• Carter@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    105
    ·
    9 months ago

    How do people think paying for a service and still being served ads is acceptable?

    • AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      Hulu has a lower price tear that includes ads. It makes it more affordable for some people. If they had started out with ads I would be less upset, but for a big company like Amazon it just seems like they’re trying to make even more money off of the consumer.

      • Kernal64@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        9 months ago

        Hulu DID start out with ads. When they launched it was an entirely ad supported service. Hulu+ didn’t come until years later. After several years of running two tiers of service, free ad supported and paid ad free, they dropped the free tier. Now, years later, we’re back to ads with Hulu, but this time you pay for the privilege.

      • dangblingus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Right, but the business model is totally different. You’re paying your cable provider for access, you’re not paying to watch the TV shows. The TV shows were financed by broadcaster advertising revenues among other streams of income. With Amazon, you’re paying for access and to fund their programs. Ads are just greedy and anti-consumer for a vertically integrated platform like Amazon Video.

      • Obinice@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Cable wasn’t really a thing here in the UK, we’re not primed for their bullshit.