Streaming The uncertain future of platforms, in four keys

Productions with exorbitant budgets, a huge supply of insipid content, increased subscription costs, limitations on sharing accounts, a multitude of companies saturating the streaming market or the, already resolved, strikes by the writers’ and actors’ union. These are just some of the problems that affect streaming content platforms and that predict a complicated future where surviving and standing out from the competition has become an increasingly difficult goal to achieve, but above all to maintain.

Series, sports, movies, documentaries, miniseries… on-demand content, after all. Without any dependence on schedules and available 24 hours a day, seven days a week. All for a modest price, of course.

Since Netflix burst into this new era of the entertainment industry in a big way back in an increasingly distant 2013 with its 100% original House of Cards series, more than 10 years have passed. Since then, the boom in streaming content has only increased and grown at a rate almost directly proportional to the number of subscribers and the emergence of new platforms.

HBO Max, Apple TV, Prime Video, Disney, DAZN, SkyShowtime and, of course, Netflix are just some of the best known. Although these platforms do not offer data on the number of subscribers or the audiences that make their content, it is a reality that that growth, which they experienced due to confinement in 2020, has begun to decline little by little, according to the latest data published by Bloomberg and other auditors who are experts in hearings.

With the increase in platforms, the need to attract an audience arose. Low prices, a great offer of almost infinite content and ease of consumption (viewing on any device and can even be downloaded to watch offline, possibility of sharing accounts with several people, specific recommendations) or new original products (exclusive series from platforms such as Stranger Things on Netflix or HBO’s Succession among others) outlined platforms with an offer of interesting content to go to in search of entertainment at a relatively affordable price.

But the passage of time began to change this. With the need to attract not only new audiences but also subscribers from other platforms, original productions became commonplace, launching an exclusive from time to time with a cast of well-known actors. A clear example of a launch presentation event is Tudum, a Netflix event in which, like a film festival, previews, trailers, behind the scenes or the calendar of new releases that will be released throughout the year are presented. . A way to generate long-term interest for die-hard fans.

However, not all the productions that are presented tend to be the “bombshells” that are expected. And Netflix, which worldwide continues to be the streaming platform with the best numbers, with 232 million subscribers as of July 2023, is a clear example. By increasing its offer so much, especially series that need new seasons to continue their plots, production costs skyrocket. La Casa de Papel, The Squid Game or Stranger Things are one of those star products that achieve success season after season. But these are the exceptions.

Blonde, 1899, Blockbuster or Resident Evil are examples of films and series with big budgets and names that either were a failure in terms of audience, such as Blockbuster, whose first and only season did not have favorable reviews (with only 21% of reviews). positive) or Blonde, the gloomy and cruel biopic of Marilyn Monroe, which was far from even being the most viewed production at the time of its release.

The same thing happens on other platforms: a lot of content and expensive. All this means that these mammoth budgets, which seek to create a franchise that is engaging but above all profitable, are diluted in insubstantial productions that do not convince an audience that is already oversaturated with content.

As if this were not enough, the crisis of scriptwriters, which ended last September after 5 months, and that of actors, which still continues today, has affected the platforms more than expected, especially in terms of what is refers to the payment of so-called residuals (payments derived from the rebroadcast of content). One of the main demands of the scriptwriters and a clear point of friction, since streaming is not governed by this system, which already existed in the days of DVD or rebroadcast on television, not allowing us to see if the current pay-per-view corresponds or not with reality.

Furthermore, although the scriptwriters have already returned to work, this almost half-year break will not be immediately noticeable: the real drought will possibly arrive in spring, when series and films that the scriptwriters have now resumed are still in production.

The current strike of the actors and the chronic investment problems of the production companies and platforms predict a future that will be difficult to tackle. Without actors, those series pending filming or simply entering production will see their dates delayed. In the short term, this stoppage will not be perceived as serious, but it will be from 2024 onwards.

Added to the decline in profits itself (on streaming platforms, according to Bloomberg, large companies have seen their income reduced by almost 90% in a decade) there remains a problem with a rather complex solution. That perfect world of almost infinite content at low cost seems to be getting further and further away.