[eteos]

For some reason alot of people talk like they have the right to have one 10$ subscription that provides every movie and series in the world, with the reasoning that it's possible with music. That is a utopia. All the movies/series are more expensive than all the songs. Especially production-wise.

It wouldbbe bice

[beatgammit]

I don't think that's what people want, I think people just want reasonable value for a reasonable price and not have to juggle streaming services.

Personally, I'd love a service that provides a good quantity of content at some base price, with more content available for some additional, fixed price. Some ideas:

- add-on services for an extra monthly price (say, $10/month base for Netflix, $10 more each for Disney, HBO, etc) - access to everything, but limited number of hours/shows/movies per month, with extra purchasable time/shows/movies - ala carte movies/shows should be reasonably priced (newer shows/movies around $5 down to $1 for older content)

I have having to remember which platform has which content. I don't care if a movie was produced by Disney or DreamWorks, I just know I want to watch it with my kids. Amazon usually has it available for purchase/rent, but finding the proper platform would be significant cheaper since it's available as part of the monthly fee I'm already paying.

I think copyright should be much more limited than it is today. When copyright was introduced, it lasted 14 years, and could be extended an additional 14 years if the content owner was still alive. I think basic idea makes sense, but with corporations owning copyright, perhaps it makes sense for these owners to prove that they need the additional protections to turn a profit in order to get an extension. I think this would encourage content owners to make their content more available while they still have protections instead of hoarding it because they know people have to come to them for their content.

Personally, I only have two streaming services: Netflix (my kids like several shows there) and Amazon (we really like 2 day shipping, the video is just a perk). We've rented a handful of shows, but it's really a turnoff because my kids like to watch something several times in a short period, but I don't want to rent it several times, so we tend to just avoid content that's not available. I would be happy to pay more for more content access, but I don't want yet another platform.

If I were less well-off, I'd consider just giving up on streaming and go back to piracy. Instead, I just deal with mediocre content instead of getting exactly what I want for a bit more money.

[Karunamon]

If the studios had the will to get together and do this, it absolutely would be possible.

[javagram]

$10 for everything that was already produced in history? Sure.

$10 to fund equivalent production of new movies and TV shows? Impossible. Profits in the media industry aren’t that high, so reducing the amount of incoming monthly money to less than a single movie ticket or 1/6 of a cable subscription means that they can’t afford to produce nearly as much content as they do right now.

[Flow]

Doesn't most movies earn back the money the first days/weeks in the cinemas?

But you might have a point for tv series. I suspect they have gotten much more expensive to make the last 1-2 decades.

[wolco]

If they started paying everyone minimum wage and cut production costs they could.

[javagram]

Good luck forcing everyone to work for minimum wage. They’d leave for other industries, we don’t have a command economy.

[wolco]

Acting is a calling. We would lose many pretty faces but the people remaining would be extremely talented perhaps more average looking.

There are a lot of people in community theater now who would love a bigger audience. Tons of youtube creators would gladly make shows for the masses if the networks would have them many would even pay.

[brianwawok]

You want the studios to get together and fix the prices for consumers? That would end up well