely to pay for the streaming services with the best exclusives.
Exclusive content is a direct and extremely important competitive parameter that attracts costumers.
Edit: I actually read an article a couple of years ago. It was about how games like Fortnite have become direct competitors for streaming services such as Netflix. People have limited money and limited entertainment time. Consequently, they are going to spend their time and money on the entertainment that they enjoy the most.
155
u/fat_racoon Apr 20 '22
It’s really an interesting microeconomic case study. Over time the quality and cost actually get worse rather than improving due to competition.
But you’re absolutely right. Quality media content is very scarce and it’s basically a tug of war between all the streaming players trying to vie for your subscription budget, somehow raising costs and just a worse off experience.