Hacker News Reader

Comment by mosselman | Hacker News Reader

What Disney content are you referring to? In my mind Disney has Star Wars and movies for children. The only great thing that comes to mind is Pixar, but I am not going to pay monthly for two handfuls of movies. But seeing as you are so enthusiastic about their content, it must be my ignorance.

So, again and from a place of interest, what content are you referring to?

View on HN

Lets assume you've been living under a rock because otherwise your comment is immensely condescending. & star was is for kids.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assets_owned_by_The_Wa...

or more specifically movie franchises

https://entertainment.ie/cinema/movie-news/heres-an-almost-c...

I am sorry that you don't like their content, but for what, 95 years Disney has produced decade after decade films that are popular, profitable and proven to be rewatched (and re-paid) decade after decade - films that were made 80 years ago are still bringing in millions - that's what you want for a steaming service.

I didn't say I don't like their content. I am saying that I wouldn't pay every month to have the option to look at their content. Will you be watching Toy Story and Finding Nemo 4 times a month? I'd rather buy those on a disc (which I did) and pop them in every now and then.

Better yet, sometimes cinemas replay those classics so you can enjoy the full experience. I'd rather pay to go look at that.

I'm not convinced the economics work out that well. Rough guess, Disney now has call it 60 top flight movies, from Snow White to Star Wars (top flight as in have been either box office smashes and/or perennial money makers).

If I could buy all the DVDs (I'm not sure I could) I would be paying 15 quid a shot - that's 900 pounds. At 9 quid a month subscription that's 8 and a half years before I break even.

I am fairly sure I lost most of the DVDs I had 9 years ago in our last house move.

Yes it is likely to be bad economics, but it's not that bad.

Edit: I wanted to check my 60 movie count and I think I am under estimating - (1) lists 57 "Classic Animated Movies" - and some are obscure but I would lay good money that most people you know have seen at least 40 - and that does not include any Pixar (20 movies?) Marvel or Star Wars (must be 30 by now).

A family (and yes that's the target audience) could have a Movie Bight once a week for ten years on this subscription.

I guess only time and competition will tell

1) https://reelrundown.com/animation/all-50-disney-classics-mov...

A lot of Marvel content I would presume.

Which is also not great.

I mean, you might not like them but they are among the highest grossing movies of all time.

I get what you are saying, but I'd find it stupid to pay a set amount per month to see the same movies over and over. Do you really think people will pay to see all of the Avengers movies every month? If yes, then fine, good for Disney. I just find the 'they have better content' line a bit much.

I'd rather watch Master of None, Fargo, The Crown and many more quality Netflix than some action here movie that has been cut from the same comic book cloth as the previous one. But that is just a matter of preferences, but to say their content is better based on how good they do in the box office is nonsense.

I think we can all agree here that this segregation of content feels like a step back, and the grandparent asserting that Disney has great content that warrants paying for is controversial in this light.

It’s besides the point OP wanted to make.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com