Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman
I don’t understand yours. And no, I clearly wasn’t saying that.
I’ll put it as simply as I can.
13 million people pay £24 into a pot, which gets unevenly distributed among third parties, after covering some platform and equipment costs. For that everyone gets almost everything.
TV companies decide they don’t like their share of the pot and so launch their own separate platforms at £6 each.
Now to achieve the previous total pot value they need 52 million individual subscriptions. I don’t believe that market exists unless some households take four (or more) subscriptions and this group will be worse off by paying the same (or more) for less content.
|
If the six Hollywood companies currently share the proceeds of the £24 pot, which makes it they get £4 each, if spread evenly, why do the companies need 52 million subscribers? They need 13m people paying £4 each, for their own streamers to achieve the same as before.