▲ 191 ▼ Netflix Gains Six Million Subscribers After Password Sharing Crackdown (www.macrumors.com) submitted 3 years ago by fer0n@lemm.ee to c/moviesandtv@lemmy.film 97 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] Soundhole@lemm.ee 139 points 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Art3sian@lemmy.world 51 points 3 years ago (2 children) People don’t give big business enough credit in this space. Things like this are market tested and simulated long before they are rolled out. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Purplexingg@lemmy.world 24 points 3 years ago Well, things work until they don't. Predictions can only get you so far. See: new coke, qwikster, onlyfans trying to ban porn. But yeah I'm sure they did a cost benefit and decided it was worth permalink fedilink source parent [–] HeavenAndHell@lemmy.world 8 points 3 years ago Yeah like how Blockbuster tested their plan to remain a brick and mortar store? Or Boeing testing their new jet design before they had two airliners crashing? Or Capcom designing SFV to be more like a PaaS and ultimately failing enough to let go one of their most veteran producers? I think plenty of large big businesses make very stupid decisions all the time and the netflix account sharing thing honestly could’ve gone either way. Also, there’s no guarantee this is going to save netflix. They still have terrible habits of putting out garbage and canceling good shows that have plentiful viewership. Netflix for the longest time has been trying to make lightning strike twice by treating every new Netflix original like it’s supposed to be the next Stranger Things. That’s a stupid thing to do. Of course I don’t give big businesses enough credit, they haven’t earned that reputation. permalink fedilink source parent [–] EyesEyesBaby@lemmy.world 15 points 3 years ago (2 children) Net subscribers may have increased, but I suspect many of them have chosen a cheaper option. Since my family can no longer use my account there's no need to have 3 simultaneous streams. I chose for a cheaper subscription and expect many to do the same. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] pragma@lemmy.zip 17 points 3 years ago (1 child) Wasn't there a news article floating around yesterday claiming that Netflix was about to ditch their cheapest ad-free option? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] EyesEyesBaby@lemmy.world 12 points 3 years ago They are, in the US and UK. Greedy bastards. permalink fedilink source parent [–] moobythegoldensock@geddit.social 1 point 3 years ago I suspect you are right, because Netflix is axing its lowest ad-free tier and those on it will either need to pay the higher ad-free or switch to ads. permalink fedilink source parent [+] Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz -9 points 3 years ago (2 children) Damn those greedy bastards wanting users to pay for their service permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] ABCDE@lemmy.world 9 points 3 years ago (1 child) I was paying for it, for four screens and multiple users, as permitted on their site. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz -10 points 3 years ago (4 children) Many others were using other people's accounts for free permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] Platomus@lemm.ee 9 points 3 years ago No, the accounts were paid for. permalink fedilink source parent [–] brimnac@lemmy.world 5 points 3 years ago (1 child) Netflix literally said “Sharing is caring” about passwords a few years back… permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz -6 points 3 years ago (1 child) I guess they changed their minds then. Hypocrites or not I still feel like wanting to get paid for people using your service is reasonable. I've never used Netflix but if I did I'd imagine this wouldn't affect me much as a paying customer. It seems to mainly be an issue for those who either travel alot or are using somebody else's account permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] brimnac@lemmy.world 5 points 3 years ago That was their business model, hence why people got upset. permalink fedilink source parent [–] moobythegoldensock@geddit.social 4 points 3 years ago (1 child) No, they were using paid accounts. If I buy a frisbee and throw it to a friend, my friend doesn’t owe the frisbee company anything. I paid for the frisbee, I can do what I want with it. If I pay for 4 simultaneous streams from a video company, why is it that company’s business how and when I use them, or who I share them with? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bowreality@lemmy.ca 1 point 3 years ago Exactly this permalink fedilink source parent [–] ABCDE@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago I allow people to use it for free as it's not a huge expense, and it's something nice to do. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Platomus@lemm.ee 9 points 3 years ago The users were playing for the service tho. They then created artificial barriers to charge more for the service. They've been doing it consistently. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Art3sian@lemmy.world 51 points 3 years ago (2 children) People don’t give big business enough credit in this space. Things like this are market tested and simulated long before they are rolled out. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Purplexingg@lemmy.world 24 points 3 years ago Well, things work until they don't. Predictions can only get you so far. See: new coke, qwikster, onlyfans trying to ban porn. But yeah I'm sure they did a cost benefit and decided it was worth permalink fedilink source parent [–] HeavenAndHell@lemmy.world 8 points 3 years ago Yeah like how Blockbuster tested their plan to remain a brick and mortar store? Or Boeing testing their new jet design before they had two airliners crashing? Or Capcom designing SFV to be more like a PaaS and ultimately failing enough to let go one of their most veteran producers? I think plenty of large big businesses make very stupid decisions all the time and the netflix account sharing thing honestly could’ve gone either way. Also, there’s no guarantee this is going to save netflix. They still have terrible habits of putting out garbage and canceling good shows that have plentiful viewership. Netflix for the longest time has been trying to make lightning strike twice by treating every new Netflix original like it’s supposed to be the next Stranger Things. That’s a stupid thing to do. Of course I don’t give big businesses enough credit, they haven’t earned that reputation. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Purplexingg@lemmy.world 24 points 3 years ago Well, things work until they don't. Predictions can only get you so far. See: new coke, qwikster, onlyfans trying to ban porn. But yeah I'm sure they did a cost benefit and decided it was worth permalink fedilink source parent
[–] HeavenAndHell@lemmy.world 8 points 3 years ago Yeah like how Blockbuster tested their plan to remain a brick and mortar store? Or Boeing testing their new jet design before they had two airliners crashing? Or Capcom designing SFV to be more like a PaaS and ultimately failing enough to let go one of their most veteran producers? I think plenty of large big businesses make very stupid decisions all the time and the netflix account sharing thing honestly could’ve gone either way. Also, there’s no guarantee this is going to save netflix. They still have terrible habits of putting out garbage and canceling good shows that have plentiful viewership. Netflix for the longest time has been trying to make lightning strike twice by treating every new Netflix original like it’s supposed to be the next Stranger Things. That’s a stupid thing to do. Of course I don’t give big businesses enough credit, they haven’t earned that reputation. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] EyesEyesBaby@lemmy.world 15 points 3 years ago (2 children) Net subscribers may have increased, but I suspect many of them have chosen a cheaper option. Since my family can no longer use my account there's no need to have 3 simultaneous streams. I chose for a cheaper subscription and expect many to do the same. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] pragma@lemmy.zip 17 points 3 years ago (1 child) Wasn't there a news article floating around yesterday claiming that Netflix was about to ditch their cheapest ad-free option? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] EyesEyesBaby@lemmy.world 12 points 3 years ago They are, in the US and UK. Greedy bastards. permalink fedilink source parent [–] moobythegoldensock@geddit.social 1 point 3 years ago I suspect you are right, because Netflix is axing its lowest ad-free tier and those on it will either need to pay the higher ad-free or switch to ads. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] pragma@lemmy.zip 17 points 3 years ago (1 child) Wasn't there a news article floating around yesterday claiming that Netflix was about to ditch their cheapest ad-free option? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] EyesEyesBaby@lemmy.world 12 points 3 years ago They are, in the US and UK. Greedy bastards. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] EyesEyesBaby@lemmy.world 12 points 3 years ago They are, in the US and UK. Greedy bastards. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] moobythegoldensock@geddit.social 1 point 3 years ago I suspect you are right, because Netflix is axing its lowest ad-free tier and those on it will either need to pay the higher ad-free or switch to ads. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz -9 points 3 years ago (2 children) Damn those greedy bastards wanting users to pay for their service permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] ABCDE@lemmy.world 9 points 3 years ago (1 child) I was paying for it, for four screens and multiple users, as permitted on their site. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz -10 points 3 years ago (4 children) Many others were using other people's accounts for free permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] Platomus@lemm.ee 9 points 3 years ago No, the accounts were paid for. permalink fedilink source parent [–] brimnac@lemmy.world 5 points 3 years ago (1 child) Netflix literally said “Sharing is caring” about passwords a few years back… permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz -6 points 3 years ago (1 child) I guess they changed their minds then. Hypocrites or not I still feel like wanting to get paid for people using your service is reasonable. I've never used Netflix but if I did I'd imagine this wouldn't affect me much as a paying customer. It seems to mainly be an issue for those who either travel alot or are using somebody else's account permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] brimnac@lemmy.world 5 points 3 years ago That was their business model, hence why people got upset. permalink fedilink source parent [–] moobythegoldensock@geddit.social 4 points 3 years ago (1 child) No, they were using paid accounts. If I buy a frisbee and throw it to a friend, my friend doesn’t owe the frisbee company anything. I paid for the frisbee, I can do what I want with it. If I pay for 4 simultaneous streams from a video company, why is it that company’s business how and when I use them, or who I share them with? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bowreality@lemmy.ca 1 point 3 years ago Exactly this permalink fedilink source parent [–] ABCDE@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago I allow people to use it for free as it's not a huge expense, and it's something nice to do. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Platomus@lemm.ee 9 points 3 years ago The users were playing for the service tho. They then created artificial barriers to charge more for the service. They've been doing it consistently. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ABCDE@lemmy.world 9 points 3 years ago (1 child) I was paying for it, for four screens and multiple users, as permitted on their site. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz -10 points 3 years ago (4 children) Many others were using other people's accounts for free permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] Platomus@lemm.ee 9 points 3 years ago No, the accounts were paid for. permalink fedilink source parent [–] brimnac@lemmy.world 5 points 3 years ago (1 child) Netflix literally said “Sharing is caring” about passwords a few years back… permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz -6 points 3 years ago (1 child) I guess they changed their minds then. Hypocrites or not I still feel like wanting to get paid for people using your service is reasonable. I've never used Netflix but if I did I'd imagine this wouldn't affect me much as a paying customer. It seems to mainly be an issue for those who either travel alot or are using somebody else's account permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] brimnac@lemmy.world 5 points 3 years ago That was their business model, hence why people got upset. permalink fedilink source parent [–] moobythegoldensock@geddit.social 4 points 3 years ago (1 child) No, they were using paid accounts. If I buy a frisbee and throw it to a friend, my friend doesn’t owe the frisbee company anything. I paid for the frisbee, I can do what I want with it. If I pay for 4 simultaneous streams from a video company, why is it that company’s business how and when I use them, or who I share them with? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bowreality@lemmy.ca 1 point 3 years ago Exactly this permalink fedilink source parent [–] ABCDE@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago I allow people to use it for free as it's not a huge expense, and it's something nice to do. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz -10 points 3 years ago (4 children) Many others were using other people's accounts for free permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] Platomus@lemm.ee 9 points 3 years ago No, the accounts were paid for. permalink fedilink source parent [–] brimnac@lemmy.world 5 points 3 years ago (1 child) Netflix literally said “Sharing is caring” about passwords a few years back… permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz -6 points 3 years ago (1 child) I guess they changed their minds then. Hypocrites or not I still feel like wanting to get paid for people using your service is reasonable. I've never used Netflix but if I did I'd imagine this wouldn't affect me much as a paying customer. It seems to mainly be an issue for those who either travel alot or are using somebody else's account permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] brimnac@lemmy.world 5 points 3 years ago That was their business model, hence why people got upset. permalink fedilink source parent [–] moobythegoldensock@geddit.social 4 points 3 years ago (1 child) No, they were using paid accounts. If I buy a frisbee and throw it to a friend, my friend doesn’t owe the frisbee company anything. I paid for the frisbee, I can do what I want with it. If I pay for 4 simultaneous streams from a video company, why is it that company’s business how and when I use them, or who I share them with? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bowreality@lemmy.ca 1 point 3 years ago Exactly this permalink fedilink source parent [–] ABCDE@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago I allow people to use it for free as it's not a huge expense, and it's something nice to do. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Platomus@lemm.ee 9 points 3 years ago No, the accounts were paid for. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] brimnac@lemmy.world 5 points 3 years ago (1 child) Netflix literally said “Sharing is caring” about passwords a few years back… permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz -6 points 3 years ago (1 child) I guess they changed their minds then. Hypocrites or not I still feel like wanting to get paid for people using your service is reasonable. I've never used Netflix but if I did I'd imagine this wouldn't affect me much as a paying customer. It seems to mainly be an issue for those who either travel alot or are using somebody else's account permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] brimnac@lemmy.world 5 points 3 years ago That was their business model, hence why people got upset. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz -6 points 3 years ago (1 child) I guess they changed their minds then. Hypocrites or not I still feel like wanting to get paid for people using your service is reasonable. I've never used Netflix but if I did I'd imagine this wouldn't affect me much as a paying customer. It seems to mainly be an issue for those who either travel alot or are using somebody else's account permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] brimnac@lemmy.world 5 points 3 years ago That was their business model, hence why people got upset. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] brimnac@lemmy.world 5 points 3 years ago That was their business model, hence why people got upset. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] moobythegoldensock@geddit.social 4 points 3 years ago (1 child) No, they were using paid accounts. If I buy a frisbee and throw it to a friend, my friend doesn’t owe the frisbee company anything. I paid for the frisbee, I can do what I want with it. If I pay for 4 simultaneous streams from a video company, why is it that company’s business how and when I use them, or who I share them with? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bowreality@lemmy.ca 1 point 3 years ago Exactly this permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ABCDE@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago I allow people to use it for free as it's not a huge expense, and it's something nice to do. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Platomus@lemm.ee 9 points 3 years ago The users were playing for the service tho. They then created artificial barriers to charge more for the service. They've been doing it consistently. permalink fedilink source parent