ijakinov t1_isvcj47 wrote on October 18, 2022 at 11:38 PM

Reply to comment by Stonewalled89 in Netflix Will Consider Content Spending Boost After Positive Subscriber Numbers by Neo2199

It’s better than spending it on expensive shows hardly anyone watches.

A lot of people complain about cheap reality shows but if you can make a show for 1/10 the cost for 1/4 the engagement that’s better ROI. Plus, in practice some of these reality shows end up performing super well.

kinzer13 t1_isvktju wrote on October 19, 2022 at 12:40 AM

Jr. Executive over here landing truth bombs. But honestly you need these cheap shows and you need well written "prestige" TV as well. HBO is very selective, but what they do put out is generally very good/great. If all Netflix invests in is cable TV level reality shows, Netflix will go the way of cable TV.

Caelinus t1_iswfec9 wrote on October 19, 2022 at 4:52 AM

> It’s better than spending it on expensive shows hardly anyone watches.

Better for people who own a part of Netflix, definitely. But also definitely not better for the pursuit of art. I am totally fine with trash shows in general, and there are some that are even highly entertaining.

I just think there should be a higher principal than whatever has the highest ROI. I know that most people working in television feel the same too. Unfortunately our entire system of ownership disincentivizes doing that almost entirely, so we have to fall back on the goodwill of those paying the artists.

I think the reason Netflix cancels so many of its good shows is that they need new prestige content to draw people in, and by a few seasons in they stop pulling in new subs at the same rate. At that point they just want to keep people subbed with an endless stream of low effort but lightly entertaining shows.

ijakinov t1_iswk4cz wrote on October 19, 2022 at 5:45 AM

For art people who like that stuff need to be willing to pull out their wallets. The problem with the general purpose streaming service behind a subscription is the people who appreciate the artsy fartsy stuff have weak voting power. With an a La carte model you can be like hey here’s my money keep making this. Under the subscription they are going to be looking for the show that’s both a crowd pleaser and an award winner opposed to just an award winner.

There can be a system where people who want to see “art” can fund these shows and it can be a good business. But I think what’s hurting it is this standard that everything should come as part of their subscription else they pirate or at least won’t pay. In other industries when there’s something that doesn’t appeal to the masses they call it a niche market and generally in these markets the people will pay a premium. I’m a super hero content fan and I loved the idea of paying $8 a month for a DC service because it was like here’s $8 a month make me only DC content opposed to here’s $20 make content that appeals to 200M people