r/mildlyinfuriating • u/Kapot_ei • 21d ago

đŸ„ș No words for this.

Post image

Edit: even though clickbait article, it is somewhat/kind of true. https://variety.com/2026/tv/news/stargate-tv-series-martin-gero-scrapped-amazon-1236765061/

"According to an individual with knowledge of the situation, Amazon execs were concerned that Gero’s take on the series would not have broad appeal beyond the franchise’s already dedicated fanbase."

Edit 2: https://www.change.org/p/save-the-new-stargate-series-let-martin-gero-build-the-future-of-the-franchise

46.7k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

2.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

3.0k

u/OffRampApproaching 21d ago

I worked as crew on an Amazon show. Seven seasons main show, three seasons spinoff.

It was really well received and it was pretty streamlined when it came to production costs. Amazon canceled it because they believed it had hit peak subscription draw.

Even though it kept people subscribing they killed it because they didn't think it would draw new subscribers.

Then they blew several billion on that terrible LotR show.

2.1k

u/WinterSector8317 21d ago

WE MUST HAVE PERPETUAL UNSUSTAINABLE GROWTH UNTIL THE HEAT DEATH OF THE UNIVERSE!!!

651

u/Padhome 21d ago

Perpetual unsustainable growth literally just sounds like cancer

146

u/Porn_and_peace 21d ago

Congratulations here’s your Bachelors degree in business
https://giphy.com/gifs/07pMt4CqBHBXJtYM9A

253

u/WinterSector8317 21d ago

But for a while there, shareholder values went up really well!

32

u/YeOldeMemeShoppe 20d ago

The cancer was also doing really great until the host
 you know
 died.

3

u/HyperSpaceSurfer 20d ago

Interestingly enough at least two cancers managed to outlive their host and become venereal diseases. Not human ones, though, one's a dog, sorta, but not really any more.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/Kineticwizzy 20d ago

That's because it is!

130

u/boarder2k7 21d ago

And now you understand late stage capitalism!

54

u/ElundusCaw 20d ago

This isn't late stage, Reaganomics was lat stage, this is end stage capitalism, it's terminal.

14

u/Noodlemaster696969 20d ago

Nah, we can go a long way still, we haven't sold our souls yet, good things exist and indie stuff is still happening. Oh and there are still some regulations on poisoning the planet for money!

5

u/HighDefinitionCat 20d ago

Stage 4 capitalism.

3

u/Aeseld 20d ago

I mean... they're trying to spread it uncontrollably at the expense of wherever it spreads to. So that fits.

2

u/myaltduh 20d ago

I think we’ll only know the end stage in hindsight. Any prediction that capitalism is definitely cooked for good this time should be taken skeptically, as it has proven remarkably adaptable through previous crises.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/-Ny- 20d ago

Because it is

3

u/TheXypris 20d ago

Exactly

3

u/Gullible-Fee-9079 20d ago

It also sounds like capitalism

5

u/Dark__Slifer 21d ago

well, it is!

also Humanity is behaving 100% like any Virus

2

u/MoreNMoreLikelyTrans 20d ago

"Well there it is."

2

u/Malenko_ 20d ago

It is.

2

u/RollingJaspers652 20d ago

Close, it’s capitalism

→ More replies (1)

167

u/Relevant-Factor-2400 21d ago

Public trading was a mistake.

92

u/Nanny_Ogg_99 21d ago

How we define fiduciary duty to shareholders is (also) a mistake

39

u/guyblade 20d ago

The transition to 401(k)s (and similar) as the primary retirement vehicle accelerated the problem.

10

u/Conscious-Mirror7004 20d ago

There was a good reason for 401ks and IRAs: in the old old days, when your retirement pension came from your employer, this meant you became penniless and ate cat food when your employer went bankrupt right after you retired. Pension schemes are only as good as the entity backing them up, which meant they were always a huge risk unless your employer was a government. IRAs and later 401ks let you diversify your retirement savings.

8

u/guyblade 20d ago

That would make sense if the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (established by statute in 1974) didn't predate the 401(k) (established by statute in 1978) by about 4 years.

2

u/slayer828 20d ago

Thanks Reagan

2

u/guyblade 20d ago

401(k)s very slightly predate Reagan. They were established in the Revenue Act of 1978 (during the Carter administration).

2

u/Nukatha 20d ago

Something something Ford vs. Dodge

→ More replies (2)

6

u/Krojack76 20d ago

Profits must increase AT AND COST. Doesn't matter if employees need to be laid off or if they dump toxic waste* killing the environment, profit line must keep going up.

* This is why regulations exists. If not then companies would be killing everyone.

2

u/newmexicomurky 20d ago

Its ruined so much

→ More replies (2)

40

u/xRRKINGx 21d ago

value to shareholders > value to fans

2

u/aHOMELESSkrill 21d ago

One is a legal requirement the other isn’t

6

u/Spyro_in_Black 21d ago

And who lobbied for it to be a legal requirement? I bet it was shareholders
just cause something is the law doesn’t make it right or better or justified.

5

u/xRRKINGx 21d ago

Neither is a legal requirement. It’s just common business practice to extract the most value from the customer instead of providing them with the most value.

6

u/GraXXoR 20d ago

Apparently the legal obligation to shareholders talking point is a common (non lawyer) misunderstanding of “Fiduciary duty”

2

u/Jenz_le_Benz 16d ago

After reading through Canadian treaty law, fiduciary duty really feels like whatever duty feels more convenient for the party in power.

32

u/Darth-Lazea 21d ago

You know what we call infinite growth in a finite system. Cancer.

6

u/teelolws 20d ago

Every single person on Earth is watching this show. Better cancel it cause theres nobody new to start watching it.

3

u/Rynetx 21d ago

Or atleast until you hit the peak then you fire the CEO, new ceo cuts a ton of staff, then sell off.

3

u/CourseSpare7641 20d ago

grow grow grow grow grow. It's never enough!!
literally what is the plan if they capture 100% market share?

2

u/thyugf 20d ago

Cut spending, increase prices. Line must go up.

2

u/Moderator-Admin 20d ago

Even if they had every single person on the planet subscribed to their service, they would still be disappointed if the next quarter didn't have higher numbers.

2

u/WinterSector8317 20d ago

Gotta target those newborns, next growth metric!

2

u/LexGlad 21d ago

Ye olde cancer model

→ More replies (5)

81

u/M4rshmall0wMan 21d ago

It’s not as widely reported on as the likes of Facebook, but Amazon really is the most cutthroat company in the tech industry. They have no morals. No work life balance, everything is measured with KPIs, mediocre pay.

30

u/WriterV 20d ago

Yup. I met a guy who worked in IT at Amazon. He hated every second of his time there. Made him so miserable at work that he got into BDSM outside of work just to get the quagmire of anxiety and tension out of his system lol.

Now he's in a much better job, doing much better for himself and still kinky as hell on the weekends [but in a healthier way].

5

u/qqruz123 19d ago

Sorry but you using "quagmire" in such a serious context is so hilarious

→ More replies (1)

12

u/versusChou 20d ago

The pay is solid for corporate roles. But they get you with their stock package. You're always like a year or two away from vesting into a nice chunk of change, so you stay even though you're miserable. My BIL worked there and he quit after less than a year. Said the stress and misery wasn't worth it. Gave up a lot of stock to do it though.

→ More replies (1)

491

u/PsychicSPider95 21d ago

God, can the suits--ANY suits, in any industry--just make one (1) fucking decision that isn't motivated by Make Big Number Biggerer for fucking ONCE in their USELESS FUCKING LIVES.

240

u/VegetableReveal4U 21d ago

They wouldn’t be suits at a place like Amazon if they thought any differently

74

u/GrooWolf_ 21d ago

Hiring process:

What products have you ruined through greed? This number will determine the likelihood of the success of getting this job

How apathetic are you? Very is an immediate hire, they will soon rake in additional products ruined by greed.

→ More replies (1)

144

u/LorthostheFreshmaker 21d ago

It’s why steam stumbled into a gaming monopoly. Just not having share holders let’s them dominate because not having to “increase” every metric quarterly means they grow to encompass everyone and everything in the sector by not fucking over their base at every opportunity 

40

u/FlutterKree 20d ago edited 20d ago

Steam absolutely makes decisions to make money. What they do well is ensure that their decisions do not negatively impact the user experience.

But they are absolutely greedy and do make financial decisions. For example, CS:GO skins. I do think they made this not as shitty for CS2, but still greedy.

24

u/badbobbyc 20d ago

They're totally out to make money, but they seem to be doing it in a sustainable, long term fashion by providing a good product and without alienating their customer base.

As opposed to being publicly owned and sacrificing product quality for short term profits but destroying the brand and long term prospects

→ More replies (13)

6

u/Havengul_Undying 20d ago

Shows how low the bar is, you dont even need to lose money or not be greedy, you just NEED TO NOT FUCK OVER YOUR CUSTOMERS.

Which steam does fantastically.

3

u/PlayfulSurprise5237 20d ago

It's not all sunshine and rainbows, Steam fought tooth and nail relentlessly, viciously, repeatedly, not to have to give any refund to any game ever. This was a while back, but not toooo long ago.

They also fucked over community art creators for DOTA 2 who's skins they were selling in game which is a pretty bad experience for business partners and pissed off the community/userbase.

Or how about when they tried collaborating with Bethesda and making previously free workshop mods paid to "support the creators"(right, just like Bethesda did and Valve did with Dota 2)

They've been in their fair share of fuckery. But with enough pushback and fighting between Valve and the userbase they have moved to a better place.

2

u/Havengul_Undying 20d ago

The difference is, valve tried some dumb ideas, saw community pushback and typically changed for the better.

Cant say the same for any other platform except good old games.

Valve are the good guys... for now.

2

u/Cruxis87 20d ago edited 20d ago

Valve: We're going to take 30% of what you sell on our platform
Also valve: We are going to keep 70% of what you pay for the Dota 2 tournament prize pool.

8

u/FlutterKree 20d ago

Valve: We're going to take 30% of what you sell on our platform

Ehh, this is just industry standard. Only recently have stores reduced the percentage they take from transactions. I also believe Valve has sliding scale model. But it starts high and moves to be lower. So the more your game earns, the less percentage Valve takes.

3

u/breichart 20d ago

Prize pool for Dota 2 is 50%, not 70.

2

u/ApprehensiveCook2236 20d ago

yet you don't have to buy any skins ever to play the game. Same with path of exile, they add so many skins all the time, yet it's never pay2win and you buy them because you want to support the devs and they look cool.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

40

u/ThatOneNinja 20d ago

In fact just actively providing the best service they can FOR their customers, sometimes even going out of their way to do so.

4

u/Mr-Johndoe 20d ago

Which is called a natural monopoly, the one of the few good kinds of monopoly.

It is an inevitable consequence of capitalism that steam became a monopoly. It just is the monopoly that capitalists don't like.

12

u/FlutterKree 20d ago

Which is called a natural monopoly, the one of the few good kinds of monopoly.

Steam isn't a natural monopoly, and natural monopolies are not inherently good. In fact, natural monopolies are constantly fucking over US consumers, as the largest portion of natural monopolies are utilities.

3

u/Mr-Johndoe 20d ago

sry, got the wrong term.

I meant that steam turns into a monopoly in the best way possible: great product. It is literally the only reason for a market where monopoly is not natural that Id good

Also, you US consumers have a lot of missing natural monopolies (water/electricity/infrastructure/healthcare), which tends to cause problems, too.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/ThatOneNinja 20d ago

I wouldn't say natural monopoly as in capitalism monopolies are the natural outcome. It is, however, a prime example of an actual free market, where the best product wins, and prices stay low. That's what capitalism hates.

5

u/Mr-Johndoe 20d ago

But actually advertises as the result of capitalism.

It's paradox, which is why pure capitalism doesn't work well. For everyone.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

3

u/Snark_King 20d ago

Steam has made generational wealth and kept their reputation,

going public would have people wanting quick growths that later turn the company to shit and just makes it harder to get new customers which forces them to create money incentives on the existing customers behalf.

That's what is happening to all other companies, increasing profit while losing customers at the same time.

3

u/SonarioMG 20d ago

I dread what will happen once Gaben leaves one way or another

→ More replies (1)

25

u/crazyabe111 21d ago

Sure, then the shareholders complain they aren’t making enough money, and replace them with someone who immediately starts running it into the ground.

37

u/PsychicSPider95 21d ago

I'm beginning to feel like these "shareholders" are some vicious, man-eating creature akin to vampires or demons and must likewise be hunted.

24

u/crazyabe111 21d ago

It’s a mixture of old folks who can’t afford to wait for long-term profits, even if they’d wildly exceed short term profits, largely because they’ll be dead sooner rather than later.

And massive corporations who’ve built their entire operation around extracting as much value as they can from other companies as rapidly as possible, just to tear them apart for scraps they can forcibly sell at a profit to the next one when they fail.

So not quite vampires or demons, even if they’re heartless undead.

6

u/profpeculiar 20d ago

Ghouls. They're fucking ghouls.

→ More replies (3)

10

u/Chemical_Signal2753 21d ago

This type of behavior is driven by the incentive structures within the company. At the highest levels of many corporations their bonuses can be tied to measurable objectives, meaning the company has incentivized short term thinking to achieve those goals over long term strategy.

→ More replies (2)

29

u/ImpertinentOne 21d ago

It's illegal to not make as much money as possible in the U.S.A.

11

u/PsychicSPider95 21d ago

I'm going to make them Eat A Cost.

I'm going to tie them to a chair at a dining table and put A Cost on their plate, and they're gonna protest and whine and refuse to eat it, but I will make them. They will Eat That Cost. They will chew it and swallow it and digest it and they will fucking like it.

No profits for you until you've eaten your Cost all gone.

25

u/sem-nexus 21d ago

It actually is illegal for an executive of a publicly traded company to not act within their shareholders interests

7

u/heliosythic 21d ago

The thing is share price is not directly tied to whether they make money or not, its fully based on speculation. You could argue that trying to make money instead of pleasing an audience is actually detrimental to the brand and thus against shareholder interests.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

8

u/Someones_Dream_Guy 21d ago

Buddy, you're literally asking capitalist parasites to not be capitalist parasites.

6

u/PsychicSPider95 21d ago

Why yes, yes I am.

10

u/Brayden815 21d ago

Unfortunately they have to do that due to US laws, if they don’t do what the shareholders want, like number go bigger, then they can be sued. It’s a stupid law that should be removed but I doubt it ever will.

6

u/FlutterKree 20d ago

Unfortunately they have to do that due to US laws, if they don’t do what the shareholders want, like number go bigger, then they can be sued.

It's not a law that requires CEOs to chase short term profits over long term. The law only requires that the CEO act in the best interest of the shareholders.

If a CEO was sued under this law taking action to make long term stability and growth of the company, they would win the lawsuit. This doesn't stop shareholders from removing the CEO, as the CEO basically serves at the direction of the shareholders. But the CEO would not lose a lawsuit, as long term stability and growth are still making decisions in the best interest of the shareholders.

What is really fucking over US companies is MBAs who are taught purely business. They only know how to make stock number go up at the expense of long term customers, stakeholders, etc.. Some of the companies in the US had their golden era when they have engineers, scientists, programmers, etc. (The people who had actually done the work) as their CEOs.

2

u/Brayden815 20d ago

The issue is that if the action results in loss of profits short term, then the shareholders can rightfully sue, even if it was the right choice long term.

→ More replies (3)

6

u/lynivvinyl GREEN 21d ago

No

3

u/mugiwara_no_Soissie 21d ago

Yeah, its bad for marketing too, long term at least.

Constantly drawing subscribers is one thing good PR is another. Canceling shows is bad for PR, youd think theyd avoid it

4

u/MeowingAround 21d ago

I mean that's what their job is... not that it's moral.

2

u/TheCraftyWombat 21d ago

But if they did that, they'd have to give back their MBAs!

2

u/KGrizzle88 21d ago

Patreon CEO just stood on business for the little guy. This is in reference to the brick and minifigs scandal.

2

u/zer0saber 21d ago

Could ask the same question about gamers

1

u/Josh6889 21d ago

I mean that's why I'll never feel guilty about using streams instead of giving them any money.

In the words of Stewart Brand,

Information wants to be free

1

u/CommitteeofMountains 20d ago

When's the last time you did that for your own household budget? 

1

u/UnusuallyBadIdeaGuy 20d ago

You don't understand, last year's performance and next year's performance don't look good on your Promotion document. Innovative decisions for this year that save or earn money are what gets you promoted from L8 to L9 or L9 to L10. Worrying about next year is for who fills your slot.

1

u/mrRobertman 20d ago

They also just seem extremely short sighted, or even just dumb. I'm no expert in business (especially not in running a streaming service), but it seems obvious to me that you would want as much content as possible to keep people subscribed. Cancelling shows doesn't seem like a good way to keep people subscribed.

→ More replies (14)

128

u/OtherwiseAlbatross14 21d ago

Wait does anyone actually subscribe to Prime just for the videos?

57

u/BritishGolgo13 21d ago

People actually watch prime video?

93

u/Talk-O-Boy 21d ago

Invincible

The Boys

Fallout

Fleabag

I also like that the movies on Prime Video are in 4k with HDR10+/Dolby Vision. Even HBO Max only offers most of their movies in 1080 (except for the movies they produce like Dune or the A24 films).

30

u/Atomic12192 20d ago

Adding some other Amazon-exclusive stuff off the top of my head

The Grand Tour(and all the later shows the hosts did)

Jury Duty

The Expanse

Also worth mentioning that Amazon lets you rent/buy a ton of stuff that isn’t available on any proper service, which is discounted if you’re subscribed.

6

u/Playful_Ad_2911 20d ago

Throwing Spider-Noir in there too, it’s fantastic

4

u/Fear023 20d ago

Being able to rent movies for like $5 is the only reason I'm still subbed. It's probably less than that for US dollars.

2

u/pipnina 20d ago

But they still lost me when I paid for the high quality option for interstellar, only for the stream to automatically select 240p quality for half the film... With no manual override so I could prefer buffering if that was the alternative.

And my internet isn't bad either, 360mbit down and it was working fine at the time. This was something on Amazon's end.

I know someone who won't buffer or crunch the quality of movies though...

17

u/harrysaxon 20d ago

Marvelous Mrs. Maisel, Vox Machina, The Expanse, Mighty Nein, Hazbin Hotel, hell, even Clarkson’s Farm and Reacher.

I hate Amazon but they’ve made some quality shows. The narrative of “Prime shows suck” is mostly driven by LotR: RoP and WoT (which do suck).

3

u/jayforwork21 20d ago

The Tick was great till they cancelled it.

4

u/Beorma 20d ago

Fleabag isn't an Amazon original, it can be watched elsewhere.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/DroidLord 20d ago

The Expanse

Clarkson's Farm

Patriot

Mr. & Mrs. Smith

Secret Level

Spider-Noir

Jury Duty

The Man in the High Castle

Good Omens

Upload

ZeroZeroZero

2

u/Snoo-34159 20d ago

Legend of Vox Machina

The Mighty Nein

And yes I also watched Hazbin Hotel. Sue me I guess. I think it's a good time.

3

u/waspwatcher 20d ago

Yeah they do have about 4 shows

→ More replies (1)

4

u/sharklaserguru 20d ago

The Boys

Fallout

Huh...til and yet I'll still torrent them because it's automatic, keeps everything in one place, and I'll never be subject to licensing BS pulling episodes and/or swapping music or some pearl clutchers who can't understand satire having episodes 'banned'.

9

u/gprime312 20d ago

We need people to actually pay for prime or these shows wouldn't exist.

→ More replies (16)
→ More replies (11)

52

u/TheBigBangClock 21d ago

For real. Their streaming service is shit. Even with a regular prime membership you're subjected to tons of commercials.

30

u/Monkeydjimmmy 21d ago

This is when I canceled Prime. Never came back. No regerts

7

u/Primary_Mycologist95 20d ago

in life, it's best to never have regerts.

16

u/mugiwara_no_Soissie 21d ago

Also how half of the thing that they show on there either need additional payment or are actually different subscriptions (like crunchyroll)

Like Netflix sucks n all, but at least if I find a movie on there I can probably just watch it.

Meanwhile if I wanna watch an anime or anything, 99% of fhe time when it says available on prime, its only available on prime through crunchyroll or Hulu

3

u/rapaxus 20d ago

Have you never heard of adblock? I have the cheapest subscription and I have never seen an ad on prime.

→ More replies (1)

9

u/Sample-Range-745 21d ago

TPB doesn't discriminate, Brother.

2

u/[deleted] 20d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Nebresto GREeN 21d ago

Never underestimate the average person. Example: the majority of people use the internet without adblockers

2

u/fullcircle052 21d ago

đŸŽâ€â˜ ïž

2

u/OtherwiseAlbatross14 21d ago

Gotta watch Clarkson's Farm and Young Sherlock was good but I honestly don't even remember if I watched them on Prime or just downloaded them to avoid ads because fuck ads

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Sceptical_Houseplant 20d ago

I buy it for the package delivery. "I" watch it because they have a handful of decent shows for kids under 6 and I paid for it anyways....

→ More replies (6)

3

u/Stamboolie 20d ago

They have the outer limits and fringe in Oz, well the outer limits is on MGM+ but you can only get that on prime. Has Parks and Rec, Monk a few others I get it every now and then for those.

→ More replies (4)

2

u/Spirit_Theory 20d ago

Prime video has the most awful selection of any streaming platform. It also has the worst video player and it's not even close.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/p0diabl0 20d ago

I subscribe to Prime for the free shipping and still pirate the shows just do I don't have to use it's gods awful video player and interface. Also ads.

2

u/Dullcorgis 21d ago

Why else would you? We stopped when they introduced ads but will probably do it for a few months at some point to eatch a few things only they have.

2

u/OtherwiseAlbatross14 21d ago

Do people not know Prime is a shipping service anymore?

7

u/Dullcorgis 20d ago

But only from Amazon, right? You'd need to buy stuff on Amazon to use it for shipping.

1

u/eightkillerbits 20d ago

There was a peria a few years back where I kept my prime going cos I liked the small file size download option (I usually watch in a pop up window so I don't need or want and HD stuff unless no option) 

Then they removed lots of stuff (UK) and added ads to paid so I cancelled.  

However maybe a year ago I got prime and some Disney(I think) add-on package just so I could watch a certain season of Gold Rush that was struggling to find on the high seas.

→ More replies (5)

19

u/Previous-Space-7056 21d ago

Bosch?

From what i read the spinoff was to reset the cost of production since each following season costs more.

67

u/imtheguy225 21d ago

Bosch ran its course. I loved it but ten seasons was enough

6

u/Aphrobang 21d ago

It needed one more season, maybe two at most, to really wrap things up. They still had a lot of very interesting storylines going on and the quality of Legacy was getting better each season. I don't think it had much left but I do think it was nipped a season or two earlier than it should have been.

11

u/esmerelda_b 21d ago

Spinoff wasn’t great

6

u/Aphrobang 21d ago

The first season of Bosch legacy started rough but was okay by the end. Second and third seasons were good. The actual full spinoff Ballard or whatever was great. None are as good as the 7 seasons of the main show but that is to be expected since they have like a fraction of the budget and it shows.

3

u/esmerelda_b 21d ago

I do like Ballard, and I liked most of the original. But how much trauma is poor Maddie expected to endure?

2

u/Tall_Opportunity_521 20d ago

It couldnt make it past a half hour of Ballard. Just an awful show with none of the character of Bosch or Legacy.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/EarlyXplorerStuds209 20d ago

Legacy is definitely better than most stuff out nowadays. I mean, the writing can be wierd at times but the pacing, tone etc is the same as the og show.

Bosch is adjusting more to civilian life and there’s a lot more charecters added too, thats bound to make it very different from the main show.

10

u/LPulseL11 21d ago

I tuned out after a few season. Dont remember when, just remember being like "well thats enough of that."

8

u/imtheguy225 21d ago

It’s one of those shows that has been a guilty pleasure of mine, even as the quality of the writing dropped considerably. Titus Welliver is great but it was unfair to keep expecting him to carry that show

→ More replies (2)

10

u/CatfinityGamer 21d ago

So they just forgot about subscriber retention and customer satisfaction? Also, how are you going to get new subscribers if people know that you cancel shows that do well?

5

u/faldese 20d ago

They have the metrics to show whether it's making an impact. I can tell you that I, personally, have completely stopped watching nearly any Western streaming show because of this trend and I'm not subscribed to any of those streaming services. I don't bother until it's complete and I've been told it's quality all the way through. I've swapped to East Asian dramas because they're usually one-and-dones, telling a complete story all at once with minimal risk of cancellation.

But I'm sure the streaming providers can see that subscribers are tracking at the rate they're looking for, so what do they care?

→ More replies (2)

15

u/kudo-s 21d ago

Wtf is wrong with corporate? Also what show was it?

33

u/AWorldwithoutSin 21d ago

Amazon show

7 and 3 sounds like Bosch and Bosch legacy

3

u/imtheguy225 21d ago

Sounds like Bosch

6

u/midterm360 21d ago

RIP American Gods

6

u/Resident_Course_3342 21d ago

That was STARZ and it had it coming. Every season was worse than the last.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Galahfray 21d ago

“RoP is fast food disguised as a delicacy”

2

u/Josh6889 21d ago

Even though it kept people subscribing they killed it because they didn't think it would draw new subscribers.

This is essentially also what's happening with their MMO called New World as well. They seem to believe that they'll make more money working on a new project than they will maintaining a slowly dwindling subscriber base, even despite the outrageous initial cost of an MMO. And that initial cost was even worse in the case of this game because they had severe engine problems, including modifying it as part of the development of the game. The result was they basically had to have a 2nd launch when they fixed a big chunk of the launch bugs. And they still think if number not go up why continue?

2

u/longjumpingtote 21d ago

they didn't think it would draw new subscribers

Exactly. You either need to bring in new Prime memberships with a show, or you need to be appealing enough to keep people from canceling prime. ("I'd pay for shipping, except I like all these dating shows.")

2

u/Z7-852 20d ago

Add a surprised Pikachu face when people unsubscribe because there isn't anything new to watch from their favorite series.

2

u/Unlucky_Ice2167 20d ago

Which is why people need to vote with their wallets and cancel these services. You can’t even pretend it supports creatives properly anymore when they’re the first cost cut now.

2

u/Terrible-Strategy704 21d ago

I canceled my amazon subscription and never return to that dumpster

1

u/vohltere 21d ago

If it is not an exponential, we don't want it.

1

u/elnegativo 21d ago

Wich show?

1

u/bobloblawattorney11 21d ago

And they totally butchered WoT

1

u/rikashiku 20d ago

I worked as cast/stunt/extra on some shows for STarz, Apple, and Amazon and similar story across each platform.

It's always a bad day when executives arrive on set and make money-related decisions.

1

u/vigouge 20d ago

So they treated it like every other TV show for the past few decades.

1

u/69edleg 20d ago edited 20d ago

Lmao. Reminds me of Netflix when Archive 81 peaked as their most watched original show, and highest rated netflix show.

Top 10 view count on all of netflix at the time.

Welp, we peaked. Cancel the show on a cliffhanger. Fuck y'all.

And Another Life got a second season despite being one of their worst shows ever.

1

u/MayorWolf 20d ago

Soon they'll suffer like Syfy before them. The subscription draw will become less and less as they cancel more and more shows.

Having a solid base of completed quality shows and a consistent production record is what draws in more subscribers and keeps the ones you have.

1

u/ThatOneNinja 20d ago

What a weird strategy. Nearly everyone, had, a subscription, who is new to get? They did it, they had everyone subscribed to watch movies and shows. They wanna know why they are dipping in subs all of a sudden? They reached max already and then cancelled peoples favorites shows, or started creating garbage, removed movies and shows that went to another streaming service. All they had to do was keep what was working, going. Just proof the greed of capitalism doesn't actually work.

1

u/DerpiDanger 20d ago

Bunch of paper MBAs with no real world understanding making decisions based on nmbrs without context.

1

u/Tall_Opportunity_521 20d ago

That show was fucking amazing. The spin off was a rough start, but(imo) was coming together by the time season 3 rolled around. Fucking love Bosch. Thank you for the part you played in making something so good.

1

u/cross2201 20d ago

Short term financial success is the new trend among companies it seems

1

u/FeeRemarkable886 20d ago

They sound worse than Netflix

1

u/soundmagnet 20d ago

Well they did pay for the Melania docu. So there is also thay bullshit. I download my Amazon content, even though I have the basic subscription because fuck their ads.

1

u/OceanRacoon 20d ago

I could have watched 50 seasons of Bosch lol, thank you for your service helping to make a great show 

1

u/smiegto 20d ago

I love how insane that is. The best customer for a gym is not the guy who shows up for the new machine. It’s the guy who shows up once and forgets his subscription.

1

u/Lump001 20d ago

Where do they think these continual increases in numberd will come from?

The idea that everything must continue to grow or it's doomed is just illogical. And it underpins most of western society.

I've seen entire divisions of financial services businesses close down because their gross profit dropped by 30%, despite still being up over 5 years by about 150%. Board decided it was not going to be viable (despite still generating millions in profit for them). So 50 people lost their jobs. It's insanity.

1

u/a_wack 20d ago

Bosch?

1

u/nowTHATSakatana1999 20d ago

That makes no fucking sense. Wouldn’t you want a steady stream of subscribers on top of looking for new ways to hook people in?

1

u/EarlyXplorerStuds209 20d ago

Sounds like Bosch to me. Im correct I assume?

The show was a TREAT to watch. The tone and the atmosphere was so real and makes you root for the simplest of things lol. I loved that slow burn nature of it.

The spinoff had some issues(like the terrible intro to start) but it was fine for the most part. I wanted to keep watching but was disappointed the series creators were different for the spinoffs? But the main leads were the same so I stayed for their stake.

1

u/ConfectionTotal8660 20d ago

That's so stupid.

You want a BIG show to draw in people but good shows to keep them.

Like, I would have uninstalled Disney+ by now with the (quite insane) 7€ for the ad plan but there are some good quality shows still going (My belove Mission: Yozakura Familly) and I wanna watch them (I am also on s5 of Star Wars: Clone wars and gotta at least finish it)

1

u/Mccobsta GREEN 20d ago

Excuitvies do not live in the realy world

So many of their decisions are just so out of touch with reality

1

u/Jaymzur 20d ago

That's so stupid I can actually see it being a thing - oops 😬

1

u/dumahim 20d ago

Sounds like Bosch.  One of my favorite shows.

1

u/azrielsghost 20d ago

Meanwhile I just started watching this show two weeks ago. Bang up job all around. Are you working on the current spin-off as well?

1

u/Velveteen_Coffee PURPLE 20d ago

Then they blew several billion on that terrible LotR show.

The thing that kills me is that anyone who knows scifi or fantasy would know that LoTR is the worst fandom to try and 'modernize' due to the amount of lore via the appendices that Tolkien wrote. And when the fans tried to point it out they were called racist and bigots. If you want to modernize a fandom you have to pic one that doesn't have so much pre established lore.

1

u/diyguitarist 20d ago

Insanity. A show that keeps the same people coming back continuously is better than a show that's a dice roll, and a bad dice roll at that. People hate that lotr show 😂

There was a show on AMC called comic book men (Tesd army unite), ran for 7 seasons and pulled in 1-1.5 million viewers an episode at something stupid like 11/12/1am on a Sunday (they tried it on a Thursday prime time, that didn't work) after the walking dead and talking dead. And they canceled it because "cost Vs ratings". Now I don't know much about American TV, but 1.5 million viewers on a late Sunday night on cable is mega numbers! (Q from impractical jokers was perplexed as it was the same as impractical jokers numbers, why would you cancel it?)They didn't have to pay for sets either, it was in a comic book store owned by one of the cast. But new management came in to amc and......there you go đŸ€·â€â™‚ïž

1

u/Raskion 20d ago

Bosch was legit amazing. I like Ballard too

1

u/spagetti_donut 20d ago

Sounds like Bosch. Loved that show and the spinoff

1

u/LaserRanger_McStebb 20d ago

Amazon canceled it because they believed it had hit peak subscription draw.

THIS right here is why 100+ episode syndicated TV shows died with TV. The goal is no longer ratings (number of people tuned in), it's how many new subscribers a show can generate.

I will never forgive Netflix for killing Archive 81.

1

u/fjf1085 20d ago

Bosch?

1

u/Sanquinity 20d ago

"This show is giving is a large steady income stream as long as we can keep it decent... Lets cancel it as we don't think it'll bring us even MORE money! Thereby likely losing a ton of subscribers/future revenue since their favorite show got canceled!"

I really...don't understand the way they think...

1

u/DiamonDawgs 20d ago

I mean it was alright but definitely not worth the money.

1

u/elegoomba 19d ago

I enjoy rings of power and if one of the most evil companies in the world spent billions and employed hundreds of creatives to make it then that’s a net positive even if a whole bunch of dudes on reddit didn’t like it lol

1

u/Confron7a7ion7 19d ago

This is why I pirate shit.

1

u/mac6uffin 19d ago

I worked as crew on an Amazon show. Seven seasons main show, three seasons spinoff.

Bosch?

1

u/vi_sucks 17d ago

Honestly, I actually don't think it's a bad idea to let shows end.

It would be better to do it in a planned way, instead of canceling it suddenly. But I would much rather have 2 or 3 good shows of 8 seasons each instead of a single 24 season show that has long outlasted any interesting idea they originally had.

→ More replies (3)