[maccard]

> Being honest as long as something like this is available I don't really see what a site like netflix could offer that would convince me to pay

Most people are honest, and will do the the legal thing when faced with two equal options. If the choice is between that UI but it's illegal, and a reskin of that UI but it's £30/mo, I'd pay.

But it's not, as the other comments here said. It's a choice between that for free and a limited catalog of region restricted, ever changing, poor video quality streams spread of multiple services, and given the choice between paying 4 providers for a poor service and getting a good service from one location, people will pick the latter.

[mi_z]

You wanting everything for £30 is just not a sustainable cost though. They would lose money like that.

[josephg]

Why? If I watch 2 shows from Netflix, it costs $10. If I watch 2 shows from Disney, it costs $10. If I watch a show from Disney and a show from Netflix, why should that cost $20? And if I pay $10 for that, why would that be uneconomical?

The way licensing and streaming costs work is super arbitrary and wacky. There’s nothing fixed and eternal about it. If the fee structure isn’t working (and it’s not) then it should be changed.

The movie industry can get a reasonable amount of my money or none of my money. Their choice.

[loloquwowndueo]

That’s their problem though :) bet they lose more money from the $0 they get from pirates - or so they whine.

[maccard]

Replace 30 with 60/80, whatever. The entire rest of the post is my point, not the specific number.