[eru]

> Their 1080p is still the super-crummy 1080p they had 15 years ago.

Oh, 1080p indeed been introduced in 2009, eg 15 years ago. I thought it was younger. However, just pretend I was talking about the next higher resolutions, or 60fps.

> [...] they're just going to take more profit, as long as it's still minimally good enough for the average viewer.

Competition will take care of that extra profit.

[crazygringo]

> Competition will take care of that extra profit.

No it won't. I said "minimally good enough". Competition takes care of things up to "minimally good enough". And then it stops.

That's my point -- bandwidth getting cheaper is not leading streamers to increase the quality of their 1080p. Because not enough people care. Not enough people will switch services. Competition ceases because it's not a significant factor of differentiation.

(For the niche people that do care, that's why YouTube premium exists, but it's niche.)

[eru]

> No it won't. I said "minimally good enough". Competition takes care of things up to "minimally good enough". And then it stops.

Huh, why would it stop? People can freely switch between streaming services.

> Because not enough people care.

Yes, competition improves what people care about. That's a good thing. You don't want society to waste resources on stuff people don't care about.

Btw, your argument might demonstrate that video quality won't go up, if people don't care. Yes, I agree. But what does that have to do with profit?

People always eg care about price; and they will switch for price.