Many more people are jumping from one streaming subscription to another, a behavior that could have big implications for the entertainment industry.

Americans are getting increasingly impulsive about hitting the cancellation button on their streaming services. More than 29 million — about a quarter of domestic paying streaming subscribers — have canceled three or more services over the last two years, according to Antenna, a subscription research firm. And the numbers are rising fast.

The data suggests a sharp shift in consumer behavior — far from the cable era, when viewers largely stuck with a single provider, as well as the early days of the so-called streaming wars, when people kept adding services without culling or jumping around.

Among these nomadic subscribers, some are taking advantage of how easy it is, with a monthly contract and simple click of a button, to hopscotch from one service to the next. Indeed, these users can be fickle — a third of them resubscribe to the canceled service within six months, according to Antenna’s research.

“In three years, this went from a very niche behavior to an absolute mainstream part of the market,” said Jonathan Carson, the chief executive of Antenna.

Non-paywall link

  • Aviandelight @mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    144
    ·
    7 months ago

    I really don’t understand why streaming business are so surprised. They are providing television for rent and users are renting it plain and simple.They seem to think they are entitled to lengthy subscriptions from users when in reality they aren’t providing a service that’s even stable or worth it.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      48
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      The Netflix model was only ever really sustainable as long as there was only one or two providers. As long as there was only Netflix people were quite happy to just stay with the subscription because all of the content was on one convenient platform.

      If I want to watch popular shows and how I have to subscribe to five or six services. Why would I do that if they are all still going to be there in a couple of months.

      • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        7 months ago

        The Netflix model was only ever really sustainable as long as there was only one or two providers

        The netflix model of streaming for cash was sustainable. The practice of gouging to where people will churn, that’s more widespread and an expected result.

        • Pofski@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          7 months ago

          The moment that I wasn’t allowed to do with my 6 accounts what I want to do, it was done for me.

      • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        if they are all still going to be there in a couple of months.

        That’s the beauty of Netflix. They won’t.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          7 months ago

          They usually keep new shows at least for a year. And I suppose after that there’s no possible way of watching that content ever again, it’s lost into oblivion and certainly not available to download from a large number of locations.

          Oh well

    • Seraph@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      7 months ago

      Users: Fine if you want me to pay a monthly fee I’ll only pay 3 months of the year.
      Streaming services: Shook

    • the post of tom joad
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      You’re probably being theoretical rhetorical, but they’re definitely not surprised. Any actual confusion as to why an article like this can be cleared up when you consider the author isn’t really talking to us. Try reading it as if it’s a business brief, talking about us as a ‘problem’ that must be addressed. That ‘problem’ is we users are getting more value from the current model than was calculated by corporate.

      Soon there will be another article (also addressing the room as if we’re not part of the discussion) detailing how corporate managed to “fix” it, and the revenue increases it brings. The other companies will follow suit to thunderous applause

    • Omega@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      7 months ago

      I would be happy to keep subscribing for a reasonable price. But I’m starting to trim the fat as they continue to price gouge.