It's become a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy, like how people didn't trust Google to keep Stadia running so why would they buy full price games on it? Why would I pay for Netflix and get excited about their shows when so many get canned with no conclusion?
But as more people say that and don't bother watching until there's a whole finished story, then even more shows get canceled earlier because nobody watched the first season.
Aggressively launching lots of shows and canceling the lower performing ones might be a sound financial strategy in the short term, but I don't think it's doing great things for customer goodwill.
> But as more people say that and don't bother watching until there's a whole finished story, then even more shows get canceled earlier because nobody watched the first season.
That's still netflix's fault. They need to stop expecting the world to flock to their newest shows the moment they are released, there's too much competing for our attention, and instead invest in stories and creators they believe in, and make sure that they're always funding and releasing a complete and quality product. It doesn't matter if a show is only one season, so long as that one season has a satisfying conclusion.
Stories written to span multiple seasons are fine too, but they need to commit to seeing that show to its conclusion. Even if a show doesn't perform very well, some percentage of Netflix subscribers will enjoy it making it an asset for their library and on a long enough timescale it'll be worth it, but if they really want to cancel a show before the story has a chance to reasonably end, they'd be better off removing it entirely from their library. Right now their library is filled with shows that will entice new watchers only to piss them off when they learn the plug was pulled early, or which will sit unwatched by the people who have already heard that netflix screwed the show and its fans over and that's a liability.
Totally agree that it's Netflix's fault. I was a Netflix subscriber and bailed when they announced the account sharing restrictions because frankly they don't have the catalog to back up their ever increasing prices. They want $20/month for 4K. If I were going to subscribe to one of the big streaming services again, that's a tough sell against Apple's TV+ at $8/month for 4K and a better track record on show cancellations. Maybe for people who watch a lot more TV than I do it's worth the expense.
The only streaming I'm paying for now is dropout.tv, the little niche service descended from College Humor that only has like 3 shows producing new seasons. But it's consistently great, I'm not worried they're going to cancel after every season, and I'm supporting a small group of creators who all seem like nice people. Win-win-win.
My guess is that startup costs represent the bulk of the cost of a show. Just filming one episode probably costs somewhere on the same order of magnitude as an entire season.
That's self-inflicted. They're the ones who turned themselves into a worldwide known meme. Now they're suffering the consequences of their lack of dedication.
It's not on customers to respect the corporation's whims. Customers vote with their wallets.
But as more people say that and don't bother watching until there's a whole finished story, then even more shows get canceled earlier because nobody watched the first season.
Aggressively launching lots of shows and canceling the lower performing ones might be a sound financial strategy in the short term, but I don't think it's doing great things for customer goodwill.