Streaming Doesn't Pay
August 19, 2023 6:17 PM Subscribe
The Real Cost of Good Movies lays out the issues in the media strikes - streaming (non)-royalties, digital likenesses, and LLM's - while sketching the reductions in quality and choice for media consumers. Concludes with a suggestion to burn it all down and replace it with BandCamp for video.
Yeah, the pivot to streaming was suicide for the AMPTP. If they'd had any actual forecasters on salary, they probably could have said "so, making zillion dollar content for a fixed income stream doesn't make sense", but apparently these brilliant men leading these companies being paid millions of dollars a year aren't smart enough to hire any of those actually smart people.
The biggest problem (and the reason why all these entertainment companies jumped on the streaming bandwagon in the first place) is that Netflix was fast becoming the gatekeeper for online streaming. If one player in the streaming licensing market becomes bigger that all others, has squillions in VC cash, keeps outbidding their competitors on content exclusives, pushing said competitors out of the market, that player will eventually be able to squeeze their content suppliers.
Oh wow that sounds like the exact track Netflix was on circa early 2010s. Until all the providers stopped licensing their content to Netflix but had no one else really to license to without the whole problem getting worse and decided to started to going it alone instead. Which isn't so profitable either.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:33 PM on August 19, 2023 [10 favorites]
The biggest problem (and the reason why all these entertainment companies jumped on the streaming bandwagon in the first place) is that Netflix was fast becoming the gatekeeper for online streaming. If one player in the streaming licensing market becomes bigger that all others, has squillions in VC cash, keeps outbidding their competitors on content exclusives, pushing said competitors out of the market, that player will eventually be able to squeeze their content suppliers.
Oh wow that sounds like the exact track Netflix was on circa early 2010s. Until all the providers stopped licensing their content to Netflix but had no one else really to license to without the whole problem getting worse and decided to started to going it alone instead. Which isn't so profitable either.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:33 PM on August 19, 2023 [10 favorites]
In a race to the bottom, it doesn't help to be in the lead.
posted by notoriety public at 7:42 PM on August 19, 2023 [44 favorites]
posted by notoriety public at 7:42 PM on August 19, 2023 [44 favorites]
I found the discussion of subscription value interesting; below some rate of watching stuff, it's cheaper to just rent what you're after directly. (They mention Amazon+VUDU; I've almost always found movies I'm after for rent on YouTube.) And with the very limited options in each streaming service, I actually end up renting things pretty often, despite having a subscription or two... Maybe I'll just cancel them all this weekend.
And rental clarifies revenue, since you're paying directly for what you're watching, relative to a subscription.
posted by kaibutsu at 8:36 PM on August 19, 2023 [8 favorites]
And rental clarifies revenue, since you're paying directly for what you're watching, relative to a subscription.
posted by kaibutsu at 8:36 PM on August 19, 2023 [8 favorites]
I'd be curious to know how renting works out with series, though. if I'm watching several series on one rental, I'm getting multiple nights of viewing out of one payment across a month or two, as we tend not to binge multiple episodes in a night. I have no idea what renting a series might cost. I've digitally purchased a series or two, but that's different from renting.
posted by hippybear at 8:47 PM on August 19, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by hippybear at 8:47 PM on August 19, 2023 [3 favorites]
A more rental focused model probably means more miniseries and movie-length productions.
If the studios hadn’t pivoted to streaming, yeah, they would have just lost market share to Netflix and Amazon, and there would be more piracy. Millennials and younger generations weren’t signing up for cable.
They’re in a tough spot. It’s not just the competition for TV viewers, it’s 1,000 new cuts taking time away from traditional TV viewing: YouTube, audiobooks, online classes, gig work, podcasts, TikTok, Kindle books, easy access to classic TV and movies, Spotify, video games, unlimited free long distance and video calls…
posted by smelendez at 9:15 PM on August 19, 2023 [4 favorites]
If the studios hadn’t pivoted to streaming, yeah, they would have just lost market share to Netflix and Amazon, and there would be more piracy. Millennials and younger generations weren’t signing up for cable.
They’re in a tough spot. It’s not just the competition for TV viewers, it’s 1,000 new cuts taking time away from traditional TV viewing: YouTube, audiobooks, online classes, gig work, podcasts, TikTok, Kindle books, easy access to classic TV and movies, Spotify, video games, unlimited free long distance and video calls…
posted by smelendez at 9:15 PM on August 19, 2023 [4 favorites]
The biggest problem (and the reason why all these entertainment companies jumped on the streaming bandwagon in the first place) is that Netflix was fast becoming the gatekeeper for online streaming.
And streaming is a great business model when you are the one company that has everything.
posted by atoxyl at 9:18 PM on August 19, 2023 [3 favorites]
And streaming is a great business model when you are the one company that has everything.
posted by atoxyl at 9:18 PM on August 19, 2023 [3 favorites]
because, of course, of this:
below some rate of watching stuff, it's cheaper to just rent what you're after directly
posted by atoxyl at 9:24 PM on August 19, 2023
below some rate of watching stuff, it's cheaper to just rent what you're after directly
posted by atoxyl at 9:24 PM on August 19, 2023
I'd just like someone to redo the maths without the million-plus-dollars-per-episode/film paid to the headline actors/directors/producers/etc.
posted by gible at 10:45 PM on August 19, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by gible at 10:45 PM on August 19, 2023 [4 favorites]
If you had told me in the early 2000s that the music industry would get to a point where Bandcamp was allowed to exist, let alone flourish, I'd have said it was impossible. So maybe there is hope that the same is true for Bandcamp for Video even though right now it looks even more dire than the music situation in the 2000s.
My big worry, though, is that Bandcamp can thrive because it doesn't actually take that much in the way of resources to cut an album compared to making a movie or, god forbid, a TV show. Promotion is another story, of course, and distribution beyond a certain scale as well, but just making music? "Bedroom pop" is a well-established genre for a reason. But video production doesn't scale down the same way unless we're talking about stuff that doesn't look as much like a TV show or a movie; something more like livestreamers or YouTube creators. If so many more people need to be involved in the process (and presumably paid more than a pittance), does a Bandcamp for TV/movies actually work?
posted by chrominance at 10:48 PM on August 19, 2023 [13 favorites]
My big worry, though, is that Bandcamp can thrive because it doesn't actually take that much in the way of resources to cut an album compared to making a movie or, god forbid, a TV show. Promotion is another story, of course, and distribution beyond a certain scale as well, but just making music? "Bedroom pop" is a well-established genre for a reason. But video production doesn't scale down the same way unless we're talking about stuff that doesn't look as much like a TV show or a movie; something more like livestreamers or YouTube creators. If so many more people need to be involved in the process (and presumably paid more than a pittance), does a Bandcamp for TV/movies actually work?
posted by chrominance at 10:48 PM on August 19, 2023 [13 favorites]
If you had told me in the early 2000s that the music industry would get to a point where Bandcamp was allowed to exist, let alone flourish, I'd have said it was impossible.
I don't know what it was like for musicians, but as a consumer early 2000s mp3.com was pretty close to what Bandcamp is today, at least in terms of selling music very conveniently. I don't remember if any well-known musicians were ever on mp3.com; the handful of musicians that I know that I discovered there (and still listen to!) were small, unsigned acts that all seem to have broken up or moved out of music by now.
posted by ElKevbo at 11:39 PM on August 19, 2023 [1 favorite]
I don't know what it was like for musicians, but as a consumer early 2000s mp3.com was pretty close to what Bandcamp is today, at least in terms of selling music very conveniently. I don't remember if any well-known musicians were ever on mp3.com; the handful of musicians that I know that I discovered there (and still listen to!) were small, unsigned acts that all seem to have broken up or moved out of music by now.
posted by ElKevbo at 11:39 PM on August 19, 2023 [1 favorite]
If the studios hadn’t pivoted to streaming, yeah, they would have just lost market share to Netflix and Amazon, and there would be more piracy. Millennials and younger generations weren’t signing up for cable.
I guess I don't understand why that's a failure mode? Studios get to use thev distribution channel to hit a maximum number of viewers. Consumers get to have an they're stuff in one place, for one subscription. Unless you're HBO or a cable channel, why is this considered losing? It sounds win-win.
posted by Dysk at 12:10 AM on August 20, 2023
I guess I don't understand why that's a failure mode? Studios get to use thev distribution channel to hit a maximum number of viewers. Consumers get to have an they're stuff in one place, for one subscription. Unless you're HBO or a cable channel, why is this considered losing? It sounds win-win.
posted by Dysk at 12:10 AM on August 20, 2023
Ted Giola has been making the case that the music streaming services can’t work out their finances. This is kind of Giola’s axe to grind; he’s a jazz reviewer who started out with some legitimate concerns about the industry and now has a successful substack where he writes a lot on the theme.
On the subject of cinema, I have noticed that the arthouse cinema near me has a much less diverse range of subjects than it used to have. It’s often big movies from France, Spain, mixed in with the artier Hollywood stuff. Punk films and non-European films, once an arthouse staple, have vanished, in favour of films made by coalitions of funders from first world business concerns.
posted by The River Ivel at 12:49 AM on August 20, 2023 [3 favorites]
On the subject of cinema, I have noticed that the arthouse cinema near me has a much less diverse range of subjects than it used to have. It’s often big movies from France, Spain, mixed in with the artier Hollywood stuff. Punk films and non-European films, once an arthouse staple, have vanished, in favour of films made by coalitions of funders from first world business concerns.
posted by The River Ivel at 12:49 AM on August 20, 2023 [3 favorites]
A lot of the art house sized staples just aren’t made anymore. The mid-tier movie has basically disappeared from the cinema as the studios want $75 million+ blockbusters and blockbusters only.
And if for some reason it is being made, it wind up on streaming only 99% of the time (and likely made as a limited series). It’s really squeezing the art house theaters.
posted by jmauro at 2:48 AM on August 20, 2023 [5 favorites]
And if for some reason it is being made, it wind up on streaming only 99% of the time (and likely made as a limited series). It’s really squeezing the art house theaters.
posted by jmauro at 2:48 AM on August 20, 2023 [5 favorites]
smelendez: If the studios hadn’t pivoted to streaming, yeah, they would have just lost market share to Netflix and Amazon, and there would be more piracy.
Netflix won over piracy because it was convenient. One place to get all things -- even if recommendations were bunk and finding good news things nearly impossible. However, exclusivity is artificial scarcity and it drives me to consider piracy again instead of multiple stupid subscriptions.
posted by k3ninho at 4:19 AM on August 20, 2023 [15 favorites]
Netflix won over piracy because it was convenient. One place to get all things -- even if recommendations were bunk and finding good news things nearly impossible. However, exclusivity is artificial scarcity and it drives me to consider piracy again instead of multiple stupid subscriptions.
posted by k3ninho at 4:19 AM on August 20, 2023 [15 favorites]
it drives me to consider piracy again instead of multiple stupid subscriptions.
To abuse the metaphor, I haven't driven yet exactly but I'm definitely ride-sharing, thanks to those who still kept going despite an era where it seemed possible to go legit, even and especially those outside the global North.
posted by cendawanita at 5:48 AM on August 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
To abuse the metaphor, I haven't driven yet exactly but I'm definitely ride-sharing, thanks to those who still kept going despite an era where it seemed possible to go legit, even and especially those outside the global North.
posted by cendawanita at 5:48 AM on August 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
Copyright infringement is really the market the streaming services are competing against. The sooner they realize the better. Which was why Netflix was a win and the balkanized current system is a loser. The service providers have to be better than your buddies Plex server and when you subscribe to a hand full of services and the content you want it not available at any price the jolly roger is pretty attractive. And once you are setup to watch some show that is only available in the US or UK or somewhere else you don't live just dropping monthly services starts looking attractive.
posted by Mitheral at 5:58 AM on August 20, 2023 [13 favorites]
posted by Mitheral at 5:58 AM on August 20, 2023 [13 favorites]
And once you are setup to watch some show that is only available in the US or UK or somewhere else you don't live just dropping monthly services starts looking attractive.
The streaming services have been mostly working well enough for me. They are frustrating and limited, but still I can make it work. But more and more lately I am running into the situation where a show will get a really strong review somewhere and then I'll find out it is not available in my country. There was a Netflix Italia show that got reviewed and seemed interesting, but it turns out that if you don't have access to Netflix Italia, you aren't watching it.
So then you start considering VPNs and piracy options, but if you are going to go to that much trouble anyway, how valuable is that original streaming service anymore?
posted by Dip Flash at 6:54 AM on August 20, 2023 [11 favorites]
The streaming services have been mostly working well enough for me. They are frustrating and limited, but still I can make it work. But more and more lately I am running into the situation where a show will get a really strong review somewhere and then I'll find out it is not available in my country. There was a Netflix Italia show that got reviewed and seemed interesting, but it turns out that if you don't have access to Netflix Italia, you aren't watching it.
So then you start considering VPNs and piracy options, but if you are going to go to that much trouble anyway, how valuable is that original streaming service anymore?
posted by Dip Flash at 6:54 AM on August 20, 2023 [11 favorites]
I can't find the name of the law or regulation nor whether it was repealed or just stopped being enforced, but everything in the industry really went to hell when Netflix changed from being a distributor to a content producer and distributor. Breaking that up really needs to happen (and not just for Netflix at this point). The subscription model they introduced is also a huge problem.
Going back to when Netflix was DVD-by-mail, the old (basically working) model was still intact. Studios produced and sold content, and theaters, Netflix and other local vendors, and retail outlets were the distribution. It made it pretty easy to figure out what sold, and no one player had the ability to lock everything up. Netflix's subscription model was problematic, but only for Netflix, and was probably a necessary tool to break into a market where the inconvenience of waiting several days vs driving to Blockbuster was an obstacle.
However, when Netflix added streaming to their subscription model instead of adding it on-demand, the model changed from providing a service to having all the content. At that point, it was inevitable that Netflix would become a content producer and everyone else would do the same.
What I've never understood about the music and movie industries in the last 25 years is why they've been so reluctant to follow the model that worked for them all through the 20th century, which is to make their product available to buy or rent easily and set prices at what the market will bear.
The music industry lost their fucking minds about the fact that when Napster came along, people discovered $17.99 was way too much for a CD, but if they would've been willing to drop that to $11.99 (and maybe even offer singles again!) they could've kept piracy at bay. Instead, they fought it tooth and nail, and now they're getting fractions of a cent from Spotify. The same thing is playing out with movies, except that instead of getting fractions of a cent from Netflix, they're all paying billions to get millions.
posted by Ickster at 7:33 AM on August 20, 2023 [7 favorites]
Going back to when Netflix was DVD-by-mail, the old (basically working) model was still intact. Studios produced and sold content, and theaters, Netflix and other local vendors, and retail outlets were the distribution. It made it pretty easy to figure out what sold, and no one player had the ability to lock everything up. Netflix's subscription model was problematic, but only for Netflix, and was probably a necessary tool to break into a market where the inconvenience of waiting several days vs driving to Blockbuster was an obstacle.
However, when Netflix added streaming to their subscription model instead of adding it on-demand, the model changed from providing a service to having all the content. At that point, it was inevitable that Netflix would become a content producer and everyone else would do the same.
What I've never understood about the music and movie industries in the last 25 years is why they've been so reluctant to follow the model that worked for them all through the 20th century, which is to make their product available to buy or rent easily and set prices at what the market will bear.
The music industry lost their fucking minds about the fact that when Napster came along, people discovered $17.99 was way too much for a CD, but if they would've been willing to drop that to $11.99 (and maybe even offer singles again!) they could've kept piracy at bay. Instead, they fought it tooth and nail, and now they're getting fractions of a cent from Spotify. The same thing is playing out with movies, except that instead of getting fractions of a cent from Netflix, they're all paying billions to get millions.
posted by Ickster at 7:33 AM on August 20, 2023 [7 favorites]
Now that fiber is available in our neighborhood, we’re kind of on the cusp of dropping cable and going full streaming. I say “kind of” because our limited experience with streaming so far (Netflix, Prime, D+, Hulu) has been, well, very disappointing/disillusioning. It just seems like we spend 90% of the time on the various services just scrollingscrollingscrollingscrollingscrollingscrollingscrollingscrollingscrollingscrolling... endlessly, in hopes of finding something that piques our interest.
It’s maddening to scroll through hundreds of offerings and finding very little of interest. It’s kind of like cable tv only on steroids. The only advantage we can see in going full streaming is we will be paying less for umpteen shows we aren’t interested in. I guess that’s a win?
posted by Thorzdad at 7:34 AM on August 20, 2023 [3 favorites]
It’s maddening to scroll through hundreds of offerings and finding very little of interest. It’s kind of like cable tv only on steroids. The only advantage we can see in going full streaming is we will be paying less for umpteen shows we aren’t interested in. I guess that’s a win?
posted by Thorzdad at 7:34 AM on August 20, 2023 [3 favorites]
Remember back when there were like five TV channels and three of them wouldn't even come in clearly on the rabbit ears? We'd watch almost anything. Now on Netflix it's endless scrolling of stuff we just don't care that much for? What even happened. (We hardly ever watch english-language produced shows or movies any more; just so fucking sick of Western storytelling.)
posted by seanmpuckett at 7:40 AM on August 20, 2023 [11 favorites]
posted by seanmpuckett at 7:40 AM on August 20, 2023 [11 favorites]
It’s maddening to scroll through hundreds of offerings and finding very little of interest.
reminds me of the video rental days. A lot. With every given streamer like a different store or chain. So you end up having to pick through a lotta lotta crap to find something you actually feel like giving an hour or so of your life to. And of course, as with back then, no streaming service has everything ... but you usually end up finding something.
The analogy breaks down when you get to the streaming subscription model, of course, because it's very very easy (feature not bug) to stream ten minutes of something and decide naaah! this ain't for me, on to something else. You could do this with a video rental, of course, but you wouldn't get your money back.
I don't pretend to know how all of this will end up playing out. But I do hope that we, the audience, figure out how to make our demands clear and get them on the table. I know what mine are, more or less:
1. stop fucking around and make everything available (one way or another) to everybody who
2. is willing to pay a fair amount for (one way or another) access to that everything while
3. (related to #1) understanding that those responsible for creating the works in question are fairly compensated for their time and talents.
posted by philip-random at 7:56 AM on August 20, 2023
reminds me of the video rental days. A lot. With every given streamer like a different store or chain. So you end up having to pick through a lotta lotta crap to find something you actually feel like giving an hour or so of your life to. And of course, as with back then, no streaming service has everything ... but you usually end up finding something.
The analogy breaks down when you get to the streaming subscription model, of course, because it's very very easy (feature not bug) to stream ten minutes of something and decide naaah! this ain't for me, on to something else. You could do this with a video rental, of course, but you wouldn't get your money back.
I don't pretend to know how all of this will end up playing out. But I do hope that we, the audience, figure out how to make our demands clear and get them on the table. I know what mine are, more or less:
1. stop fucking around and make everything available (one way or another) to everybody who
2. is willing to pay a fair amount for (one way or another) access to that everything while
3. (related to #1) understanding that those responsible for creating the works in question are fairly compensated for their time and talents.
posted by philip-random at 7:56 AM on August 20, 2023
Netflix And Max Director Steven Soderbergh Calls Out Streaming Services Hiding Numbers: 'They Don’t Want Wall Street To Look Under The Hood' - "Soderbergh revealed to Defector that he's only received 'adjectives' to describe how his programs are doing, like, 'We feel good about these numbers.' It's better that those on and off camera are informed of the success of their projects compared to being in the dark about it... data transparency is the key to keeping these streaming services alive. With the correct data revealed, actors and writers can get the money they need to survive as well as gain a better understanding of how well a film or show they've worked on is doing."
earlier...
Endeavor's Chairman Renegotiates How Movie Stars Get Paid Online - "On the writers guild and unions, they were used to royalties from TV and film. There was a real methodology that had been negotiated over a series of years. Now something goes on streaming and there's no transparency, fewer optics into how the show performed. How do you get your fair share of your royalty fee?" (previously)
Hollywood superagent Jeremy Zimmer wants to change how talent is paid - "Writers, actors and other creative types need to get paid based on the number of people who view their work on streaming services, he said... Zimmer isn't getting much support for his idea now. Netflix tightly controls its viewer data and doesn't have a big incentive to change the business model that has built it into an industry juggernaut, with a US$165 billion (RM684.75 billion) market value. Musicians, meanwhile, routinely criticise record labels and streaming services for paying them too little. But Zimmer said the pay-per-view model will come in time. 'We're all trying to head in that direction,' he said."
posted by kliuless at 7:57 AM on August 20, 2023 [7 favorites]
Well, it’s just, there are two potential reasons that we’re not getting all of the information. One is that they’re all making a lot more money than anybody knows and that they’re willing to tell us. The other is they’re making a lot less money than anybody knows. And they don’t want Wall Street to look under the hood of this thing in any significant way because there’ll be a reckoning that will be quite unpleasant. It’s one of those two. My attitude is, I’d rather work in a version of the business where I know what’s going on. And if I have to take a haircut, to work in that business, and bet on myself more and take less upfront, which I’ve done a lot, then I’ll do that.Steven Soderbergh Says It's Time To Tear The Streaming Model Down To The Studs - "That could, though, mean, potentially, a drastic reduction in the amount of things that get made. If we tear this thing down to the studs, and find out that the math is funky, it's going to be quite a transformation. And so my feeling—and I'm operating from a place of real privilege—is the sooner we find out the better, because one way or another, it's gotta get rebuilt, you might as well start now."
earlier...
Endeavor's Chairman Renegotiates How Movie Stars Get Paid Online - "On the writers guild and unions, they were used to royalties from TV and film. There was a real methodology that had been negotiated over a series of years. Now something goes on streaming and there's no transparency, fewer optics into how the show performed. How do you get your fair share of your royalty fee?" (previously)
Hollywood superagent Jeremy Zimmer wants to change how talent is paid - "Writers, actors and other creative types need to get paid based on the number of people who view their work on streaming services, he said... Zimmer isn't getting much support for his idea now. Netflix tightly controls its viewer data and doesn't have a big incentive to change the business model that has built it into an industry juggernaut, with a US$165 billion (RM684.75 billion) market value. Musicians, meanwhile, routinely criticise record labels and streaming services for paying them too little. But Zimmer said the pay-per-view model will come in time. 'We're all trying to head in that direction,' he said."
posted by kliuless at 7:57 AM on August 20, 2023 [7 favorites]
> Copyright infringement is really the market the streaming services are competing against. The sooner they realize the better. Which was why Netflix was a win and the balkanized current system is a loser. The service providers have to be better than your buddies Plex server and when you subscribe to a hand full of services and the content you want it not available at any price the jolly roger is pretty attractive.
an intervention that is necessary to make in the thread: your buddy's plex server, as a tool for preserving and disseminating media, is a moral good. it's good that the collective buddy's-plex-servers of the world exist. unlike the buddy's-plex-server system, the media streaming companies are 1) awful at disseminating material 2) given to destroying media rather than preserving it.
as such, netflix's success back in the day wasn't a "win," it was just some crappy company briefly discovering a highly effective method for displacing the earlier, better mode of media delivery.
posted by bombastic lowercase pronouncements at 8:09 AM on August 20, 2023 [6 favorites]
an intervention that is necessary to make in the thread: your buddy's plex server, as a tool for preserving and disseminating media, is a moral good. it's good that the collective buddy's-plex-servers of the world exist. unlike the buddy's-plex-server system, the media streaming companies are 1) awful at disseminating material 2) given to destroying media rather than preserving it.
as such, netflix's success back in the day wasn't a "win," it was just some crappy company briefly discovering a highly effective method for displacing the earlier, better mode of media delivery.
posted by bombastic lowercase pronouncements at 8:09 AM on August 20, 2023 [6 favorites]
another way to put it: information goods are (pure) public goods -- non-rival and non-excludable -- which breaks capitalism (as we know it!), requiring public financing and/or differential pricing where "the marginal willingness to pay should be equal to marginal cost" for optimal allocation :P
posted by kliuless at 9:41 AM on August 20, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by kliuless at 9:41 AM on August 20, 2023 [4 favorites]
I don't know what it was like for musicians, but as a consumer early 2000s mp3.com was pretty close to what Bandcamp is today, at least in terms of selling music very conveniently. I don't remember if any well-known musicians were ever on mp3.com; the handful of musicians that I know that I discovered there (and still listen to!) were small, unsigned acts that all seem to have broken up or moved out of music by now.
Yeah, I remember mp3.com, and there were a few other services over the years--some have survived, many have not. I think the difference is that none of those services were ever as successful as Bandcamp for some reason. Could be that they were competing with Napster and Kazaa at the height of their infamy, and the product they were offering wasn't much better; could be that they never managed to grow beyond the tiny indie bands that made up their bread and butter, and so never managed to expand their reach much; could just be a UX/convenience thing (Bandcamp is so much nicer than any other digital music storefront I've ever used, it's the gold standard for me).
Hell, it could be that Bandcamp figured out very early on how to do both physical AND digital sales from the same storefront, and mix in code redemption as well so labels putting out and distributing their own releases could still take advantage of Bandcamp's services. Other storefronts that mixed physical and digital always clearly privileged physical and digital was always an afterthought: buy this vinyl, you'll get some random 320kbps MP3s in a ZIP file but make sure you download it now because the link will expire in 30 days. Bandcamp manages to do justice to both, and makes for a much more compelling consumer option, at least for me. (I fully admit that there aren't a ton of people who'll appreciate Bandcamp always offering FLACs as a download option like I do.)
posted by chrominance at 9:42 AM on August 20, 2023 [4 favorites]
Yeah, I remember mp3.com, and there were a few other services over the years--some have survived, many have not. I think the difference is that none of those services were ever as successful as Bandcamp for some reason. Could be that they were competing with Napster and Kazaa at the height of their infamy, and the product they were offering wasn't much better; could be that they never managed to grow beyond the tiny indie bands that made up their bread and butter, and so never managed to expand their reach much; could just be a UX/convenience thing (Bandcamp is so much nicer than any other digital music storefront I've ever used, it's the gold standard for me).
Hell, it could be that Bandcamp figured out very early on how to do both physical AND digital sales from the same storefront, and mix in code redemption as well so labels putting out and distributing their own releases could still take advantage of Bandcamp's services. Other storefronts that mixed physical and digital always clearly privileged physical and digital was always an afterthought: buy this vinyl, you'll get some random 320kbps MP3s in a ZIP file but make sure you download it now because the link will expire in 30 days. Bandcamp manages to do justice to both, and makes for a much more compelling consumer option, at least for me. (I fully admit that there aren't a ton of people who'll appreciate Bandcamp always offering FLACs as a download option like I do.)
posted by chrominance at 9:42 AM on August 20, 2023 [4 favorites]
If you had told me in the early 2000s that the music industry would get to a point where Bandcamp was allowed to exist, let alone flourish, I'd have said it was impossible.
There was never anything that could have prevented Bandcamp from existing. It has never been illegal for independent acts to make their music accessible however they saw fit. Now, label acts being on Bandcamp is another thing altogether, but again, that's up to the individual labels. Bands had their music up on MySpace way before Bandcamp ever existed, and also, as mentioned above, mp3.com. Though the popularity algorithm on mp3.com was so bad that the band Red Delicious was #1 for most of that site's existence, just because the list was on the homepage.
posted by grumpybear69 at 11:02 AM on August 20, 2023 [3 favorites]
There was never anything that could have prevented Bandcamp from existing. It has never been illegal for independent acts to make their music accessible however they saw fit. Now, label acts being on Bandcamp is another thing altogether, but again, that's up to the individual labels. Bands had their music up on MySpace way before Bandcamp ever existed, and also, as mentioned above, mp3.com. Though the popularity algorithm on mp3.com was so bad that the band Red Delicious was #1 for most of that site's existence, just because the list was on the homepage.
posted by grumpybear69 at 11:02 AM on August 20, 2023 [3 favorites]
> But video production doesn't scale down the same way unless we're talking about stuff that doesn't look as much like a TV show or a movie
If this is a little bit true now, it's not likely to stay that way for long.
posted by matjus at 11:19 AM on August 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
If this is a little bit true now, it's not likely to stay that way for long.
posted by matjus at 11:19 AM on August 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
Here in San Francisco, once upon a time, there were a number of theaters that showed repertory films, foreign films, weird avant garde films, etc. But they’re pretty much gone. There were loads of music stores with a wide variety of CDs and other media. Amoeba Records had a huge selection of CDs and DVDs. During that time I could go see pretty much anything I wanted to see, or I could buy what I wanted to see or listen to. Most of the music stores are gone. And Amoeba is now pretty much emptying out of inventory except vinyl for collectors of sorts and I don’t find anything there anymore. There were once a number of local publications that gave me reviews and calendars of events so I could see what was happening and what was coming. But no more. The environment was rich in choice, but no longer. Thanks to technology, a person’s ability to consume music and film was amazing. I was in heaven. But no more. I don’t have any answers because it all seems to be wrapped up in some corporate money machinations that seem to ignore people like myself. Yeah, I have one album on Bandcamp, but I’m not famous, nor do I try to market myself, and given all the stuff there, I doubt anyone would ever discover it. Art, in general, seems like a ghost town…
posted by njohnson23 at 11:19 AM on August 20, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by njohnson23 at 11:19 AM on August 20, 2023 [3 favorites]
the easier it gets to make/distribute the work, the cheaper it will be to consume it.
posted by matjus at 11:22 AM on August 20, 2023
posted by matjus at 11:22 AM on August 20, 2023
If the Blue was really concerned about residuals, there wouldn’t be links to YouT*be movies, tv shows, etc.. BandCamp for films/videos just means another place to watch amateur stuff shot on phones.
posted by Ideefixe at 11:25 AM on August 20, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by Ideefixe at 11:25 AM on August 20, 2023 [2 favorites]
I've never even heard of "Amoeba Records", but I've got to say that I'm pretty suspicious of the idea that they had a wider variety than the internet does. I suspect that you don't need a music store with variety; you need a curated list.
posted by Flunkie at 11:38 AM on August 20, 2023
posted by Flunkie at 11:38 AM on August 20, 2023
I think, in practice, curation is a part of variety, not just access. Like the internet *has* so much, but the easily accessed curation kind of tries to guide you down well worn paths.
In practice variety in experience is how long it take you to find something new and different that you like, and that doesn't take access to everything - in fact that can be an impediment - you need access to enough things, and importantly good things, so that it doesn't take long to find something new and different and good. Which I can easily see a record store doing better than just approaching the internet through google and spotify.
posted by Zalzidrax at 11:48 AM on August 20, 2023 [4 favorites]
In practice variety in experience is how long it take you to find something new and different that you like, and that doesn't take access to everything - in fact that can be an impediment - you need access to enough things, and importantly good things, so that it doesn't take long to find something new and different and good. Which I can easily see a record store doing better than just approaching the internet through google and spotify.
posted by Zalzidrax at 11:48 AM on August 20, 2023 [4 favorites]
Here in San Francisco, once upon a time, there were a number of theaters that showed repertory films, foreign films, weird avant garde films, etc. But they’re pretty much gone. There were loads of music stores with a wide variety of CDs and other media. Amoeba Records had a huge selection of CDs and DVDs. During that time I could go see pretty much anything I wanted to see, or I could buy what I wanted to see or listen to. Most of the music stores are gone. And Amoeba is now pretty much emptying out of inventory except vinyl for collectors of sorts and I don’t find anything there anymore. There were once a number of local publications that gave me reviews and calendars of events so I could see what was happening and what was coming. But no more. The environment was rich in choice, but no longer.
Somehow feels like a sad synecdoche for how San Francisco's changed over the last two decades.
posted by Insert Clever Name Here at 12:07 PM on August 20, 2023 [6 favorites]
Somehow feels like a sad synecdoche for how San Francisco's changed over the last two decades.
posted by Insert Clever Name Here at 12:07 PM on August 20, 2023 [6 favorites]
In terms of finding things, I prefer to browse and hope for the chance of serendipity. That method worked for years, when there were places that featured loads of variety to browse like real stores. You can’t browse on the internet. If you know what you want, you can find that. As to curated lists, who curates the curators?
posted by njohnson23 at 12:18 PM on August 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by njohnson23 at 12:18 PM on August 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
Now that fiber is available in our neighborhood, we’re kind of on the cusp of dropping cable and going full streaming. I say “kind of” because our limited experience with streaming so far (Netflix, Prime, D+, Hulu) has been, well, very disappointing/disillusioning. It just seems like we spend 90% of the time on the various services just scrollingscrollingscrollingscrollingscrollingscrollingscrollingscrollingscrollingscrolling... endlessly, in hopes of finding something that piques our interest.
The way we watch things these days is pretty common, I think. You subscribe to a specific service for a few months, in order to watch some number of shows or movies on that service. Then you shut that one down, and subscribe to another to do the same. Eventually, six months or a year later, you cycle back to the first since by then they have new content. It solves the "scrollscrollscroll" issue, and also solves the "hold on, how many services are we paying for?" revelation.
I believe the services call this "churning" and hate it (they want you to keep the service year-round, and pay for the cheaper ad-supported tier that earns them more money) but for us at least doing this kind of cycling has been working.
posted by Dip Flash at 12:39 PM on August 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
The way we watch things these days is pretty common, I think. You subscribe to a specific service for a few months, in order to watch some number of shows or movies on that service. Then you shut that one down, and subscribe to another to do the same. Eventually, six months or a year later, you cycle back to the first since by then they have new content. It solves the "scrollscrollscroll" issue, and also solves the "hold on, how many services are we paying for?" revelation.
I believe the services call this "churning" and hate it (they want you to keep the service year-round, and pay for the cheaper ad-supported tier that earns them more money) but for us at least doing this kind of cycling has been working.
posted by Dip Flash at 12:39 PM on August 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
I think, in practice, curation is a part of variety, not just access. Like the internet *has* so much, but the easily accessed curation kind of tries to guide you down well worn paths.Sure, it often works out that way, but what Amoeba Records (apparently) did was also curation; they decided what to sell at their store. The same thing could be done without owning a physical store.
posted by Flunkie at 12:52 PM on August 20, 2023
As to curated lists, who curates the curators?Who curated the selection at Amoeba Records?
posted by Flunkie at 12:53 PM on August 20, 2023
Where we're at:
• recorded entertainment was enabled by technology
• massive profits were enabled by scarcity (the difficulty of copying films, records & broadcasts)
• newer technology eliminated scarcity and pulled the rug out
I've long felt that all digital entertainment should be made available everywhere for $5/month.
Just about everyone in the industrialized world could afford that, making the revenue somewhere in the neighborhood of $5B a month and eliminating piracy.
All the current artists, studios and production companies would have to agree to participate - and with trustworthy metrics deployed - take their cut of actual views/listens.
posted by mmrtnt at 1:09 PM on August 20, 2023 [3 favorites]
• recorded entertainment was enabled by technology
• massive profits were enabled by scarcity (the difficulty of copying films, records & broadcasts)
• newer technology eliminated scarcity and pulled the rug out
I've long felt that all digital entertainment should be made available everywhere for $5/month.
Just about everyone in the industrialized world could afford that, making the revenue somewhere in the neighborhood of $5B a month and eliminating piracy.
All the current artists, studios and production companies would have to agree to participate - and with trustworthy metrics deployed - take their cut of actual views/listens.
posted by mmrtnt at 1:09 PM on August 20, 2023 [3 favorites]
I feel like the piracy debate is a bit of a derail - the problem isn’t that people are stealing stuff, it’s that the large businesses will not distribute, will not make, will not even think about commissioning anything that isn’t the kind of slam dunk that a Marvel movie is.
posted by The River Ivel at 1:57 PM on August 20, 2023 [5 favorites]
posted by The River Ivel at 1:57 PM on August 20, 2023 [5 favorites]
I liked how the Sam Raimi Spiderman / big-names-vs-bad-work-relationships explains the sprawling money-controlled MCU (and probably also the poor choices in Star Wars VII-IX).
the large businesses will not distribute, will not make, will not even think about commissioning anything that isn’t the kind of slam dunk that a Marvel movie
Commissioning big things vs competing with their back-catalogue. The long tail was supposed* to keep hard workers in royalties as well as funding new creation. Now there's so much talk of a 'golden age' that I can't keep up and when I do watch celebrated stuff, it's often tedious, and that long tail is siloed rather than widely available.
*: I said supposed.
posted by k3ninho at 2:46 PM on August 20, 2023
the large businesses will not distribute, will not make, will not even think about commissioning anything that isn’t the kind of slam dunk that a Marvel movie
Commissioning big things vs competing with their back-catalogue. The long tail was supposed* to keep hard workers in royalties as well as funding new creation. Now there's so much talk of a 'golden age' that I can't keep up and when I do watch celebrated stuff, it's often tedious, and that long tail is siloed rather than widely available.
*: I said supposed.
posted by k3ninho at 2:46 PM on August 20, 2023
I cancelled all of my streaming services and switched back to DVDs.
posted by metatuesday at 5:49 PM on August 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by metatuesday at 5:49 PM on August 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
I used to enjoy Netflix's DVD service, because the selection made up for the wait. For a while, it felt like I could watch almost anything I wanted, as long as it had been released to DVD. Then they started focusing on their streaming service to the detriment of their DVD service and the selection got worse, and I eventually canceled. So did a lot of other people.
And then the selection on streaming started to get worse.
Doing some quick Google searches, it seems like the DVD service was profitable - just not as profitable as the streaming service. And it was so much better than what we have now.
posted by Kutsuwamushi at 6:19 PM on August 20, 2023 [4 favorites]
And then the selection on streaming started to get worse.
Doing some quick Google searches, it seems like the DVD service was profitable - just not as profitable as the streaming service. And it was so much better than what we have now.
posted by Kutsuwamushi at 6:19 PM on August 20, 2023 [4 favorites]
Curation is what influencers should be. I wasn't looking hard but there was some of this with Twitter X.
netflix's success back in the day wasn't a "win," it was just some crappy company briefly discovering a highly effective method for displacing the earlier, better mode of media delivery.
Was was meaning a win for content companies. It would of course be a loss for the public domain.
posted by Mitheral at 6:20 PM on August 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
netflix's success back in the day wasn't a "win," it was just some crappy company briefly discovering a highly effective method for displacing the earlier, better mode of media delivery.
Was was meaning a win for content companies. It would of course be a loss for the public domain.
posted by Mitheral at 6:20 PM on August 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
With music, I miss the random discovery of putting a giant mp3 library, full of friends' music collections that had been merged in, on shuffle, and just getting a completely random selection of music, must of which I'd never heard before. All services today any to do some kind if recommendation algorithm, try and make sure stuff makes sense, basically they try exceptionally hard not to do what I want. My dream is to put Spotify on shuffle. The whole of Spotify. When no theming, no logic, no trying to work out what I like, it might like. Just a completely random selection from the entire library, until the next song, also an unrelated completely random song. I don't want to be in rabbit holes, I want to find stuff that's unlike anything I've ever heard that I don't know about, and never would, except for shuffle. My old, giant mp3 library used to achieve that, do a degree.
posted by Dysk at 7:21 PM on August 20, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by Dysk at 7:21 PM on August 20, 2023 [4 favorites]
I've long felt that all digital entertainment should be made available everywhere for $5/month.
Sort of like BBC tv back in the day? Yesno?
The Amoeba Revords I know of sells used as well as new, so there’s a lot of curation done by everyone else who shops there. Even more if the buyer pays attention to what they’re special ordering.
posted by clew at 9:59 PM on August 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
Sort of like BBC tv back in the day? Yesno?
The Amoeba Revords I know of sells used as well as new, so there’s a lot of curation done by everyone else who shops there. Even more if the buyer pays attention to what they’re special ordering.
posted by clew at 9:59 PM on August 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
Amoeba works like most any independent record/assorted media store, except that some of their locations (there are three as far as I know: Berkeley, SF and LA) are notably big and have a correspondingly large selection. I think what’s being missed is the particular combination of curation and serendipity that a place like that provides. The ways to source media online that come closest to capturing that experience are not, I’d say, the legal ones.
posted by atoxyl at 11:16 PM on August 20, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by atoxyl at 11:16 PM on August 20, 2023 [2 favorites]
I've long felt that all digital entertainment should be made available everywhere for $5/month.
Agreed, or hell just make it available everywhere at whatever your current price is. I currently live in Europe but still subscribe to multiple US streaming services, relying on VPNs (blame my wife's love of American TV). Not only is it an extra cost, but it's significantly extra hassle as well. Certain services (Hulu, Peacock) work pretty hard to hunt down and blacklist traffic they suspect is originating from overseas, despite the fact that we are probably well under 1% of their viewership. Never mind that I pay for these services, same as anyone else.
Can't say I'd be sad to see any of these companies lose business.
posted by photo guy at 1:27 AM on August 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
Agreed, or hell just make it available everywhere at whatever your current price is. I currently live in Europe but still subscribe to multiple US streaming services, relying on VPNs (blame my wife's love of American TV). Not only is it an extra cost, but it's significantly extra hassle as well. Certain services (Hulu, Peacock) work pretty hard to hunt down and blacklist traffic they suspect is originating from overseas, despite the fact that we are probably well under 1% of their viewership. Never mind that I pay for these services, same as anyone else.
Can't say I'd be sad to see any of these companies lose business.
posted by photo guy at 1:27 AM on August 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
I think this article confuses a few different things: first 'streaming' was never meant to replace going to the movies for new movies, and it most assuredly has not. So comparing the number of new movies made vs the vast past library isn't really correct. Also most of the time in the past, the number of movies actually shown was very small. HBO etc still repeat movies regularly with very small active libraries - MTV just constantly showing Ridiculousness is just taking it to it's logical conclusion.
Hastings (and every other movie store) having 20 copies of the latest big blockbuster subsidized the shelf-space for less popular movies, but stores (in the past) weren't really good about maximizing their sales per sq ft, which is why WalMart came in and ate their lunch, and they don't exist anymore.
I've long felt that all digital entertainment should be made available everywhere for $5/month.
A $5 a month model for every movie isn't going to happen, because the back-end technology costs are too high. $5 for the most popular movies is possible, but the vast library is gone.
posted by The_Vegetables at 8:29 AM on August 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
Hastings (and every other movie store) having 20 copies of the latest big blockbuster subsidized the shelf-space for less popular movies, but stores (in the past) weren't really good about maximizing their sales per sq ft, which is why WalMart came in and ate their lunch, and they don't exist anymore.
I've long felt that all digital entertainment should be made available everywhere for $5/month.
A $5 a month model for every movie isn't going to happen, because the back-end technology costs are too high. $5 for the most popular movies is possible, but the vast library is gone.
posted by The_Vegetables at 8:29 AM on August 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
what Dysk described about music is similar to this streaming website I made that randomly plays any of 40,000 LP records from archive.org here: https://locserendipity.com/LP.html
posted by metatuesday at 9:21 AM on August 21, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by metatuesday at 9:21 AM on August 21, 2023 [4 favorites]
The way we watch things these days is pretty common, I think. You subscribe to a specific service for a few months, in order to watch some number of shows or movies on that service. Then you shut that one down, and subscribe to another to do the same. Eventually, six months or a year later, you cycle back to the first since by then they have new content. It solves the "scrollscrollscroll" issue, and also solves the "hold on, how many services are we paying for?" revelation.
Ehhhhh...That sounds like way more work than it’s worth, frankly. It’s just fucking tv.
posted by Thorzdad at 2:27 PM on August 21, 2023
Ehhhhh...That sounds like way more work than it’s worth, frankly. It’s just fucking tv.
posted by Thorzdad at 2:27 PM on August 21, 2023
« Older One of the First Parts I Remember Noticing was the... | I _kinda_ get p-adic numbers a little more after... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
The retreat to the ad-supported platforms is just recreating OTA broadcasting only differently now. People wanted to pay for no commercials, but now commercials will be intruding everywhere, even onto Netflix unless you can pay even more.
I don't know how they sort this out unless they really change what they're using their streaming platforms for, and even rolling a few of them up altogether.
posted by hippybear at 7:18 PM on August 19, 2023 [5 favorites]