[tombert]

Yeah, ever since that change happened, I haven't logged into Prime Video. I'm paying money for a product, I shouldn't have to put up with ads too.

I understand that it's not free to produce TV shows, no free lunches and whatnot, so I understand why stuff I watch for free has ads, but if I'm paying for something I draw a line that I don't want my shit interrupted by advertisement.

It really annoyed me that Prime decided that they would just impose ads on me unless I pay them an additional $4 a month. I already pay for Prime, I already buy many products on Amazon, I don't want to pay an extra $50 a year just to watch your mediocre shows without you trying to indoctrinate me to buy more shit.

[philistine]

On a fundamental level you're absolutely right. Unfortunately, you're complaining about a model that has existed for decades at this point: the cable model. You pay an arm and a leg for cable, and yet you get ads.

Companies seem incapable of imagining a world where they don't double dip, since they've built the whole house of cards on the cable model and they want nothing else than to recreate it.

[bcrl]

Cable still has one thing going for it: it tends to be cheaper for sports. Watching hockey games online requires subscriptions to 3 different streaming services just to follow a single local team, which is ridiculous.

[reaperducer]

Watching hockey games online requires subscriptions to 3 different streaming services just to follow a single local team, which is ridiculous.

A newspaper recently published an article stating that if you wanted to watch every NFL game, you'd need eleven streaming subscriptions.

[ch0wn]

Same for me. I actually don't order much but kept the subscription going for some of the shows I enjoyed. I promptly cancelled because of this. Obviously I'm in the minority, otherwise they wouldn't do it.