• LetMeEatCake@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    9 months ago

    It’s also because their current shows suck, and because any shows that are actually good get shitcanned after season 2, because Netflix sees less consumer growth after two seasons.

    I’m always surprised at how often other people (not you) will defend this practice from Netflix. It’s classic case of following the data in a stupid way. If their data shows that interest drops off after two seasons, I don’t doubt it.

    But… that comes with a cost. They have built a reputation as a company that doesn’t properly finish shows that they start, that will leave viewers hanging. That makes it harder to get people invested in a new series, even one that’s well reviewed. Why get interested in something you know will end on a cliffhanger?

    That kind of secondary order impact from their decision isn’t going to show up in data. Doesn’t change that it happens all the same.

    • Hot Saucerman@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      9 months ago

      Just gotta say you fucking nailed it. The long-term knock-on effect of people not wanting to start a new Netflix show only to like it and for it to be cancelled is too real.

      • CopernicusQwark@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        It’s basically the Google Effect, with how no one gets excited about their new products these days for much the same reason.

    • Fedizen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      time slots in tv were a blessing in disguise because it made the choice “what should I run in this time slot” rather than “should I run this show”.

      This now leads to shows getting axed when in the past they be moved to a different time slot or would be left alone until they found something better.