doldisod

lol.

Your comments here make it pretty clear that you’re an ideologue who never intended to seriously engage with anyone anyway.

You hate advertising, therefore everything about this article is evil regardless of how correct it may be from a business perspective. You have no interest in debating the article, but only care about pursuing your holy war against advertising.

First, who cares? This article isn’t about the consumers. Perhaps it would be great for the Netflix consumer if Netflix became a nonprofit?

Second, why? Why would this be bad for the Netflix consumer. Consumers willing to pay current sub fees shouldn’t be affected, and those unwilling to pay current prices would be able to access Netflix for less money.

This would obviously benefit consumers with less disposable income.

The article specifically argues that they should do this in order to further grow their customer base, and retain customers that are unwilling to pay current prices.

Why couldn’t they keep existing subscribers ad-free? Those people are currently paying huge subscription fees.

Why would it be impossible for Netflix to implement advertising in the way this article suggests?

Highest tiers being the current tiers.

The article also argues that Netflix is constantly bumping up their prices, and this would further justify that by making the higher tiers seem more attractive.

You’re joking, right?

> Similarly first time I see a youtube ad, I'll cancel my youtube premium subscription.

Youtube has ads for the lower tiers, yet you’re still subscribed.

This article is explicitly not arguing that Netflix should show ads to existing subscribers like yourself.

> I read this and I’m honestly still not sure what Ben’s point is

It’s in the title

> Not to mention the clickbait title.

Why do you think the title is clickbait? It accurately reflects the contents of the article.