zlacker

>>meetpa+(OP)
It's always great to read about how the people the own the means of distribution aquire also the means of production, trying to create a meta-monopoly. /sarcasm

I'm rooting for someone on the regulary side disliking all the crap that Netflix produces, and just shuts the whole thing down. Those 5 billion they'd have to pay for a breakup fee in that case would have me feeling better that I couldn't cancel their service, since my family pesters me to keep it.

>>mihaic+Z9
There is no “monopoly” on either content distribution or creation. Amazon and Apple are both trillion dollar companies that have streaming services.

Then there is Disney, Comcast (Peacock), Paramount, STARZ (standalone company), and AMC

>>raw_an+Yb
The legal definition of monopoly in some jurisdictions means anyone with a large enough of a market share able to influence pricing, etc in a market. A market share as low as 25% can be called a monopoly. Does HBO+Netflix have a 25% share of the streaming market? I've no idea, but possibly.

>>Dharma+XT
Market share matters little when most people have multiple streaming services they use simultaneously.

It’s not like Apple and Google where the majority of people either have an Android or iOS based phone.

YouTube I believe has more viewing hours than Netflix.

>>raw_an+lY
But none of the streaming services are competing because they don't offer the same products, by design. Nobody is switching from Apple TV to Netflix because they don't share any shows - they buy both.

>>array_+fj2
So? I also go to two different restaurants to buy different food, or two different websites to buy two different things, or fly two different airlines to go to two different places, etc.