• Number1SummerJam@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    106
    ·
    1 year ago

    When will the greed stop? At what point will these corporations realize that the average American is completely stretched thin financially and will have to cease unnecessary expenses? They’re all just shooting themselves in the foot.

      • CosmoNova@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        50
        ·
        1 year ago

        It‘s laughable to expect corporations to act against their only purpose. As soon as a company sells shares it takes the route of infinite growth which is impossible. First they grow their user base and once they start to inevitably stagnate, they start milking their costumers, shaving off features and laying off workers in order to grow their income. It is really the only way for them to remain existent when the market is saturated. They cannot stay in business when they make billions a year when these billions aren‘t even more billions than last year. You can‘t attract new investors that way and therefore cannot continue to exist. Enshittyfication only just started. It cannot possibly get better when they can‘t expand their user base, only worse. They know they will self destruct eventually, but that doesn‘t matter as long as shareholders get their piece of the cake and jump ship to sink the next one. Just being a massively profitable company is bad business if you‘re not growing. That‘s the state of capitalism we‘re in.

        • kinsnik@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          As soon as a company sells shares it takes the route of infinite growth which is impossible

          yeah, the stock market makes that a company that is stable and generates a reliable income each year is seen as bad, but a company that has large grow in obviously unsustainable speed, which doesn’t have plans on how to ever become profitable is good (i am not specifically taking about netflix here)

      • Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        When the platform dies.

        “first, they are good to their users; then they abuse their users to make things better for their business customers; finally, they abuse those business customers to claw back all the value for themselves. Then, they die. “

        Source

      • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Incorrect.

        It will stop when our species exterminates itself out of greed.

        Climate change will probably only thin our numbers by the billions as a result of of the owner’s greed, but then they want to profit off AI, and CRISPR, and innumerable other potentially profitable means to our self-extinction.

        The greed will stop when all the humans are dead almost certainly by our own hands, and humans are actively working to accomplish this.

    • AProfessional@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      1 year ago

      As consolidation continues corporations do not need to compete on prices as there are no alternatives. Yes people will pirate but they’ve already lobbied vendors to embrace DRM and governments to make it illegal so that makes it as annoying as possible.

      • Carobu@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        1 year ago

        Are we reading the same thing? Netflix has more competition now than it ever has. When Netflix had cheaper prices when it has no competition than it does now. Piracy has been making a huge resurgence as well.

        • query@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          1 year ago

          “More competition” meaning less access, people having to pay for multiple different services instead of having it in one place.

          The competition should be about having the best platform, not exclusive content. There’s no reason why the same show couldn’t be on two different platforms. And available globally. Practically, all you really need is more local servers for where there’s more traffic.

          • Goronmon@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The competition should be about having the best platform, not exclusive content.

            Those both sound like competition to me. What you are really asking for is “I want things to be cheaper” which is a separate and sometimes related issue to competition, but separate nonetheless.

            The path to lower prices the way you want would be government-mandated price controls on the industry.

            • SinningStromgald@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              The path to lower prices the way you want would be government-mandated price controls on the industry.

              Now you’re just talking dirty cause you can.

            • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              The path to lower prices the way you want would be government-mandated price controls on the industry.

              Mandatory price controls can be tricky economically. I could certainly consider them on thinks required for living (food, housing, fuel), but putting them on optional entertainment like streaming? That sounds very counter productive.

        • AProfessional@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          When Netflix started they entered the market as a licensor of content from studios to be distributed as part of a streaming service.

          This possibility largely no longer exists. All of the studios have bought out competition, stopped licensing a lot of their popular content, and now release their content themselves. This means there is little competition in the film distribution market for streaming, beyond PayPerView.

    • Fribbtastic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      As long as people pay for it and they make massive profits through it.

      I mean, look at the last situation in which netflix addressed account sharing. Their user number actually increased because of it from what I have read.

      Those people that can’t afford it will most likely switch to a less expensive tier and then probably see ads. I have seen that recently with my father who wasn’t even bothered or annoyed by the constant ads while watching a single episode.

      • Wisely@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I don’t understand how people are ok with ads? They annoy me so much. It’s wasting your time so it can attempt to manipulate you into buying stuff with the money you can’t afford to spend.

    • Ado@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      We keep saying this but they keep profiting more and more every time lol. Remember when everyone on reddit was gonna quit Netflix for the password sharing block? Ya, their users increased afterwards.

    • FunkyMonk@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      AND KILL THE AMERICAN DREAM THAT ANY MAN CAN BE KING?! might as well just side with those broke natives /s