I think it's because the movie/tv industries are unionized and everyone has to get paid, so they have to get more from the customer side. Whereas in the music industry, we're ok with musicians being "starving artists", so the labels can just pay the artists less.
I remember using it 2007-2008-ish and it being pretty magical at the time.
The value of a singular service with 'all' the content is higher than a plurality of services each with only a little. In other words I'd happily pay more per month for the Spotify of TV, movies, and sports that I currently do for a sampling of the usual streaming services.
Frankly if I was king of the world any and all licensing deals for media would have to be explicitly non-exclusive, effectively decoupling production from distribution. Any service should be able to stream/rent any media for the same rate as any other. This would let the market sort out what people value in terms of streaming 'packages'.
Google Play Pass[0] is basically the app equivalent of Spotify. One monthly or annual fee for access to a library of "hundreds" of apps. And movies, TV shows, and music can all be purchased a la carte, not just through streaming subscriptions.
> Any service should be able to stream/rent any media for the same rate as any other.
Sounds good to me. I would also be fine with compulsory licensing for individual copies, or frankly just an end to copyright altogether.
>Google Play Pass[0] is basically the app equivalent of Spotify. One monthly or annual fee for access to a library of "hundreds" of apps.
At the risk of dating myself, this is not a way I/my social circle consumes 'apps'[0]. But by the same token, if I were to subscribe to a service like MSFT's GamePass[1] personally I would find the most value in a service with everything, and be annoyed at having to juggle multiple subscriptions. The multiple services make it difficult and expensive to enjoy a breadth and diversity of media, regardless of total amount/quality consumed. For instance, imagine how obnoxious Spotify would be if it broke up into different services by genre.
By extension, I'd always pay more than my current given subset of subscriptions for an 'everything' service.
> And movies, TV shows, and music can all be purchased a la carte, not just through streaming subscriptions.
Certainly, but back when I purchased such things a la cart I'd have no problem cross shopping redbox/blockbuster/amazon. Probably because I only ever have to engage one and that engagement ends after the transaction, until re-initiated by myself. Maybe it's a psychological hangup, shrug.
[0]Not that I 'consume' many apps, or interact with the stores often. I think of them (sans games, and novelties) as little more than glorified websites. An 'app', as I use my phone, is just a glorified gateway to either data delivery (e.g. Netflix) or other backend traditionally and adequately served via website (e.g. google calendar)
[1]Google Stadia manages to be the worst of both worlds here, trying to be a service that also requires a la carte purchasing, instead of one or the other.