RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
> https://www.bbc.com/news/business-62226912
>
>

I had to ask Siri how many subscribers they still had which should’ve been
right in the first paragraph. She said 222 million. So 1 million seems like
a big number but not percentage wise. Frankly I’m surprised it’s not more.

--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

On 2022-07-20 04:00:40 +0000, anim8rfsk said:
> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> https://www.bbc.com/news/business-62226912
>
> I had to ask Siri how many subscribers they still had which should’ve been
> right in the first paragraph. She said 222 million. So 1 million seems like
> a big number but not percentage wise. Frankly I’m surprised it’s not more.

Streaming service subscribers grew massively during Covid lockdowns
when people had very little to do. Now that things are almost back to
normal, many of those people simply don't have the time and inflation
means they don't have the "spare" money, so subscriptions are dropping
again.

Netflix is about to start their "ad-based" option, where you play less,
but have to suffer though adverts (although it remains to be seen if
ad-blockers will get rid of them.

On 7/19/2022 9:07 PM, Your Name wrote:
> On 2022-07-20 04:00:40 +0000, anim8rfsk said:
>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/business-62226912
>>
>> I had to ask Siri how many subscribers they still had which
>> should’ve been
>> right in the first paragraph. She said 222 million. So 1 million seems
>> like
>> a big number but not percentage wise. Frankly I’m surprised it’s
>> not more.
>
> Streaming service subscribers grew massively during Covid lockdowns when
> people had very little to do. Now that things are almost back to normal,
> many of those people simply don't have the time and inflation means they
> don't have the "spare" money, so subscriptions are dropping again.
>
> Netflix is about to start their "ad-based" option, where you play less,
> but have to suffer though adverts (although it remains to be seen if
> ad-blockers will get rid of them.
>
'Flix had an investors conference call or something like that earlier in
the week. The reports I'm hearing are that all the stuff that is other
companies' IP will NOT be on the ad-supported tier with speculation that
it is because 'Flix doesn't want to share the ad revenue with them.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 21:00:40 -0700, anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
wrote:

>RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>> https://www.bbc.com/news/business-62226912
>>
>>
>
>I had to ask Siri how many subscribers they still had which should’ve been
>right in the first paragraph. She said 222 million. So 1 million seems like
>a big number but not percentage wise. Frankly I’m surprised it’s not more.

Google says 220.7 m as of 06/30/22 and offers the following link:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/netflix-subscriber-loss-april-june-1.6526260#:~:text=Netflix%20ended%20June%20with%20220.7,Walt%20Disney%20Co.%20and%20Apple.

Note the caption on the lead image which says:
"For the first time in a decade, Netflix announced it has 200,000
(sic) subscribers globally, and the company says it may lose as many
as two million more in the months ahead. "

The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 21:00:40 -0700, anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/business-62226912
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I had to ask Siri how many subscribers they still had which should’ve been
>> right in the first paragraph. She said 222 million. So 1 million seems like
>> a big number but not percentage wise. Frankly I’m surprised it’s not more.
>
> Google says 220.7 m as of 06/30/22 and offers the following link:
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/netflix-subscriber-loss-april-june-1.6526260#:~:text=Netflix%20ended%20June%20with%20220.7,Walt%20Disney%20Co.%20and%20Apple.
>
> Note the caption on the lead image which says:
> "For the first time in a decade, Netflix announced it has 200,000
> (sic) subscribers globally, and the company says it may lose as many
> as two million more in the months ahead. "
>

Well there’s a sentence that doesn’t make a whole Lotta sense. :-)

--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

On 7/20/2022 1:53 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
> The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>> On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 21:00:40 -0700, anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/business-62226912
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I had to ask Siri how many subscribers they still had which should’ve been
>>> right in the first paragraph. She said 222 million. So 1 million seems like
>>> a big number but not percentage wise. Frankly I’m surprised it’s not more.
>>
>> Google says 220.7 m as of 06/30/22 and offers the following link:
>> https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/netflix-subscriber-loss-april-june-1.6526260#:~:text=Netflix%20ended%20June%20with%20220.7,Walt%20Disney%20Co.%20and%20Apple.
>>
>> Note the caption on the lead image which says:
>> "For the first time in a decade, Netflix announced it has 200,000
>> (sic) subscribers globally, and the company says it may lose as many
>> as two million more in the months ahead. "
>>
>
> Well there’s a sentence that doesn’t make a whole Lotta sense. :-)
>
It came from a big company, what did you expect? :P

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On 2022-07-20 21:22:27 +0000, Dimensional Traveler said:
> On 7/20/2022 1:53 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>> The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 21:00:40 -0700, anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/business-62226912
>>>>
>>>> I had to ask Siri how many subscribers they still had which should’ve been
>>>> right in the first paragraph. She said 222 million. So 1 million seems like
>>>> a big number but not percentage wise. Frankly I’m surprised it’s not more.
>>>
>>> Google says 220.7 m as of 06/30/22 and offers the following link:
>>> https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/netflix-subscriber-loss-april-june-1.6526260#:~:text=Netflix%20ended%20June%20with%20220.7,Walt%20Disney%20Co.%20and%20Apple.
>>>
>>>
>>> Note the caption on the lead image which says:
>>> "For the first time in a decade, Netflix announced it has 200,000
>>> (sic) subscribers globally, and the company says it may lose as many
>>> as two million more in the months ahead. "
>>
>> Well there’s a sentence that doesn’t make a whole Lotta sense. :-)
>
> It came from a big company, what did you expect? :P

More like the usual "journalist" / "news" incompetence. They're so busy
rusing to be first that they realey bother to check anything, including
teh actual facts. :-\

On 7/20/2022 5:36 PM, Your Name wrote:
> On 2022-07-20 21:22:27 +0000, Dimensional Traveler said:
>> On 7/20/2022 1:53 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>> The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 21:00:40 -0700, anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/business-62226912
>>>>>
>>>>> I had to ask Siri how many subscribers they still had which
>>>>> should’ve been
>>>>> right in the first paragraph. She said 222 million. So 1 million
>>>>> seems like
>>>>> a big number but not percentage wise. Frankly I’m surprised it’s
>>>>> not more.
>>>>
>>>> Google says 220.7 m as of 06/30/22 and offers the following link:
>>>> https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/netflix-subscriber-loss-april-june-1.6526260#:~:text=Netflix%20ended%20June%20with%20220.7,Walt%20Disney%20Co.%20and%20Apple.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Note the caption on the lead image which says:
>>>> "For the first time in a decade, Netflix announced it has 200,000
>>>> (sic) subscribers globally, and the company says it may lose as many
>>>> as two million more in the months ahead. "
>>>
>>> Well there’s a sentence that doesn’t make a whole Lotta sense. :-)
>>
>> It came from a big company, what did you expect?  :P
>
> More like the usual "journalist" / "news" incompetence. They're so busy
> rusing to be first

What language is this, Maori?

On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 14:22:27 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

>On 7/20/2022 1:53 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>> The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 21:00:40 -0700, anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/business-62226912
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I had to ask Siri how many subscribers they still had which should?ve been
>>>> right in the first paragraph. She said 222 million. So 1 million seems like
>>>> a big number but not percentage wise. Frankly I?m surprised it?s not more.
>>>
>>> Google says 220.7 m as of 06/30/22 and offers the following link:
>>> https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/netflix-subscriber-loss-april-june-1.6526260#:~:text=Netflix%20ended%20June%20with%20220.7,Walt%20Disney%20Co.%20and%20Apple.
>>>
>>> Note the caption on the lead image which says:
>>> "For the first time in a decade, Netflix announced it has 200,000
>>> (sic) subscribers globally, and the company says it may lose as many
>>> as two million more in the months ahead. "
>>>
>>
>> Well there’s a sentence that doesn’t make a whole Lotta sense. :-)
>>
>It came from a big company, what did you expect? :P

Given Netflix claims roughly 220 million customers I just assumed the
author left off 3 zeroes. I really didn't think about it in more
detail than that beyond typing into Google asking "how many customers
does netflix have?"

On 7/20/2022 3:36 PM, Your Name wrote:
> On 2022-07-20 21:22:27 +0000, Dimensional Traveler said:
>> On 7/20/2022 1:53 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>> The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 21:00:40 -0700, anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/business-62226912
>>>>>
>>>>> I had to ask Siri how many subscribers they still had which
>>>>> should’ve been
>>>>> right in the first paragraph. She said 222 million. So 1 million
>>>>> seems like
>>>>> a big number but not percentage wise. Frankly I’m surprised it’s
>>>>> not more.
>>>>
>>>> Google says 220.7 m as of 06/30/22 and offers the following link:
>>>> https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/netflix-subscriber-loss-april-june-1.6526260#:~:text=Netflix%20ended%20June%20with%20220.7,Walt%20Disney%20Co.%20and%20Apple.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Note the caption on the lead image which says:
>>>> "For the first time in a decade, Netflix announced it has 200,000
>>>> (sic) subscribers globally, and the company says it may lose as many
>>>> as two million more in the months ahead. "
>>>
>>> Well there’s a sentence that doesn’t make a whole Lotta sense. :-)
>>
>> It came from a big company, what did you expect?  :P
>
> More like the usual "journalist" / "news" incompetence. They're so busy
> rusing to be first that they realey bother to check anything, including
> teh actual facts.  :-\
>
>
Or to make sure they don't have any typos....

Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
> On 7/20/2022 1:53 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>> The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 21:00:40 -0700, anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/business-62226912
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I had to ask Siri how many subscribers they still had which should’ve been
>>>> right in the first paragraph. She said 222 million. So 1 million seems like
>>>> a big number but not percentage wise. Frankly I’m surprised it’s not more.
>>>
>>> Google says 220.7 m as of 06/30/22 and offers the following link:
>>> https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/netflix-subscriber-loss-april-june-1.6526260#:~:text=Netflix%20ended%20June%20with%20220.7,Walt%20Disney%20Co.%20and%20Apple.
>>>
>>> Note the caption on the lead image which says:
>>> "For the first time in a decade, Netflix announced it has 200,000
>>> (sic) subscribers globally, and the company says it may lose as many
>>> as two million more in the months ahead. "
>>>
>>
>> Well there’s a sentence that doesn’t make a whole Lotta sense. :-)
>>
> It came from a big company, what did you expect? :P
>

Heh

--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 14:22:27 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
> <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>
>> On 7/20/2022 1:53 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>> The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 21:00:40 -0700, anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/business-62226912
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I had to ask Siri how many subscribers they still had which should?ve been
>>>>> right in the first paragraph. She said 222 million. So 1 million seems like
>>>>> a big number but not percentage wise. Frankly I?m surprised it?s not more.
>>>>
>>>> Google says 220.7 m as of 06/30/22 and offers the following link:
>>>> https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/netflix-subscriber-loss-april-june-1.6526260#:~:text=Netflix%20ended%20June%20with%20220.7,Walt%20Disney%20Co.%20and%20Apple.
>>>>
>>>> Note the caption on the lead image which says:
>>>> "For the first time in a decade, Netflix announced it has 200,000
>>>> (sic) subscribers globally, and the company says it may lose as many
>>>> as two million more in the months ahead. "
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well there’s a sentence that doesn’t make a whole Lotta sense. :-)
>>>
>> It came from a big company, what did you expect? :P
>
> Given Netflix claims roughly 220 million customers I just assumed the
> author left off 3 zeroes. I really didn't think about it in more
> detail than that beyond typing into Google asking "how many customers
> does netflix have?"
>

Sure. But losing “2,000,000 more“ only makes sense if the initial number
they reported is already down from previous numbers and it’s not. It’s
written as if the 220, million is a record high. Tthere’s simply no way to
take that apart and not come to the conclusion that whoever wrote it is an
idiot!

--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

In article <tb7v1r$fgm$1@gioia.aioe.org>, YourName@YourISP.com wrote:

>Netflix is about to start their "ad-based" option, where you play less,
>but have to suffer though adverts (although it remains to be seen if
>ad-blockers will get rid of them.

I thought there was already a plan like that existing.

--
Let's go Brandon!

Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
> In article <tb7v1r$fgm$1@gioia.aioe.org>, YourName@YourISP.com wrote:
>
>> Netflix is about to start their "ad-based" option, where you play less,
>> but have to suffer though adverts (although it remains to be seen if
>> ad-blockers will get rid of them.
>
> I thought there was already a plan like that existing.

They announced it when people started howling about the huge price increase
for the current tiers. This is them finally implementing it.

>
> --
> Let's go Brandon!
>
>

--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

anim8rfsk@cox.net wrote:
> Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
>> In article <tb7v1r$fgm$1@gioia.aioe.org>, YourName@YourISP.com wrote:

>>> Netflix is about to start their "ad-based" option, where you play less,
>>> but have to suffer though adverts (although it remains to be seen if
>>> ad-blockers will get rid of them.
>>
>> I thought there was already a plan like that existing.
>
>They announced it when people started howling about the huge price increase
>for the current tiers. This is them finally implementing it.

Ah, that explains it!

--
Let's go Brandon!