this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2023
519 points (95.4% liked)
Technology
58303 readers
10 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Stories like this are weird. As are the reactions.
It's a nominal cost for a lot of content. Some people lost access to it because they were sharing accounts, and millions who did decided that it was worth the $12 or whatever to get their own account.
And?
And most of those new accounts are in countries where there was no password crackdown and Netflix lost about 8% on share price so they want to spin the idea
I would counterargue it is different from a traditional price increase. Netflix basically ''backstabbed'' their consumers, by altering the contract they followed for years and even repeteadly made marketing and promises in that regard (all the ''sharing netflix with family and friends is an expression of love'' posts).
If the price had increased, it would be another reaction, but this new house limitation is really a petty move that feels a lot worse. I hope the other streamings just increase the price and let people share the same account.