It’s more than likely a problem of service, not price. Even if you have all the money in the world, bad service is bad and people’s time and patience aren’t infinite.
Oh please. Someone like him raking in the money, money can guarantee better service than average joe’s pull. Let’s not kid ourselves here. I’m actually astounded to know how much there is a divide here in the comments, where people are actually defending the rich one here.
And here I thought piracy was for the people that couldn’t afford these luxuries on a daily basis. Piracy being for people that simply, by choice, don’t want to bother with the legal alternative because of the questionable practices in play. Piracy being for people that just simply are locked out and have had their consumer rights stomped on all the way.
Why are we drawing the lines of exception here between a dude that pulls a million a year. That’s like the antithesis of the concept of piracy. He’s earning $83,000 a month, that’s a lot more than an average joe makes in an entire year’s worth of their salary.
You’re defending the 1% and that’s just wrong on so many angles when it comes to piracy.
Someone like him raking in the money, money can guarantee better service than average joe’s pull.
Huh? How does that even work? He’s rich, but they’re not making a custom app or server for him. He still has to deal with the same buggy nonsense as tour average Joe.
He still has more say than average joe. Average joe pays an affordable but budget of a premium. He’s probably paying for top-tier level stuff, giving how much he’s making. He has more saying power than average joe. Average joe is the one getting the hot-potato of agents, getting ignored, getting mislead .etc
What makes you think a rich person is getting the same?
What makes you think a rich person is getting the same?
The fact that they’re almost certainly not using different apps for different users. And the fact that there’s no rich person tier for streaming services. They have no way or reason to distinguish between a rich person and an average Joe. It doesn’t matter how much money you have when there’s nothing to pay for.
no no no, you don’t understand! there’s a secret “rich ppl netflix” that you can’t get unless you pay $12,000 for it. the illuminati built it for bill clinton
Can we not shift this from the very important issue of how stupid this streaming situation is into the much less important, albeit still valid, “one rich athlete spends slightly less than his fair share in this one instance”—no one is defending this guy because he’s rich, only because it’s the irony of the situation
The more people who pirate, the better. It doesn’t matter who as long as everyone is getting away with it equally
It’s more than likely a problem of service, not price. Even if you have all the money in the world, bad service is bad and people’s time and patience aren’t infinite.
Oh please. Someone like him raking in the money, money can guarantee better service than average joe’s pull. Let’s not kid ourselves here. I’m actually astounded to know how much there is a divide here in the comments, where people are actually defending the rich one here.
And here I thought piracy was for the people that couldn’t afford these luxuries on a daily basis. Piracy being for people that simply, by choice, don’t want to bother with the legal alternative because of the questionable practices in play. Piracy being for people that just simply are locked out and have had their consumer rights stomped on all the way.
Why are we drawing the lines of exception here between a dude that pulls a million a year. That’s like the antithesis of the concept of piracy. He’s earning $83,000 a month, that’s a lot more than an average joe makes in an entire year’s worth of their salary.
You’re defending the 1% and that’s just wrong on so many angles when it comes to piracy.
Huh? How does that even work? He’s rich, but they’re not making a custom app or server for him. He still has to deal with the same buggy nonsense as tour average Joe.
He still has more say than average joe. Average joe pays an affordable but budget of a premium. He’s probably paying for top-tier level stuff, giving how much he’s making. He has more saying power than average joe. Average joe is the one getting the hot-potato of agents, getting ignored, getting mislead .etc
What makes you think a rich person is getting the same?
The fact that they’re almost certainly not using different apps for different users. And the fact that there’s no rich person tier for streaming services. They have no way or reason to distinguish between a rich person and an average Joe. It doesn’t matter how much money you have when there’s nothing to pay for.
no no no, you don’t understand! there’s a secret “rich ppl netflix” that you can’t get unless you pay $12,000 for it. the illuminati built it for bill clinton
Can we not shift this from the very important issue of how stupid this streaming situation is into the much less important, albeit still valid, “one rich athlete spends slightly less than his fair share in this one instance”—no one is defending this guy because he’s rich, only because it’s the irony of the situation
The more people who pirate, the better. It doesn’t matter who as long as everyone is getting away with it equally