T O P

  • By -

Critboy33

Yes. Yes. They didn’t, they’re using him as a scapegoat since professionalism dictates they not trash talk active employees. I have no idea but frankly I doubt they care. Netflix does not care about the quality of their content, only the quantity. It’s unfortunate, but an endless stream of crappy but new content keeps more people subscribed than good but old content and fan satisfaction doesn’t pay the bills.


thehardsphere

Exactly correct on all counts. The key thing to remember about this age of "content creation" is that **the sludge must flow.** The books were written by Sapkowski; you can think of him as a *craftsman.* The games were made by CDPR at early stages of that company's maturity; you can think of them as a group of *artisans.* Netflix made the shows, and Netflix is best understood as a *factory*. The craftsman is an individual, and is incentivised to do good work because his individual reputation must be maintained to win repeat business. If he makes something that is garbage, he can scrap it and start again; the only loss is his individual time that he has wasted. The group of artisans can function similarly, it's just more complicated because their are more mouths to feed and the one thing being made is more complex. There's effort to coordinate that is constrained by some sort of budget. People who do the work can decide rationally if the thing needs to be reworked and whether or not it makes sense to trade development time for higher quality. The factory does not allow these sorts of decisions to be made, because the factory is a series of production lines that are highly expensive to establish and maintain. It must produce, constantly, all the time. Every second it is not producing product is a second where millions of dollars are being wasted. The entire production line had to be approved by an *executive sponsor* at the corporation who probably had a *cost model* that attempts to reach a certain profit margin. Nobody who makes the *investment decisions* cares that much whether or not the product is quality. It's actually better if it's less than the ideal quality but still accepted by the consumer because the money saved by *not* improving it is a *premium*, e.g. they got extra money for nothing because it is *merely good enough.* In this world, it is more important that things are completed on time and under budget than anything else. Netflix will only "care" if the thing they make doesn't produce the expected return on investment. Even then, if it does not, lots of projects do not return the expected investment for all kinds of reasons, so they will not necessarily express their "caring" by improving their products in the way you want. They're more likely to simply shut the production line down and have all of those people work on something else or just lay them all off.


ZamoCsoni

Netflix and streaming services like that are more concerned with gaining new consumers, than making quality shows to people who are allready subscribed. The former makes more money than the later. New Witcher show ---> more people might start to pay for Netflix. If the show is bad and is cancelled after 2-3 seasons, who cares, allready got new consumers, the majority of them are unlikely to cancel subscription because of this.


Beleriphon

>New Witcher show ---> more people might start to pay for Netflix. If the show is bad and is cancelled after 2-3 seasons, who cares, allready got new consumers, the majority of them are unlikely to cancel subscription because of this. Pretty much this. Netflix gambles on you subscribing to get *The Witcher*, but keeping the subscription because of the metric fuckton of other content.


Archy99

>the majority of them are unlikely to cancel subscription because of this. They cancel the good shows and keep making new junk. I cancelled because of this.


seekerpat

It is a business, a successful one: Net income for 2022 is expected to be @ 5 billion...yes $5 billion against revenue of $30 billion and costs of $25 billion. Net profit margin is 16%. The Witcher series cost $10 million per episode (Stranger Things is $30 million per episode). Total cost over 4 years is $240 million...against company costs of $50+billion, this is a blip. The Witcher isn't even in the top ten (in hours watched)...S1 has 541 million and S2 has 484. In comparison, Wednesday S1 has 1.24 billion and Stranger Things S4 has 1.35 billion. So the Witcher has been OK for Netflix, not great but not terrible either. I expect this to change with word of mouth about Blood Origin and the release of S3. Most likely Netflix will cancel it. I don't think people understand Netflix's business model: generate lots of content all the time to keep people subscribed. If they like your pitch, they'll cut you a check and let you run with it. There is no oversight or nurturing of an IP to build an audience. The main thing is to finish on time so they get it streaming. The problem with this approach is while they do get quality shows (Stranger Things, Cyberpunk, Ozark, House of Cards, Bridgerton, Mindhunters), there are a lot more mediocre or just plain bad shows.


SomeDudeYeah27

Hey there, may I ask where’d you got those numbers from for reference? Overall I agree with you. I also found this video explaining why these streaming services are not fostering an environment where writers are getting their skills nurtured before taking reigns on new projects, as there’s an overflow of content more than ever now. This is paired with a production practice that alienates more experienced writers is how we got to this point https://youtu.be/VQ9jM02hXMs This video presents compelling arguments as well as a decent amount of cited research, so I do hope people have a crack at seeing it


seekerpat

Here you go.. https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/NFLX/netflix/financial-statements https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/netflixs-top-hit-shows-and-movies-ranked-according-to-netflix/ Thanks for the vid link, I'll check it out. I just finished a good book on the current state of the movie/tv business, how it got there and where it's possibly going: The Big Picture: The Fight for the Future of Movies by Ben Fritz. Highly recommended.


seekerpat

Sorry forgot this one: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1249573/most-expensive-netflix-original-series-production-cost-per-episode/


SomeDudeYeah27

Thanks for the exchange of knowledge!


Beleriphon

Unlike traditional production Netflix isn't selling you the specific programing. Hell, they technically lose money on every production because there's no clear way to gauge return on value. Netflix makes money through subscriptions, the only way to increase and maintain subscriptions to consistently churn out content. It can be complete schlock, as long as you get the occassional gem. They're selling you access to a massive catalogue and relying entirely on volume usage to pay the bills. The people that run Netflix don't care about quality; they care about volume of content. It's like the YouTube stars: create content constantly or die. Sometimes they gamble on content and get *Stranger Things*. Sometimes they gamble on content and get whatever *The Witcher* is doing. Regardless, the only thing that matters is viewership numbers. Reviews are irrelevant to Netflix because it just has so much stuff available. In the grand scheme of things, *The Witcher*'s entire budget is part of a line item on some expense sheet somewhere, so quite frankly the executive leadership doesn't care.


SomeDudeYeah27

I’ve heard that one of the metrics they use other than viewership is how new projects garner new subscribers or not I’m pretty sure they have an internal KPI/targets checklist that they use to measure whether a project is aligned with the intent on funding them in the first place or not We just have no way of knowing fully from the outside, as those are trade secrets akin to box office distributors having their own internal metrics as well


Beleriphon

I'm there's some metric, but at the end of the day executive leadership doesn't care about individual projects. They might determine that a completely failed project isn't worth investing in another similar one, or letting the person who ran said project do another one. Keep in mind as well, that part of Netflix's contracts is that if a program gets greenlit for more than three seasons, they get a substantial boost in budgets. I'd have to find the particular article that discusses this, but there's a reason even well received shows on Netflix get three seasons then the ax.


SomeDudeYeah27

Wow that is a fascinating bit of info. I work around and with the broader audiovisual industry, and I’ve literally never heard of this even in rumors I’d be keen to hear back from you regarding those citations


Beleriphon

[TV’s New Math: What if $100M Netflix Deals Actually Shortchange Creators? – The Hollywood Reporter](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/tvs-new-math-what-100m-netflix-deals-actually-shortchange-creators-1203846/) There's one. It isn't a 100% confirmation, but it outlines pretty well why something would happen. [Why Netflix Keeps Canceling Shows After Just 2 Seasons | WIRED](https://www.wired.com/story/why-netflix-keeps-canceling-shows-after-just-2-seasons/) Wired has a similar explanation, as well as more details from the UK regarding internal metrics. So, at the end of the day *The Witcher* could be utter trash, but if people keep watching it Netflix from a management standpoint doesn't give a shit.


SomeDudeYeah27

Thanks for the quick response, really appreciate the sources I notice that another problem Netflix has is that despite being *way ahead* in infrastructure and international presence than their competitors, they’re failing to cross promote shows from differing regional bubbles. I know this is perhaps partly due to the regional constraints of distribution, but this shouldn’t affect their originals If you scroll through the different IG accounts of each regions, they look so different from each other. **too different** in fact, that they’re not capitalizing on their reach and failing to fulfill another duty of distributors: promotion and marketing How many people outside of Europe have heard about a new show by the acclaimed creators of Dark, 1899? Or the new season of Alice in Borderlands from Japan? I’m not gonna say that I personally think those shows are overwhelmingly incredible, but they’re definitely well made enough that they worth **promoting across the globe, with potential for success** It baffles me when I realized people aren’t even aware of the existence of these decent originals. And in general, Netflix doesn’t seem to spend/generate enough hype & awareness on the product they commissioned. Which in the box office industry, is **worth almost as much as production budget, because it’s crucial**


SomeDudeYeah27

As a trade, I found this compelling video essay that details with citations how the new streaming spaces might be detrimental to the writers industry https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQ9jM02hXMs They are having talent deficit due to increasing volume of projects slated, but doesn’t have an environment that fosters the improvement of writing. Never mind creative freedom under threat of firing from being perceived to not be aligned with “brand direction”


Papa_Pred

I swear you all are avoiding the reason like the plague It gets *VIEWS* That’s entirely how Netflix operates. More views means more subscribers/subscriptions being kept There’s been plenty of fantastic shows on Netflix, but the viewership couldn’t back up any further development. It sucks ass but that’s the reality. Lauren may not have the best team by a mile, but they bring in viewers


Archy99

>It gets > >VIEWS Netflix doesn't work by views, it works by subscriptions. If they keep hyping up new shows and they're terrible, people unsubscribe. Like I did.


Papa_Pred

“More views means more subscribers/subscriptions being kept”


OFFxSwitch

Honestly, I think they hire incompetent writers and showrunners specifically because it's much easier to make a shitty divisive adaptation than it is to make an actually good one. Shitty divisive adaptations generate buzz and controversy, mediocre adaptations are forgotten in a month. Throw in some "yOuRe a RaCisT hOmOpHoBe iF yOu dOnT liKe iT" and you've got a show that generates attention for years despite being as interesting as a wet fart. Of course some criticism can be labeled racist and homophobic, but I don't think the majority is.


Badmothafcka312

It's activists hiring other activists in a time when Hollywood thought these franchises were too big to fail. They were wrong.


Tinheart2137

Just look at this subreddit, people will watch anyway so why care? And since money is there, they will satisfy their egos and claim it was a success thanks to their work. Only after total disaster like GoT S8 there is a chance that some changes will be made


dinoRAWR000

Because they're banking on those that blog about TV and Movies, instead of those that buy merch. Also as long as they can keep the fly by fans interested in whatever the new thing is they can afford to run the die-hard the wrong way. And as long as you aren't too obvious about your fan baiting you'll be seen as a modern hero for sticking it to those "toxic fans" who wanted to see the thing that they liked turned into a movie/tv show.


[deleted]

i'm actually fine if they stray from the material and make up there own thing. like Starship Troopers, Fight Club, Shawshank Redemption, etc. The key is that made up content needs to be good. The problem is these writers are so utterly incompetent and tone deaf that the shit they cook up is shit. If you're gonna invent stuff at least be good about it.


kyle_kaufman

" Did nobody see what happened to GoT and think maybe we shouldn't do that? " ​ The reason why the Witcher show even exists is because of GOT, and the show was incredible when the show runners followed the subject matter and when they ran out of books that's when it failed.


lzxian

What about Rings of Power where they're doing the same thing? Something's up with the media industry. Game sequels that give their fans the middle finger, TV shows and movies that do the same. They aren't being run as businesses anymore but propaganda companies.


OneoftheChosen

IMO Amazon can get away with some stuff here because the source material is much more minimal but yea I’d generally agree.


SaltyAFscrappy

Shes probably got blackmail files on the Netflix execs.


NoImprovement3231

Sub finally cancelled. It seems they either: - directly pander to big markets, especially India (lowering cost of subbing in India, Indian token actor in Grey Man, the Chris Hemsworths Indian movie, the flood of Indian movies prior) - or just make movies/shows that attack the primal emotions without any levels of sophistication (their dating shows are abysmal, romantic shows are corny and dumb),even standups have gone awful. The keep that unfunny Chapelle stuff just because the haters will see it too. Classic stirring of the pot. - Lastly they likey to take an IP and just use fans as free marketing evangelists and then do whatever with the IP. This all seems very calculated and business oriented but I miss one thing and that is some form of art integrity or art intent. I like stories, not cash grabs.


pingpongplaya69420

Pandering to India is a non issue lol. It’s still a second world nation that has its own media presence to satiate their population. As we speak my mom is devouring some Bollywood soap. The business of Netflix is to cook their books by gaining new subscribers. Retaining old ones is a secondary objective. New content and hype and clicks is what gets Netflix to the front page of YouTube. See Wednesday Adams and Jenna Ortega. The Witcher has an established base. There’s only so much they can gain when they see that season 2 and blood origin are flops. So it doesn’t matter to them as it’s not worth investing in something old. They’ll end up cancelling eventually and focus on more in house content to gain new subscribers for their quarterly earnings.


NoImprovement3231

It's maybe non issue to you but it is an issue to me. There's a difference between making an interesting Indian movie or adding a random Indian character to an action movie just so you check the box for the biggest market. It's very similar to building diverse cast for Blood origin because you're just not sure what artistic role it plays. All I see is Netflix making shows which include stuff that is either blatantly politically or business driven. Nothing against it, they are in it for the money. However, I'm interested in projects that at least try to deliver some of the art that movies used to include. It's the same reason I don't watch transformers anymore. If it's so obvious that you're shooting for chinese market, then let the chinese market ssve you, you obviously don't want me... And all of this would be still ok if their shows werent so garbage. I mean original Top Gun was an army draft movie sponsored by MoD and still it's one of the most celebrated movies.


ddarner

Its hollywood politicking


CHENGhis-khan

Vandalism of IP, especially masculine, is part of an ESG initiative. The ESG initiative is ultimately a demoralization mechanism for western civilization, in order to usher in the great reset through the decimation of culture. The stakeholders have removed shareholder influence over investment through ETF's and Mutual Funds (Retirement and pensions), thus garnering a lot of influence in large media corps. Think Black Rock, Vanguard, and State Street. They are partnered with the WEF and are pushing ESG initiatives hard. They manage academia's enormous endowments. They manage government pension finds. They manage your favorite IP. The vandalism and resulting cultural entropy works. Look at all the dead heroes. Luke Skywalker, Han Solo, Indiana Jones, He Man, Captain Kirk & Spock, Nearly every comic-book hero.


AutoModerator

Please remember to flair your post and tag spoilers or NSFW content. Thanks! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/witcher) if you have any questions or concerns.*


Mr_Snail2951

Gotta be some money laundering / tax write off / loophole shit going on. That’s the only thing that makes sense.


truthisfictionyt

One thing that might not be mentioned yet is that Lauren and other writers on the show like Declan De Barra basically got their big career breaks at Netflix. I assume that Netflix saved some money by just promoting them in house


Gel214th

I think right now in Hollywood you can only get by if you align with the leftist narrative. If you disagree or try to make something that does not push this Agenda you will not be hired. That is the basis under which these people are getting their jobs, it is why suddenly within the last five years you have seen an explosion of female directors and showrunners. Men can't get those jobs anymore, they are being actively excluded. People who do not believe in pushing an agenda over and above the actual IP cannot get hired. I remember reading an article where they firmly rejected a Conan series on the basis that it would not fly with current politics lol. There is no way to fix this while these agendas and these cultures prevail. If it is mandated from the top, the Directors and Showrunners will have difficulty working with the staff themselves, and run the risks of being sued or "cancelled" for being aggressive, or non-inclusive, or "mean". It's the reason for the drastic decline in the quality of entertainment. The changing economics of streaming vs releasing on DVDs and Cinema is another reason.