[jrmg]

That’s an interesting idea. I wonder if, for some services, the outcome for the supplier would be better.

I think I’d be likely to subscribe to more TV services if they only charged me on months I used them. I’d feel I could just let them sit dormant in months they had no shows I wanted to watch, but I think I’d use them without much hesitation when some new show I was interested in became available.

[jader201]

From a consumer standpoint, 100% agree with you.

From a provider standpoint, I’m guessing they would lose more revenue from existing subscribers not using it vs. what they’d gain from new (often dormant) subscribers.

[IggleSniggle]

It's a great model for any younger, relatively unknown provider for this reason. Although, the $9/mo Netflix subscription (I can't remember the actual price point, but it worked out if you watched more than 2 movies in a month) totally beat the pants off the Blockerbuster late fees / missing title fees on a $1/film/day pay-as-you-go model, from a consumer standpoint.

[marcosdumay]

I wonder how many dormant subscribers those services have. I find it hard to believe that they'll have many.

They are not like a gym where it's work to use. Instead, they are exactly the opposite.